K-7 lens selection ?

Roland Karlsson · Jun 3, 2009

OK,

So I plan to buy an expensive camera, the K-7.

Its plenty of pixels - so I want good lenses.

As far as I understand - the kit lenses are really not up to the task. Correct me if I am wrong, but thats the impression I have got.

So - today I own e.g. a FA 50/1.4 and the *istDS kit lens. I also have lots of M lenses and M42 lenses. I also have the Zenitar. I also have a 70 mm Sigma macro lens and a 10-20 mm Sigma lens.

I now have two possible routes. Either I buy a set of prime lenses, e.g. some of FA 35/2.0, DA 21/3.2, DA 15/4, DA 70/2.4 or I buy a better zoom.

Better zooms might be DA 15-50/2.8 or Tamron 17-50/2.8 or something else.

So ... whats your advice ... how do I get quality that matches the K-7 for not too much money.

BTW - I might think the 15-50 is somewhat too large.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

lawsonstone · Jun 3, 2009

Actually, don't underestimate that kit lens. The DA 18-55mm Version II is a very fine lens and the new one coming out with the K7 is weather resistant to boot. I also found the DA 55-200 zoom to be a nice lens, and it will be out in a weather resistant version as well.

If you want SDM and weather sealing, you will have to accept big and heavy. The DA* 16-50 is nice, as is the DA*50-135, but the SDM motor makes it heavy and large.

On the other hand, the DA 40mm f/2.8 Ltd is a little pancake lens.

That FA 50mm f/1.4 should serve you very very well.
--
----------
Lawson G. Stone
I don't make history, just memories.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lawsonstone/
My 365 Photo Blog
http://www.stonesfence.net/StonesFence/Project_365/Project_365.html

Roland Karlsson · Jun 3, 2009

lawsonstone said:
Actually, don't underestimate that kit lens. The DA 18-55mm Version
II is a very fine lens and the new one coming out with the K7 is
weather resistant to boot. I also found the DA 55-200 zoom to be a
nice lens, and it will be out in a weather resistant version as well.

Any references where this is tested?

The images in this thread are NOT sharp. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=32033256

lawsonstone said:
If you want SDM and weather sealing, you will have to accept big and
heavy. The DA* 16-50 is nice, as is the DA*50-135, but the SDM motor
makes it heavy and large.

I dont need SDM and I dont need weather resistance. Both are nice - but not needed. I want VERY SHARP lenses though.

How about the Tamron lens?

lawsonstone said:
On the other hand, the DA 40mm f/2.8 Ltd is a little pancake lens.

That FA 50mm f/1.4 should serve you very very well.

A good lens with wonderful bokeh.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

Marc Sabatella · Jun 3, 2009

Roland Karlsson said:
Roland Karlsson said:

Actually, don't underestimate that kit lens. The DA 18-55mm Version
II is a very fine lens and the new one coming out with the K7 is
weather resistant to boot. I also found the DA 55-200 zoom to be a
nice lens, and it will be out in a weather resistant version as well.

Click to expand...

Any references where this is tested?

Photozone and others test lenses regularly. They weren't impressed with the 50-200, but it also seems they probably got a sub-par copy, and despite saying they returned it for another, it seems quite likely Pentax simply sent the same one back. Of course, they also break their own rules and try comparing numbers between Pentax and Nikon.

Anyhow, you haven't said what "the task" is, so it's hard to say whether these lenses are up to it or not.

Roland Karlsson said:
The images in this thread are NOT sharp.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=32033256

OK, but those are from a pre-release camera using pre-release firmware, taken using unknown lenses and with unknown technique by an unknown photographer. I see no reason to expect anything in particular of images like that.

Roland Karlsson said:
I dont need SDM and I dont need weather resistance. Both are nice -
but not needed. I want VERY SHARP lenses though.

The 18-55 and 50-200 are "sharp" but clearly not as sharp as more expensive lenses. Like the song says, it depends on what you pay. You really need to be a lot more specific about your needs before anyone can make specific suggestions.

--
Marc Sabatella
http://www.marcsabatella.com/
Blog: http://marcsabatella.blogspot.com/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcsabatella/

jerrymouse12 · Jun 3, 2009

From my impressions, 50-200 (I own DA L version) is pretty sharp in 60-135 range even wide open and a bit soft at 200mm (u need to stop down to F8+ to get decent image).

djezraj · Jun 3, 2009

I will toss the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 macro as I have rented it a couple of times and my college has the Sony mount version. Like the Pentax 16-50f2.8 a bit heavy and a large filter size but overall fast, good and affordable with nice bokeh IMO. You may find the Sigma 17-70 more flexible though slower throughout the range . If you are getting all of your quality satisfied by your primes which seem quite good indeed the kit may be enough for you as it is very affordable. For me my primes have all of the micro contrast already however if i need a lens for snapshots or Vacation I usually can get al of the contrast and sharpness I need post processing. I have had the kit a year and though it was not sharp but it was not sharpness that was the problem it was lack of mid-tone contrast. After getting the proper exposure and getting my levels and Mids bang on what I perceived as sharpness suddenly appeared. So the Kit is capable. Not ass capable as other lenses but you will be surprised at what some have done with it. It is no low light champion but you already own one of those. For me its primes for quality and kit for convenience. I will upgrade someday but until then I am satisfied with my kit
Cheers
Roger

Roland Karlsson · Jun 3, 2009

Marc Sabatella said:
OK, but those are from a pre-release camera using pre-release
firmware, taken using unknown lenses and with unknown technique by an
unknown photographer. I see no reason to expect anything in
particular of images like that.

I expect noise from a pre-release camera - not unsharpness.

Marc Sabatella said:
You really need to be a lot more specific about your needs before
anyone can make specific suggestions.

I want sharp lenses. Really sharp.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

Torphoto · Jun 3, 2009

You want sharp? look at the 50-135, a good copy is VERY sharp, as is the da 70mm, the da 40 pancakes, sorry but the kit lens and the 50-200 are consumer lenses and will never give you the sharpness of the good stuff..

full rez sample

the full rez is straight converted from raw nothing done to it, not even usm

Torphoto · Jun 3, 2009

sorry dpreview is killing the links

UtahManSir · Jun 3, 2009

OK, Add these all world lenses to what you have right now.

FA 31

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/122-pentax-smc-fa-31mm-f18-al-limited-review--test-report

D-FA 100 Macro

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/129-pentax-smc-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-review--test-report

Whammo, most of the needful focal lengths covered, you already have a decent amount of good lenses to start with anyway, and all of them sharp. You could even add the DA 40 pancake too. Pretty much everyone here loves that lens.

Too be honest though, it will be more your technique that will get you sharpness more than just the best glass.

Regards,

Lloyd

--

If it doesn't matter whether we win or lose, why do we keep score? --Worf Son of Mogh

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://main.diabetes.org/goto/Lloyd.Shell

Anastigmat · Jun 3, 2009

Roland Karlsson said:
OK,

So I plan to buy an expensive camera, the K-7.

You got that right! Only the Nikon D300 is more expensive than the K7.

Roland Karlsson said:
Its plenty of pixels - so I want good lenses.

Roland Karlsson said:
As far as I understand - the kit lenses are really not up to the
task. Correct me if I am wrong, but thats the impression I have got.

They are of course designed for mass consumption and a low price. Don't expect miracles from them. However, sometimes a more expensive lens is just faster, but not necessarily sharper.

Roland Karlsson said:
So - today I own e.g. a FA 50/1.4 and the *istDS kit lens. I also
have lots of M lenses and M42 lenses. I also have the Zenitar. I also
have a 70 mm Sigma macro lens and a 10-20 mm Sigma lens.

Looks like most of the lenses you have are wide to short teles.

Roland Karlsson said:
I now have two possible routes. Either I buy a set of prime lenses,
e.g. some of FA 35/2.0, DA 21/3.2, DA 15/4, DA 70/2.4 or I buy a
better zoom.

You can of course go both routes. It depends on your shooting habits. You may not need any more lenses than the FA 50 and the other lenses you have got. A good choice is the Pentax 12-24mm f/4 zoom, which is the same as the Tokina 12-24mm. DP Review tested he Tokina recently and it is sharp.

Roland Karlsson said:
Better zooms might be DA 15-50/2.8 or Tamron 17-50/2.8 or something
else.

So ... whats your advice ... how do I get quality that matches the
K-7 for not too much money.

Read a lot of test reports.

Roland Karlsson said:
BTW - I might think the 15-50 is somewhat too large.

--
Roland

My advice is to get the camera first, and the kit lens if you don't have any lenses. Skip the kit lens if you already own some glass. Then start shooting and reviewing your results. Based on your shooting habits and the results, you can go from there and make your buying decisions. You may want something wider than what you have, or something faster or something sharper or longer. Who knows? One man's meat is another man's poison. My favorite lens (the 400mm telephoto) may be of no use to other photographers.

Marc Sabatella · Jun 3, 2009

Roland Karlsson said:
I expect noise from a pre-release camera - not unsharpness.

OK, but who's to say the problem wasn't poor technique - poor focus, camera shake, dirty lens, etc? And a poor demosaicing algorithm is as likely to lead to unsharpness as to excessive noise. Basically, it's ridiculous to look at pictures of unknown pedigree and try to conclude anything - there are way too many variables.

Roland Karlsson said:
I want sharp lenses. Really sharp.

Got that, but any particular focal length range? Price range? Does it need to focus closely (the sharpest lenses are generally macro lenses, but not always)? Is manual focus OK? Manual exposure? Screw mount?

Some of the lenses you have alreayd are undoubtedly as sharp as anything else anyone is likely to recommend (eg, the Sigma 70 macro).

--
Marc Sabatella
http://www.marcsabatella.com/
Blog: http://marcsabatella.blogspot.com/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcsabatella/

Roland Mabo · Jun 3, 2009

There are many images taken with K20D (also with 14..6Mp) and 18-55 II (higher resolution optics than original 18-55) around which are sharper than those you link to.

You don't expect unsharpness on beta samples? Then you expect that the image processing engine in beta cameras are production version and not beta version.
And why do you expect that?

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

Roland Karlsson · Jun 4, 2009

Roland Mabo said:
There are many images taken with K20D (also with 14..6Mp) and 18-55
II (higher resolution optics than original 18-55) around which are
sharper than those you link to.
You don't expect unsharpness on beta samples? Then you expect that
the image processing engine in beta cameras are production version
and not beta version.
And why do you expect that?

Because demosaicing is a known art today. Why put in some experimental software there? Just take a good one from the shelf - and then maybe make yet another even better.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

iaki · Jun 4, 2009

If you want a very sharp lens, then the route to go is the 43 ltd.
2400+ lph as top resolution.

It is the sharpest lens ever tested by PopPhoto´s glory days. Remember it is an "enlarged" 35, not a "reduced" 50.

The 35 ltd macro is another candidate: 2200 lph from 2.8.

That being said, there are some key factors you might consider.

-For sharpness, regardless the how expensive the lens is, the element of the equation which is most capable of screwing sharpness is... you. The photographer. Even the cheapest lens currently on sale that has "low" resolution figures will blow your socks "when propperly used".

The common mistakes affecting sharpness:

Misfocusing, specially at fast apertures. This is the cause of around 98% of unsharp images.

Trembling: even the minor trembling will be recorded and shown when pixel peeping.

And finally, sharp pictures are not only a result of high resolution lenses. Microcontrast, accutance [the effect which the unsharp mask controls], sharpness delta [de diference between sharp areas vs. out of focus areas, which is why most of portraits look sharper than very sharp panos], and apparent sharpness.

So, if you want high resolution lenses, there are plenty. If you want sharp images, then start improving and cleaning your skills.

mrdc76 · Jun 4, 2009

Roland Karlsson said:
I want sharp lenses. Really sharp.

DA* 55/1.4

--
Mikko

DrugaRunda · Jun 4, 2009

with zooms
wide angle
Pentax 12-24 f4
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Pentax DA* 16-50 f2.8
and perhaps Sigma 18-50 f2.8

are all rated as excellent, with Pentax 12-24 being the sharpest option for a zoom at wide angle, and Tamron most likely being the sharpest from wide open at 17-50 range...

The three lenses in 16-50 range are known to suffer from QC issues, so try before you buy...

If you want really sharp, than you want primes and dependable on the budget you want

FA31ltd
FA43ltd
FA77ltd
or
DA70ltd
DA40ltd
DA*55
DA35mm ltd

DFA 50mm macro
DFA 100mm macro

DA21ltd and DA15mm ltd are not as sharp as the ones above as far as I can tell from many samples I have seen to date... but both (even though DA21 is as good as the zooms in the range, DA15 might be a bit weaker wide open than 12-24mm zoom... but if size matters this is the lens to get)

from the above lenses I have FA43mm, DA*55mm DA70mm and can vouch that they are as good as it gets... more than enough for K20D/K7 sensor...

There might also be some further lenses to consider in sub 100mm range which are used and which will be excellent
FA* 28-70 zoom
Tamron 28-75 zoom
FA20mm f2.8,
and there are all the Sigma primes...
which all come to my mind
and than the whole host of manual focus lenses...
All current ones from Zeiss, 18mm, 21mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm

From Voigtlander 20mm (I tried to buy it, but not available yet in UK, but from the ones in Nikon mount - it should be great), 40mm, 58mm

Older Voightlanders, and a whole host of excellent pentax older primes which are all more than capable to work with 14.6 MP of my K20D sensor when stopped down a bit...

hope that list helps... I am sure there are stills some lenses that I have missed, but I probably covered more popular choices

--
common sense is anything but common

whatever8 · Jun 4, 2009

Combine K-7 to form the Pentax 777. You can go against the Sony A380 haha.

Roland Karlsson · Jun 4, 2009

Thanx for the very valuable input. The Tamron lens sounds tempting.

The D70 is also on my list - because I just loved 100 mm for FF.

Roland

DrugaRunda said:
with zooms
wide angle
Pentax 12-24 f4
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Pentax DA* 16-50 f2.8
and perhaps Sigma 18-50 f2.8

are all rated as excellent, with Pentax 12-24 being the sharpest
option for a zoom at wide angle, and Tamron most likely being the
sharpest from wide open at 17-50 range...

The three lenses in 16-50 range are known to suffer from QC issues,
so try before you buy...

If you want really sharp, than you want primes and dependable on the
budget you want

FA31ltd
FA43ltd
FA77ltd
or
DA70ltd
DA40ltd
DA*55
DA35mm ltd

DFA 50mm macro
DFA 100mm macro

DA21ltd and DA15mm ltd are not as sharp as the ones above as far as I
can tell from many samples I have seen to date... but both (even
though DA21 is as good as the zooms in the range, DA15 might be a bit
weaker wide open than 12-24mm zoom... but if size matters this is the
lens to get)

from the above lenses I have FA43mm, DA*55mm DA70mm and can vouch
that they are as good as it gets... more than enough for K20D/K7
sensor...

There might also be some further lenses to consider in sub 100mm
range which are used and which will be excellent
FA* 28-70 zoom
Tamron 28-75 zoom
FA20mm f2.8,
and there are all the Sigma primes...
which all come to my mind
and than the whole host of manual focus lenses...
All current ones from Zeiss, 18mm, 21mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm,
85mm, 100mm
From Voigtlander 20mm (I tried to buy it, but not available yet in
UK, but from the ones in Nikon mount - it should be great), 40mm, 58mm

Older Voightlanders, and a whole host of excellent pentax older
primes which are all more than capable to work with 14.6 MP of my
K20D sensor when stopped down a bit...

hope that list helps... I am sure there are stills some lenses that I
have missed, but I probably covered more popular choices

--
common sense is anything but common

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

Roland Karlsson · Jun 4, 2009

whatever8 said:
Combine K-7 to form the Pentax 777. You can go against the Sony A380
haha.

Even better with a K-6 and 66 Ltd then

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

K-7 lens selection ?

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts