SMC-DA 12-24 ED AL (IF)

Hi Ammonyte,

It looks more like the hood on a Cokin filter holder. It shows at the very wide end of my 18-55 occasionally, when not exactly square. That'd be my guess anyway..

Cheers

Liam

Liam - I'm not quite sure, but it may have been the Pentax petal hood not on 100% square. It needs to really click home to sit square (I double checked after reading these comments).

I took a Cokin P holder and cut off the front two holders (so I'm left with just one). Even then I get more vignetting than you see in the example. It's a bit of a pain, since I'll just have to upgrade to the Cokin Z-Pro range for this lens. It's seriously wide - and I keep getting feet and bits in the frame With the modified P-holder it's just about good enough to live with, but the Z-Pro would be much better (as would the seriously expensive Lee filters!).

Peter: Regarding the comment on 16-45 vs 12-24: I have both. The 16-45 is, perhaps, a more versatile lens, and sharper. However, the 12-24 definitely has a place I've been using it almost constantly at 12mm, and yes it does expand the photographic opportunities - especially if you make the opportunities given the 18mm effective AoV (compared to 24mm of the 16-45). And if you buy from Germany, it's only 150% of the 16-45, not 200%
I had a 20-35mm on the Z1p, and have missed that seriously wide look - which is great for landscapes, and interiors

Matt

Hi Matt,

I suppose anything attached to the front of a 12mm lens (I've never used that wide a lens) is going to be difficult to keep out of shot, as you're going to be approaching something in the region of AoV 160° (calculated guess, with 15mm being 147° (APS-C)). That gives a spare 10° or a couple of mm to hide something behind the AoV if attached to the lens. That's not much to play with..

I was trying some wide angle (with the 18-55) seascapes yesterday, and as my first real venture at wide angle since using the ME with a 28mm, I'd line up a nice shiny rock a couple of feet from the camera, look through the view finder and it would look as though it was half way down the beach. Still, I got a couple of useable shots, but I need more practice. I'm off to Bruges on Saturday, so I'll try some architectural WA shots, and see if I can get better.

Cheers

Liam

There are filters, generally expensve ones, that are especially thin, for use on super-wides. You have to be caeful not to put too much of anything on the front of these lenses.

Arthur - I didn't have a screw in filter at all. It was the square filter system I was referring to. And P-size is too small
Matt

I've been using Cokin P on my 10-20 Sigma and it works ok, however you have to be very careful with the alignment if using the normal filter holder. I use a holder that is cut down to hold just a single filter and that's fine even for very wide angles.

Niblue, you're selling me more and more on this Sigma - you don't work for them, do you?

Dan

Now there is an idea - wonder if I'd get a cheap deal? Probably wouldn't want me though as I'm a slut when it comes to lens manufacturers and I'm not faithful...

I very nearly had the Pentax 12-24 as well because my wife is in Singapore at the moment and it's selling for £400 there. I was very tempted however they had the 10-17 fisheye so she's got me one of those instead.

The Sigma is a lovely lens though. It's very sharp, no sign on CA in any shots so far, good for flare and it seems well made and handles fine. Here are a few recent examples with what has become my most used lens:



Held the lens down near the ground and shot without looking through the viewfinder



Lenses this wide are great for candids because your subject (in this case my camera shy daughter) doesn't immediately clock that you're taking a picture when you don't have the camera to your eye.



My son bouncing on the trampoline - again not looking through the viewfinder by just holding the camera underneath him as he bounced.


[/img]