UWA Discussion


KTi

Senior Member
May 2, 2006
509
0
16
#1
Searched Pentax forum, last discussion was quite a while back.

I am considering to purchase one of the UWA (non-fish eye) lens.

Are the following still the preferred choice?

Pentax DA 12-24mm f/4 AL (IF)
Sigma AF10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC

Are there any "newer" lenses lately?

Thanks for your advice.
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#3
8-16 can't use filters, i would advise against it.

i use the sigma 10-20.

you can take a look at my signature links, everything that looks like it's taken with a UWA will be taken by the sigma 10-20.

one weakness of the lens is corner softness (especially at extremes), but i don't find it a pressing issue.
 

KTi

Senior Member
May 2, 2006
509
0
16
#5
8-16 can't use filters, i would advise against it.

i use the sigma 10-20.

you can take a look at my signature links, everything that looks like it's taken with a UWA will be taken by the sigma 10-20.

one weakness of the lens is corner softness (especially at extremes), but i don't find it a pressing issue.
Thanks.

Took a look at the price guide, last updated August 19, 2009, the price was $910 then. Wonder if it has came down.

Also, there is another one slightly faster at f/3.5 throughout, more expensive though.

Have a look at B&H, before shipping, US$479 (f/4-5.6) vs US$649 (f/3.5), quite a bit difference in price.
 

Dec 22, 2009
426
0
0
33
#6
Searched Pentax forum, last discussion was quite a while back.

I am considering to purchase one of the UWA (non-fish eye) lens.

Are the following still the preferred choice?

Pentax DA 12-24mm f/4 AL (IF)
Sigma AF10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC

Are there any "newer" lenses lately?

Thanks for your advice.
Both lens are good to have for landscape. I'll say go for the 12-24 if you have the budget but if you are price conscious like most of us. I'll say go for the sigma10-20 f4-5.6.

The 8-16 is very scary to use, you see the front element you'll know what I mean. Want to avoid touching & staining it also hard. Looks like a C-cup T*Ts.
 

CorneliusK

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2010
790
0
16
#7
The DA 15 is worth considering also. Main pros is that it is extremely compact and light and that it has relatively low distortion.

Check out this discussion on pentaxforums.com

The 15mm Limited controls my mind

It is also incredibly flare resistant, and has a very nice flare pattern

 

Nanoo

New Member
Jan 29, 2010
241
0
0
Choa Chu Kang
#8
And here's what the sigma 10-20mm will give you.
Picture at 10mm f4.0.


But personally, i still prefer DA15 la.
 

Last edited:

pinholecam

Moderator
Staff member
Jul 23, 2007
10,944
88
48
#10
DA15 is an excellent choice.
Very portable and unique to Pentax.
UWA primes are not so common from other brands, are very expensive and they are NEVER smaller.
The ease of chucking this into the camera bag, just makes it one of my often taken out lens.


DA15ltd

Its plenty wide. I actually cropped off another 1/6 to 1/5 on the right of this photo.
 

KTi

Senior Member
May 2, 2006
509
0
16
#11
pinholecam, excellent pics.

at 15mm (@22.5mm), somehow I felt that it is not wide enough. The sigma zoom is versatile to go from 10-20mm, covers a good range.

Unless of course the IQ of Sigma is way inferior to the DA 15. Based on those I've seen, the Sigma is not bad.
 

hjbyeo

Senior Member
May 5, 2006
5,165
30
48
East
#12
It really depends on your usage. And that may change with time, experiences etc...

For travel, I really like a setup like 12-24, 31(and you have it!), 50-200. It covers a really light setup for most usage, and wrt the wide angle lens, the 24mm which is really very useful for occasional travel portraitures (don't have to change lens). I also think the 12-24 distortions are a little easier to manage, so if you aren't into spending quite a bit of time on photoshop to correct these, then I personally think the 12-24 is an easier choice.

I see that you are using the Pen as well, so if you are travelling with that system (for leisure trips), you may not necessarily require the 24mm (covered by your pancake 17mm). The 10-20 may be a better choice then.
 

Last edited:

KTi

Senior Member
May 2, 2006
509
0
16
#13
It really depends on your usage. And that may change with time, experiences etc...

For travel, I really like a setup like 12-24, 31(and you have it!), 50-200. It covers a really light setup for most usage, and wrt the wide angle lens, the 24mm which is really very useful for occasional travel portraitures (don't have to change lens). I also think the 12-24 distortions are a little easier to manage, so if you aren't into spending quite a bit of time on photoshop to correct these, then I personally think the 12-24 is an easier choice.

I see that you are using the Pen as well, so if you are travelling with that system (for leisure trips), you may not necessarily require the 24mm (covered by your pancake 17mm). The 10-20 may be a better choice then.
Hi, appreciate your "customised" suggestion, really helpful.

I was actually wondering if I should be getting the Oly 9-18 m43 wide angle lens instead, however, I have more or less decided that the m43 system is not something I would continue building, so, leaning more towards getting it for my K7.

As you have rightly pointed out, a 10-20 mm lens would complete my range. I would be able to cover most of my usual focal length.

Just called SLRR, the 10-20mm f/3.5 has been out of stock for over a month, looks like a very hard lens to find. The quoted price is $1080.
 

hjbyeo

Senior Member
May 5, 2006
5,165
30
48
East
#14
Hi, appreciate your "customised" suggestion, really helpful.

I was actually wondering if I should be getting the Oly 9-18 m43 wide angle lens instead, however, I have more or less decided that the m43 system is not something I would continue building, so, leaning more towards getting it for my K7.

As you have rightly pointed out, a 10-20 mm lens would complete my range. I would be able to cover most of my usual focal length.

Just called SLRR, the 10-20mm f/3.5 has been out of stock for over a month, looks like a very hard lens to find. The quoted price is $1080.
Or get the older version 10-20 f4-5.6?
 

Nanoo

New Member
Jan 29, 2010
241
0
0
Choa Chu Kang
#15
But just an awareness for TS. :)
UWA lens are sometimes difficult to compose. At least it is for me. :sweat:
 

yws108

New Member
May 5, 2009
65
0
0
#16
has anyone got the sigma 8-16 here? what's the price like?

the field of view is really mind-boggling to me. and anyways, it would be a 'special scenario' kind of lens, only out of the camera bag when it's needed, so should be safe enough with the lens hood?
 

creampuff

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2006
5,116
1
0
Dover
#17
Shooting ultra wide angles isn't always about getting the lens with the widest angle of view, or for that matter, the lens with the widest maximum aperture. Making an good ultrawide angle lens is a tough challenge for any lens designer. By my reckoning the ideal UWA lens has to have good resolution, excellent flare control, good control of lens aberrations. Maximum aperture is probably one of the lowest priorities for me. What's the point of getting a lens that go the widest when the corners are crap, or the lens flares all too easily or there is noticeable wavy distortion? I like the DA 12-24mm because by my reckoning it is plenty sharp and the flare control is good (at some point in UWA shooting the sun or incandescent lighting is always gonna be a factor). Build quality is good and I can still use a filter without vignetting.


K-7 DA 12-24mm
 

KTi

Senior Member
May 2, 2006
509
0
16
#18
I am as confused as ever .... part of the joy of shopping for lens of course.
 

teruranse

New Member
Dec 19, 2006
463
0
0
#19
can the 1020 also be use for low light landscape? :dunno:
 

hjbyeo

Senior Member
May 5, 2006
5,165
30
48
East
#20
can the 1020 also be use for low light landscape? :dunno:
Clarify "low light"? Do you mean that you are going to depend on f4.0 and try to take a picture of say the Merlion or Clifford Pier in the evening with high ISO without the use of tripod?
 

Top Bottom