Nothing too remarkable about that as the smaller format demands higher resolution from its lenses.

That the Pentax 43mm out-performs the Zeiss lens is more interesting....

Well it's much straighter, but why not completely straighten it?

I would also be inclined to make the crop even on both sides of the image.

Bin the lot. Why risk using degraded inks in your printer?

Cheers, Liily, well adjuducated! I will say though that you don't go close to monsters as they lumber towards you....

OK< Daniel Bridge, over to you Sir!

Recycled Monster

In the long distant past the point has been demonstrated, and Pentax even introduced the "ghostless" filter (curved to match the front element curvature of the 55mm lens). The idea never caught on.

The biggest factor I can see is the addition of two extra lens surfaces to reflect light and it may well cause additional flare. Also, the filter is generally quite far forwards of the front element of a lens and is therefore not so well shielded by the lens hood.

In any event, the filter is not part of the design of any lens, so why add something in unless it is absolutely necessary? With film it often is necessary, but not so with digital.

A book on photography will explain in detail, but in summary filters are used with black and white film to correct and/or enhance particular colours and with colour film to change the colour balance. Virtually all of this becomes redundant with digital as it can all be done to the colour file in Photoshop, and that's what I generally now do.

When I used film, these are the filters I used most often:

Black and white:
Red: Makes blue skies very dramatic
Orange: More natural rendition of skies

Colour slides:
81A: Warming filter
80A: Correction filter to use daylight film in tungsten light

The only filter I might use these days is the Polariser, to reduce reflections on water or perhaps to intensify colours by reducing reflections.

I don't believe in using filters for lens protection on the basis that filters virtually never get damaged, so why should lenses? And why cause any potential degradation in quality by adding more glass?

Hope that helps!

It's Christmas Morning, so a Very Merry Christmas to you all!

Many suppliers still offer xp as there were early issues with Vista. Eventually though it will be the norm, as it is now in the general High Street suppliers like PC World and Dixons.

If I were buying a new PC now I might be tempted to stay with xp, but in another year....

The Schneider version is made by Pentax in the same Vietban factory as the Pentax version. It is the same lens. Whether or not Scgneider bother to have their own coating spec applied I do not know, but when AP tested bothe Schneider and Pentax 12-24mm and 50-200mm lenses no difference was found between the makes.

In any event, Schneider is a very well respected German lens manufacturer and has as much kudos to the name as Pentax has.

That they have Pentax make their DSLRs and DSLR lenses is actually quite a compliment to the high standards of Pentax.