All Forum Comments
Comment by Tyr posted on Pentax vs nikon at 19/10/2015 - 14:11
Is that second one in Bath? I rather like it.
Comment by Tyr posted on The versatility of the Pentax HD DA 15mm lens..... at 16/10/2015 - 14:28
The Samsung lens in the Mk I version where was the DA L is the Mk II version of the optics.
Comment by Tyr posted on 18-55 Lens question at 14/10/2015 - 10:39
What happened to the pouch?
Comment by Tyr posted on FS: Pentax DA * 55mm f1.4 at 10/10/2015 - 01:28
microlight2010 wrote:
On the rare occasions that I need something wider than the 20mm on the Limited zoom, rather than shelling out for a wider lens, I've adopted a technique that I found here, where I take two portrait shots at 20mm that are slightly overlapping, and then stitch them into a landscape picture using the free Hugin software. I don't know what that's equivalent to in focal length terms, but it works for me.
Since the new version of Lightroom does panoramas I've been doing the same thing!On the rare occasions that I need something wider than the 20mm on the Limited zoom, rather than shelling out for a wider lens, I've adopted a technique that I found here, where I take two portrait shots at 20mm that are slightly overlapping, and then stitch them into a landscape picture using the free Hugin software. I don't know what that's equivalent to in focal length terms, but it works for me.
Comment by Tyr posted on Which weathersealed lens for my K50? at 09/10/2015 - 19:13
LennyBloke wrote:
If so, at that price, you'd definitely hope it was better!
That's like 5x the price of the kit lens.
The DA*16-50 is probably overpriced and the WR DA 18-55 is probably underpriced (it's really intended to be sold with WR bodies at a packaged priced) so yes the price difference is significant. The current version of the WR 18-55 is a far better lens than its predecessors, so is the DA*16-50 5 times as good - No. For the vast majority of shots you sill see little or no discernible difference in quality - but it does give you 2mm extra at the wide end (which makes a big difference) and a constant f2.8 aperture throughout the whole zoom range. These 2 things can make a significant difference in some situations, and it can be those situations which make it worth paying the extra. In the example I gave (Lake district trip) it meant I didn't have to take a wider prime with me and I knew I could take photos in poorer lighting.[/quote]Agreed, there is no such thing as five times as good. Price does not reflect overall image quality in a measurable way. It is the features, and usefulness which need to be gauged for particular situations. It is currently overpriced but that fluctuates a lot. I think when I picked mine up it was about £500 new compared to today's price of £700!richandfleur wrote:
Is this the lens in question?Tyr wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="richandfleur"]I think the 18-55 WR is underrated personally. It's a quality bit of kit for not much money, and is WR sealed. Am interested to see if people notice a significant different moving to the 16-50...
I've only used the 18-55 II in the DAL version. I used to have an 18-55 I which was good but the 16-50 blows it out of the water in terms of detail. [quote:3496ace15f="richandfleur"]I think the 18-55 WR is underrated personally. It's a quality bit of kit for not much money, and is WR sealed. Am interested to see if people notice a significant different moving to the 16-50...
If so, at that price, you'd definitely hope it was better!
That's like 5x the price of the kit lens.
SDM is very good for shooting where silence is a requirement. The constant f/2.8 aperture is very god for low light or low DoF situations. The WR used to be a unique selling point but not since the WR kit lenses were released. There is a significant difference in sharpness but only stopped down a bit. The extra 2mm at the wide end makes a difference but still leaves me wanting something wider.
Comment by Tyr posted on Which weathersealed lens for my K50? at 09/10/2015 - 14:19
richandfleur wrote:
I think the 18-55 WR is underrated personally. It's a quality bit of kit for not much money, and is WR sealed. Am interested to see if people notice a significant different moving to the 16-50...
I've only used the 18-55 II in the DAL version. I used to have an 18-55 I which was good but the 16-50 blows it out of the water in terms of detail. Stopped down to f/5.6 it is amazingly sharp across the frame (16mm). Corners are very soft at f/2.8 but that is to be expected. I had to be careful with my K10D as there was a lot of moire in photos at f/4-5.6. This is not an issue with the K-5 as it has a stronger AA filter.I think the 18-55 WR is underrated personally. It's a quality bit of kit for not much money, and is WR sealed. Am interested to see if people notice a significant different moving to the 16-50...
LennyBloke wrote:
I'd highly recommend the pairing of the DA*16-50 and the DA*60-250 - above your pricing without selling, but this combination will cover so many situations admirably.
Weather sealed - fast aperture - well constructed - not compact or the lightest - superb IQ
I have a lot of lenses to choose from, but when I went to the Lake District in September this was the pairing I went with, and didn't find any situation that wasn't covered. The 60-250 is high quality at maximum aperture and all focal lengths. The 16-50 can be a little soft at 16mm and maximum aperture, but many wide zooms are a bit soft at the wide end.
Top it off with the DFA-WR 100 Macro and you've got a top kit
I've got the 16-50 and 50-135 combination. Although having recently gotten a 100 WR macro this has almost replaced my 50-135 in day to day usage. Personally I chose the 300 f/4 over the 60-250.I'd highly recommend the pairing of the DA*16-50 and the DA*60-250 - above your pricing without selling, but this combination will cover so many situations admirably.
Weather sealed - fast aperture - well constructed - not compact or the lightest - superb IQ
I have a lot of lenses to choose from, but when I went to the Lake District in September this was the pairing I went with, and didn't find any situation that wasn't covered. The 60-250 is high quality at maximum aperture and all focal lengths. The 16-50 can be a little soft at 16mm and maximum aperture, but many wide zooms are a bit soft at the wide end.
Top it off with the DFA-WR 100 Macro and you've got a top kit
KatierRax wrote:
Just picked up the 18-55mm WR Kit Lens as your advice made sense.
Very tempted to add the 100mm but also wondering how much use I would get out of it. I know and like the Tamron so, while it's not WR, in no rush to replace that, but maybe something in the 50-200mm might be handy. covers the slight gap in my focal length but also gives me a WR option with more reach.
You won't miss gaps in range very much. My 16-50 gets used as a 16mm or 50mm most of the time. My 50-135 gets used as a 135mm most of the time. If I were going to shoot primes it would be quite easy to choose just two more for my existing kit. 15mm f/4, 40mm f/2.8 and then my 100mm f/2.8 macro and 300mm f/4 telephoto.Just picked up the 18-55mm WR Kit Lens as your advice made sense.
Very tempted to add the 100mm but also wondering how much use I would get out of it. I know and like the Tamron so, while it's not WR, in no rush to replace that, but maybe something in the 50-200mm might be handy. covers the slight gap in my focal length but also gives me a WR option with more reach.
Comment by Tyr posted on Which weathersealed lens for my K50? at 08/10/2015 - 18:11
'Fixed' (constant) aperture WR lenses in that price range don't exist. You are talking £700 for a DA* 16-50 f/2.8. If you don't want fixed aperture then there are a lot more options.
Comment by Tyr posted on Which weathersealed lens for my K50? at 07/10/2015 - 20:12
Quite a find and some good shots!
Comment by Tyr posted on Crab Spider from today 10-5-15 at 07/10/2015 - 18:34
LennyBloke wrote:
Excellent set of shots.....
...you've made me feel guilty now though....
...I was less than a mile from you, tucked up in a warm bed, while you were freezing you n*ts off
Only got to wait to 2033 for the next one...Excellent set of shots.....
...you've made me feel guilty now though....
...I was less than a mile from you, tucked up in a warm bed, while you were freezing you n*ts off
Comment by Tyr posted on Eclipse Sep 2015 at 05/10/2015 - 20:18
I'd buy the 31mm f/1.8 but don't have (and can't justify) £1000+ to spend on a lens!