The difference between 10, 12 and 16?
Posted 21/05/2009 - 13:38
Link
To add a little extra to this, the K-7 has automatic distortion compensation for DA lenses, which I think read only applies to the JPEG, so you could shoot RAW+JPEG with the 12-24, have the RAW for complete control over the photo, or use the JPEG which automatically has the distortion corrected.
The K-7 also has automatic compensation for lateral chromatic aberrations, so you could shoot that nice v.wide landscape shot and have a JPEG that already has the distortion corrected, as well as removing any purple fringing!
Sounds very interesting, just wonder how well it actually works, and if this is possibly a reason for delaying a Pentax version of the 11-16 F2.8?!
The K-7 also has automatic compensation for lateral chromatic aberrations, so you could shoot that nice v.wide landscape shot and have a JPEG that already has the distortion corrected, as well as removing any purple fringing!
Sounds very interesting, just wonder how well it actually works, and if this is possibly a reason for delaying a Pentax version of the 11-16 F2.8?!
Posted 21/05/2009 - 14:04
Link
Presumably the distortion and CA corrections are optional?
I don't know which Pentax has chosen, but it could be done at a RAW level as well as JPEG. Some Panasonic cameras allegedly apply distortion correction to their RAWs.
I don't know which Pentax has chosen, but it could be done at a RAW level as well as JPEG. Some Panasonic cameras allegedly apply distortion correction to their RAWs.
~Pete
Posted 21/05/2009 - 17:26
Link
Mannesty wrote:
A RAW file is an unprocessed file, bits 'n bytes straight from the sensor. To apply any kind of processing to it would invalidate it's RAW state.
Yes unless the correction are written in a code and leave the original information intact. I really don't see a problem with a line written with the amount of CA correction and what kind of lens distortion correction is needed, it saves time in post processing.
A RAW file is an unprocessed file, bits 'n bytes straight from the sensor. To apply any kind of processing to it would invalidate it's RAW state.
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Posted 21/05/2009 - 22:51
Link
Dr. Mhuni wrote:
Regarding the difference between 12 and 16, it is significant. As for the extra 2mm I very occasionally wonder what the 10mm view might be like - but don't miss it at all really, and have reflected that the additional distortion resulting from the wider angle might often complicate things in any case. Moreover, once the lens is on the camera I reckon the extra 4mm at the long end is more useful.
interesting...Regarding the difference between 12 and 16, it is significant. As for the extra 2mm I very occasionally wonder what the 10mm view might be like - but don't miss it at all really, and have reflected that the additional distortion resulting from the wider angle might often complicate things in any case. Moreover, once the lens is on the camera I reckon the extra 4mm at the long end is more useful.
Yes all this comments made me go for the 12-24, but just to add another discussion element...the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 looks better then the previous version, but probably will be inferior to the DA 12-24.
ANyone knows when it will be released?
Posted 22/05/2009 - 07:56
Link
Daniel Bridge wrote:
Couldn't find the old thread I mentioned, but I've uploaded a pic taken from Edinburgh Castle overlooking the city. It's about 4.8Mb, and can be found here.
The lens was focused on the sign, which was about 1m away I would think. Aperture was f/8, lens was at 10mm. I'll leave you to make up your own minds about the image quality.
Dan
There is some distortion around the edges but it is not distracting to me.Couldn't find the old thread I mentioned, but I've uploaded a pic taken from Edinburgh Castle overlooking the city. It's about 4.8Mb, and can be found here.
The lens was focused on the sign, which was about 1m away I would think. Aperture was f/8, lens was at 10mm. I'll leave you to make up your own minds about the image quality.
Dan
The 10-20 is somewhere in my nice to have list as well but since I just bought a Bigma I will have a serious fight at home when I tell her that I want a 10-20 as well
Camera:K20D|Ist*DS|Spotmatic II|MZ-10
Pentax Lenses: DA16-45|DA50-200|50A 1.7
Tamron Lenses: 28-200
Takumar Lenses: SMC 55 1.8
Sigma Lenses: EX DG 50-500 'Bigma'|EX 50mm Macro
Flashes: Metz 58 AF-1|Samsung SEF-36PZF|Pentax AF-220T
Pentax Lenses: DA16-45|DA50-200|50A 1.7
Tamron Lenses: 28-200
Takumar Lenses: SMC 55 1.8
Sigma Lenses: EX DG 50-500 'Bigma'|EX 50mm Macro
Flashes: Metz 58 AF-1|Samsung SEF-36PZF|Pentax AF-220T
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
3062 posts
19 years
England Inside leg: 34
It is shame there is not the Tamron 10-24mm for Pentax