I don't get it. The seller is perfectly honest about the condition, even if they can't spell: "An unusuable camera but may be of some use for spares."

You've got to stop thinking like a photographer. It'll on1y drive you crazy!

Why would anyone want a tilt-shift lens in this digital age?

Every mm in the wide end makes a difference. But more so, the person behind the camera makes the difference. I don't use wide angle for people and so have no comparable shot. But be sure there would be no significant difference between the glass at 15mm.

I think we should be happy to be so spoiled as to have these (and more) choices at our disposal.

Mhuni, excellent photo!

For me it all comes down to focal length. For interiors 12mm is far more useful than 15mm. And for exteriors 24mm beats 15mm, which is too wide to get consistently interesting shots. I prefer something closer to normal for landscapes and cityscapes, to avoid distortion.

When travelling, the DA12-24 allows me to keep one lens on the camera most of the time. If I compare this to the size of two lenses in my bag, it's about the same, but without the necessity to keep changing every time I enter or exit a building. So while some great points have been made against the zoom, it's certainly not less practical in my typical scenario.

Day-to-day I never use a zoom and am not that interested in UWA or WA. But on holidays it is essential, as these shots illustrate. Note also the torture test of the second photo. The zoom doesn't let me down when there are direct lights and extreme DR.


Alhambra seen from Albaicin

[IMG]http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2711/4377219075_637abe336a_o.jpg[/IMG]


the men at the bar

[IMG]http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4017/4420885792_e2b7d6e5ea_o.jpg[/IMG]

The DA12-24 is not the ultimate lens but is the best of the wide angle crop currently available. I doubt many would want to pay even more for a lens with better fit and finish, especially as it's unlikely the IQ would improve. Though I think there is something new in the lens map.

Absolutely no way. I'd be losing out on a few little things, namely:

12mm, 13mm, 14mm, 16mm, 17mm, 18mm, 19mm, 20mm, 21mm, 22mm, 23mm, 24mm

I'm a big fan of primes, but in the ultra-wide zone every millimetre makes a significant difference to composition. The DA 12-24mm is quite small considering all that it does. And at high IQ from wide open.

It's far more important to have a WR body, since there are many points of failure. Next most important are zooms, depending on their construction. But a prime only needs a single gasket. I wouldn't worry too much about using a non-WR prime with a WR body, for casual use. So I guess I'm agreeing, in part, with the retailers. (There's a first time for everything!)

What it "pretends" to be is a small, stabilised, weather-sealed body with two-dial ergonomics, IBIS, and optional grip... everything the K-01 isn't. The fact it's styled to look like an actual camera and not some sort of industrial accident is hardly detrimental. I'll assume from your dismissive comment that you don't realise the hump houses an EVF in exactly the right position, in line with the lens. It is a perfect example of form follows function.

If this had a label saying "Pentax" you'd be all over it.

I agree with the general sentiment that one should not chase large aperture at the expense of other factors. But it does depend on the lens in question. I recommend the f/2 Close Focus Vivitar lenses not because I use them at f/2, but because they are sharper and more compelling at f/4 than the slower variants.

And I have tested. Put "28mm" into the search engine on my blog and find a bunch of articles. Unfortunately the only Pentax I have had a chance to use was the a f/2.8.