Reading mode: Light Dark

HD Pentax DA* 11-18 2.8 brick wall series at 2.8

Go to last post
MrB1 said:
Brentliris said:
There are lot of hair splitters on this forum who jump into the debate with glee over IQ issues and yet this actual lens may perform well enough for real world use in 98% of scenarios..
Click to expand...
It is to be hoped that you didn't really intend this comment to be as unfair as it appears. You have voluntarily posted images here, several others have viewed them, taken the time to download and examine them, commented on what you have chosen to show them, and then offered you advice based on both the evidence you have given and their expectations of a top-of-the-range Pentax product. It seems to me that they (we) are trying to be helpful.

I have no interest in this lens - it is too big and too heavy for me - but I do have an interest in Pentax producing good stuff - I have a Pentax system that I enjoy using and upgrade from time to time, so I want the company to continue being successful. But if I had paid up for such an expensive lens that produced results similar to your evidence, I would want to exchange it - at this price in the Pentax range, 'good enough' should not be good enough!

Philip
Click to expand...
I like the helpful idea, that It's unfair to be called a hairsplitter that can be doubted its derogatory but still much used term in this process quality control.

It is a hellish to press for a consumer to do extensive and exhausting tests and then have to go through severval weeks or months of uncertainty in shipping, and delays before getting the perfect lens. No good enough can be a reasonable choice if the most used scenearios the fault has little impact on the percieved quality of the results.

This lens has proven itself to me to already be good stuff. I look only at the actual gear and am not in agreement that the price of the lens is so high that it must on every parametrre it must be absolutely flawless for that to be the case it could cost double it present asking price..
 
DS21 said:
Brentliris said:
DS21 said:
Brentliris said:
Joseph Tainter said:
Brentliris said:
Terry K1 said:
I know it's a real pain to test the heck out of a UWA, then start a return process, but when you finally get a keeper, it sure makes it all worth it. A good copy of an UWA lens sure is a pleasure to own. Personally, you've already seen an issue, I wouldn't test it anymore, and send it back. I would get a refund, and buy it from a different store. Good luck to you.
Click to expand...
Thing is others that have returned lenses don't necessary get a better lens in all respects in comparison to the original lens. I plan on getting my copy fixed if it does have glaring faults that interfere with it's intended uses. I have paid for an extended warranty as besides giving full repairs in case of accidents or theft promises repairs of faults i the mechanical function. The non extended normal EU warranty laws covers repairs of faults du to manufacturing for two years and clearly covers the decentering function as the lens is advertised as being sharp across the frame even from 2.8. I can't rush through testing a lens in two weeks. The repair under warranty buys me the time to actually use the lens in the optimum period for photography. The lenses faults don't interfere with my The other poster on this thread fotoni had a problem with a DFA* 50 1.4 and had it fixed which improved it considerably, it's not perfect, but near enough. Try out two or three lenses testing and sending them back will get too time consuming as I'm a very very busy man at present not to brag about that at all but it gives me the means to invest in the gear in the first place. So no I don't return I get the lens fixed and de centering is a fixable problem..
Click to expand...
Sometimes autofocus correction (which was done on Fotoni's lens) helps to lessen a decentering issue, but cannot eliminate it. The problem starts when optical elements are cemented in the manufacturing process. This cannot be repaired.

Autofocus issues are a minor problem in such a wide angle lens. The depth of field covers small focusing errors.

If you want to try autofocus correction, there is no need to send in the lens. You can test it yourself.

Joe
Click to expand...
If pentax does not deliver on the promised "sharp across the frame even at wide open" Then they will have to replace the lens with one that fulfills that specification under EU warranty law..
Click to expand...
Pentax will claim the lens is sharp, or "up to specification" how will you prove it isn't, you think they will accept brick wall test like you did? It is much easier to deal with the store during the exchange period, and then they deal with the manufacturer. There is a reason everyone is doing it this way, or telling you from their experience that is a thing to do.
Click to expand...
Yes I know it's not possible to force them to act responsibly if the lens doesn't meet spec, I can try now to test this postulate with a lens they surely want to have a good reputation.

There are lot of hair splitters on this forum who jump into the debate with glee over IQ issues and yet this actual lens may perform well enough for real world use in 98% of scenarios..
Click to expand...
It is entirely within your right to be happy with the lens, and forget about uneven sharpness if it does not bother you in real world use. But for most people this is a very expensive lens, and this is what causes the higher scrutiny and more critical reactions to the imperfections. Also, being the star lens, this is not what most Pentax users would expect as normal. It is also hard to accept (for most here), that it is unreasonable to expect to get a better performing lens, that the other copy might be even worse. This lens is objectively overpriced for what it is (and especially in Pentax ecosystem), so it better be perfect.
Click to expand...
I like the higher scrutiny of what the lens is capable of, but it is clear tha lenses are not a laser copy machine where it's only goal is to create a carbon copy reproduction of a flat field world, it is an APSC lens on a 24 mpx sensor trying to squeeze an enormous field of view in a small space with a zoom lens, the quality that can be achieved with the lens as is phenomenal, with a little forethought a slightly soft area can be easily mitigated, so I disagree that "it better be perfect" it isn't is wholly meaningful to me when I'm out in the field using the lens. Yes you could trade the lens 2 or 3 times and miss a whole season of using the lens risk transport damage other issues turning up and long for that less then perfect first copy you originally had in your hands..

--
Reflections, understandings, discoveries and intimations..
 
Last edited:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............ repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ..... they haven't the resources (and certainly not the parts yet) to do that and it will be sent back to Pentax.

So once the fourteen day return period is over ..... so is the honeymoon for de-centered lenses and you will be at the beck and call of your local service centre ...... a battle you could easily lose.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/

--
Dave's clichés
 
Last edited:
DAVID MANZE said:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............ repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ..... they haven't the resources (and certainly not the parts yet) to do that and it will be sent back to Pentax.

So once the fourteen day return period is over ..... so is the honeymoon for de-centered lenses and you will be at the beck and call of your local service centre ...... a battle you could easily lose.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/
Click to expand...
The local service center would be the Pentax service in Hamborg. Main office for europe is located there as well.
 
Brentliris said:
This lens has proven itself to me to already be good stuff. I look only at the actual gear and am not in agreement that the price of the lens is so high that it must on every parametrre it must be absolutely flawless for that to be the case it could cost double it present asking price..
Click to expand...
Through your posts in this whole thread, and the hyperbole in the quote above, it might appear that you display a form of confirmation bias. I haven't read all the posts again but I don't recall anyone claiming that the lens must be "absolutely flawless". There is, however, some common agreement that your lens should be expected to be better than it appears to be in the photographic evidence that you have voluntarily supplied, and given that it is a top-of-the-range Pentax lens. But if you are happy to keep it, that's OK - to each his own. ;-)

Philip
 
Last edited:
DAVID MANZE said:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............
Click to expand...
This problem has been ongoing for years--since Pentax shifted lens production to Hanoi. By failing to correct the problem, Pentax has indicated clearly that they do not intend to fix the problem.

I have many film-era Pentax lenses. Not one of them ever showed optical decentering. In contrast, many of the digital Pentax lenses that I own, perhaps a majority of them, have had optical decentering severe enough to be noticeable.
DAVID MANZE said:
repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ....
Click to expand...
A decentered lens cannot be repaired. The problem arises when lens elements are cemented together. Pentax must change their manufacturing process, but have refused to do so.

Joe
 
DS21 said:
Brentliris said:
Joseph Tainter said:
Brentliris said:
Terry K1 said:
I know it's a real pain to test the heck out of a UWA, then start a return process, but when you finally get a keeper, it sure makes it all worth it. A good copy of an UWA lens sure is a pleasure to own. Personally, you've already seen an issue, I wouldn't test it anymore, and send it back. I would get a refund, and buy it from a different store. Good luck to you.
Click to expand...
Thing is others that have returned lenses don't necessary get a better lens in all respects in comparison to the original lens. I plan on getting my copy fixed if it does have glaring faults that interfere with it's intended uses. I have paid for an extended warranty as besides giving full repairs in case of accidents or theft promises repairs of faults i the mechanical function. The non extended normal EU warranty laws covers repairs of faults du to manufacturing for two years and clearly covers the decentering function as the lens is advertised as being sharp across the frame even from 2.8. I can't rush through testing a lens in two weeks. The repair under warranty buys me the time to actually use the lens in the optimum period for photography. The lenses faults don't interfere with my The other poster on this thread fotoni had a problem with a DFA* 50 1.4 and had it fixed which improved it considerably, it's not perfect, but near enough. Try out two or three lenses testing and sending them back will get too time consuming as I'm a very very busy man at present not to brag about that at all but it gives me the means to invest in the gear in the first place. So no I don't return I get the lens fixed and de centering is a fixable problem..
Click to expand...
Sometimes autofocus correction (which was done on Fotoni's lens) helps to lessen a decentering issue, but cannot eliminate it. The problem starts when optical elements are cemented in the manufacturing process. This cannot be repaired.

Autofocus issues are a minor problem in such a wide angle lens. The depth of field covers small focusing errors.

If you want to try autofocus correction, there is no need to send in the lens. You can test it yourself.

Joe
Click to expand...
If pentax does not deliver on the promised "sharp across the frame even at wide open" Then they will have to replace the lens with one that fulfills that specification under EU warranty law..
Click to expand...
Pentax will claim the lens is sharp, or "up to specification" how will you prove it isn't, you think they will accept brick wall test like you did?
Click to expand...
When I have returned decentered lenses, I usually include a cd with photos proving the problem.

Joe
 
Joseph Tainter said:
DAVID MANZE said:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............
Click to expand...
This problem has been ongoing for years--since Pentax shifted lens production to Hanoi. By failing to correct the problem, Pentax has indicated clearly that they do not intend to fix the problem.

I have many film-era Pentax lenses. Not one of them ever showed optical decentering. In contrast, many of the digital Pentax lenses that I own, perhaps a majority of them, have had optical decentering severe enough to be noticeable.
Joseph Tainter said:
repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ....
Click to expand...
A decentered lens cannot be repaired. The problem arises when lens elements are cemented together. Pentax must change their manufacturing process, but have refused to do so.

Joe
Click to expand...
And exactly this is the reason why, for example I, hesitate to acquire any (modern) Pentax lens! My recent purchase (from one year ago) was a 30-year smc Pentax-A 35-105/3.5 lens. I paid an equivalent of $170 USD (purchase, shipping from Japan, Canadian taxes) for this, seemingly never used lens, and I can't be happier. At least two other Pentax fans followed my example (alex_virt and DougOB), and they seem to be happy with it. At least Alex is for sure, though Doug doesn't complain either :-) .

--
Regards,
Peter
 
Last edited:
flektogon said:
Joseph Tainter said:
DAVID MANZE said:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............
Click to expand...
This problem has been ongoing for years--since Pentax shifted lens production to Hanoi. By failing to correct the problem, Pentax has indicated clearly that they do not intend to fix the problem.

I have many film-era Pentax lenses. Not one of them ever showed optical decentering. In contrast, many of the digital Pentax lenses that I own, perhaps a majority of them, have had optical decentering severe enough to be noticeable.
flektogon said:
repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ....
Click to expand...
A decentered lens cannot be repaired. The problem arises when lens elements are cemented together. Pentax must change their manufacturing process, but have refused to do so.

Joe
Click to expand...
And exactly this is the reason why, for example I, hesitate to acquire any (modern) Pentax lens! My recent purchase (from one year ago) was a 30-year smc Pentax-A 35-105/3.5 lens. I paid an equivalent of $170 USD (purchase, shipping from Japan, Canadian taxes) for this, seemingly never used lens, and I can't be happier. At least two other Pentax fans followed my example (alex_virt and DougOB), and they seem to be happy with it. At least Alex is for sure, though Doug doesn't complain either :-) .
Click to expand...
Hold your horses cowboy, the jury isn't out on the lens just yet, as yet the so difficult softness on one small strip on the left side of the frame at 2.8 and 11mm has influenced the images I've taken in a very minimal way, I didn't even need to shoot the lens at 2.8 at 11 mm until the yesterday where I was in a museum exhibit with sensitive fabrics so it was very dark. Her the subject was just in the middle of the portrait orientation image..

That a decentered lens can't be fixed may or not be true, they could replace the optics if that was the cause of the issue.. Though they probably just replace the whole lens..
 
MrB1 said:
Brentliris said:
This lens has proven itself to me to already be good stuff. I look only at the actual gear and am not in agreement that the price of the lens is so high that it must on every parametrre it must be absolutely flawless for that to be the case it could cost double it present asking price..
Click to expand...
Through your posts in this whole thread, and the hyperbole in the quote above, it might appear that you display a form of confirmation bias. I haven't read all the posts again but I don't recall anyone claiming that the lens must be "absolutely flawless". There is, however, some common agreement that your lens should be expected to be better than it appears to be in the photographic evidence that you have voluntarily supplied, and given that it is a top-of-the-range Pentax lens. But if you are happy to keep it, that's OK - to each his own. ;-)

Philip
Click to expand...
Still not enough photographic evidence to support the claim that it should be expected to be better.. DAVID MANZE specifically stated that the test for decentring is best done at infinity focus, the distance in my example is at 6 feet.

--
Reflections, understandings, discoveries and intimations..
 
Last edited:
Brentliris said:
Hold your horses cowboy, the jury isn't out on the lens just yet, as yet the so difficult softness on one small strip on the left side of the frame at 2.8 and 11mm
Click to expand...
It's not just at 11 mm. I see it across the zoom range in your posted photos. The question is whether you will still see it stopped down. If so, you may find the lens useable--just avoid F2.8. That is what I do with a couple of lenses I have that are okay except wide open. So take some photos and see if the problem occurs at F4.0.
Brentliris said:
That a decentered lens can't be fixed may or not be true, they could replace the optics if that was the cause of the issue.. Though they probably just replace the whole lens..
Click to expand...
When I've returned decentered lenses to Pentax under warranty, they replace the lens. It is too expensive to repair by hand optical elements that are decentered during manufacturing. Now I test a new lens immediately, and if bad, return it to the vendor for another copy.

Joe
 
Brentliris said:
Still not enough photographic evidence to support the claim that it should be expected to be better.. DAVID MANZE specifically stated that the test for decentring is best done at infinity focus, the distance in my example is at 6 feet.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why David said this. I test lenses on a brick wall at a distance of a few feet--much like your test, except I use a tripod..

Joe
 
Joseph Tainter said:
Brentliris said:
Still not enough photographic evidence to support the claim that it should be expected to be better.. DAVID MANZE specifically stated that the test for decentring is best done at infinity focus, the distance in my example is at 6 feet.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why David said this. I test lenses on a brick wall at a distance of a few feet--much like your test, except I use a tripod..

Joe
Click to expand...
He stated using infinity focus is the best way to isolate the problem from possible influence other issues like focus errors or skewed camera position etc.
 
Joseph Tainter said:
Brentliris said:
Hold your horses cowboy, the jury isn't out on the lens just yet, as yet the so difficult softness on one small strip on the left side of the frame at 2.8 and 11mm
Click to expand...
It's not just at 11 mm. I see it across the zoom range in your posted photos. The question is whether you will still see it stopped down. If so, you may find the lens useable--just avoid F2.8. That is what I do with a couple of lenses I have that are okay except wide open. So take some photos and see if the problem occurs at F4.0.
Joseph Tainter said:
That a decentered lens can't be fixed may or not be true, they could replace the optics if that was the cause of the issue.. Though they probably just replace the whole lens..
Click to expand...
When I've returned decentered lenses to Pentax under warranty, they replace the lens. It is too expensive to repair by hand optical elements that are decentered during manufacturing. Now I test a new lens immediately, and if bad, return it to the vendor for another copy.

Joe
Click to expand...
Too bad I didn't get down to testing before the 14 day trial was over... The s__t hit the fan at work the day after I bought the lens and distracted my intentions..

I look at the original files through the zoom range at 2.8 and see slight softness on the left side single row of bricks at 12mm it is already gone, the 11mm 2.8 file sharpens up very nicely with no artifacts in capture one for landscape, interiors, city streets but sharpening is not ideal when there are people on the edge of the frame or for art/ detailed parts reproduction.

--
Reflections, understandings, discoveries and intimations..
 
Last edited:
Brentliris said:
flektogon said:
Joseph Tainter said:
DAVID MANZE said:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............
Click to expand...
This problem has been ongoing for years--since Pentax shifted lens production to Hanoi. By failing to correct the problem, Pentax has indicated clearly that they do not intend to fix the problem.

I have many film-era Pentax lenses. Not one of them ever showed optical decentering. In contrast, many of the digital Pentax lenses that I own, perhaps a majority of them, have had optical decentering severe enough to be noticeable.
Brentliris said:
repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ....
Click to expand...
A decentered lens cannot be repaired. The problem arises when lens elements are cemented together. Pentax must change their manufacturing process, but have refused to do so.

Joe
Click to expand...
And exactly this is the reason why, for example I, hesitate to acquire any (modern) Pentax lens! My recent purchase (from one year ago) was a 30-year smc Pentax-A 35-105/3.5 lens. I paid an equivalent of $170 USD (purchase, shipping from Japan, Canadian taxes) for this, seemingly never used lens, and I can't be happier. At least two other Pentax fans followed my example (alex_virt and DougOB), and they seem to be happy with it. At least Alex is for sure, though Doug doesn't complain either :-) .
Click to expand...
Hold your horses cowboy, the jury isn't out on the lens just yet, as yet the so difficult softness on one small strip on the left side of the frame at 2.8 and 11mm has influenced the images I've taken in a very minimal way, I didn't even need to shoot the lens at 2.8 at 11 mm until the yesterday where I was in a museum exhibit with sensitive fabrics so it was very dark. Her the subject was just in the middle of the portrait orientation image..

That a decentered lens can't be fixed may or not be true, they could replace the optics if that was the cause of the issue.. Though they probably just replace the whole lens..
Click to expand...
Well, only you can be a judge of your own lens, but the Pentax lens quality has been judged (and convicted) many, many times :-( :-( :-(

--
Regards,
Peter
 
Last edited:
flektogon said:
Brentliris said:
flektogon said:
Joseph Tainter said:
DAVID MANZE said:
It looks like Pentax's quality control is still fallible ...... probably not helped by their precarious financial situation. ............
Click to expand...
This problem has been ongoing for years--since Pentax shifted lens production to Hanoi. By failing to correct the problem, Pentax has indicated clearly that they do not intend to fix the problem.

I have many film-era Pentax lenses. Not one of them ever showed optical decentering. In contrast, many of the digital Pentax lenses that I own, perhaps a majority of them, have had optical decentering severe enough to be noticeable.
flektogon said:
repairing a de-centered lens will not be done by a local service centre ....
Click to expand...
A decentered lens cannot be repaired. The problem arises when lens elements are cemented together. Pentax must change their manufacturing process, but have refused to do so.

Joe
Click to expand...
And exactly this is the reason why, for example I, hesitate to acquire any (modern) Pentax lens! My recent purchase (from one year ago) was a 30-year smc Pentax-A 35-105/3.5 lens. I paid an equivalent of $170 USD (purchase, shipping from Japan, Canadian taxes) for this, seemingly never used lens, and I can't be happier. At least two other Pentax fans followed my example (alex_virt and DougOB), and they seem to be happy with it. At least Alex is for sure, though Doug doesn't complain either :-) .
Click to expand...
Hold your horses cowboy, the jury isn't out on the lens just yet, as yet the so difficult softness on one small strip on the left side of the frame at 2.8 and 11mm has influenced the images I've taken in a very minimal way, I didn't even need to shoot the lens at 2.8 at 11 mm until the yesterday where I was in a museum exhibit with sensitive fabrics so it was very dark. Her the subject was just in the middle of the portrait orientation image..

That a decentered lens can't be fixed may or not be true, they could replace the optics if that was the cause of the issue.. Though they probably just replace the whole lens..
Click to expand...
Well, only you can be a judge of your own lens, but the Pentax lens quality has been judged (and convicted) many, many times :-( :-( :-(
Click to expand...
Still they have been bought enough over the years, DA ltd, FA ltd, the Star Series esp. DA' 60-250, 300mm F4 lenses the DA 50-135, DA* 55 see the Pentaxforums reviews and I think the picture is very positive for the Pentax quality..
 
Brentliris said:
Still they have been bought enough over the years, DA ltd, FA ltd, the Star Series esp. DA' 60-250, 300mm F4 lenses the DA 50-135, DA* 55 see the Pentaxforums reviews and I think the picture is very positive for the Pentax quality..
Click to expand...
Pentax has designed, and continues to design, some very fine lenses. There is no question of that. The problem is that they then shoot themselves in the foot by poor manufacturing quality control.

Star lenses, for example, are supposed to be individually hand inspected. Really? My first copy of the DA* 50-135 arrived with an optical element loose and rattling around inside the barrel.

Joe
 
Brentliris said:
flektogon said:
Brentliris said:
flektogon said:
And exactly this is the reason why, for example I, hesitate to acquire any (modern) Pentax lens! My recent purchase (from one year ago) was a 30-year smc Pentax-A 35-105/3.5 lens. I paid an equivalent of $170 USD (purchase, shipping from Japan, Canadian taxes) for this, seemingly never used lens, and I can't be happier. At least two other Pentax fans followed my example (alex_virt and DougOB), and they seem to be happy with it. At least Alex is for sure, though Doug doesn't complain either :-) .
Click to expand...
Hold your horses cowboy, the jury isn't out on the lens just yet, as yet the so difficult softness on one small strip on the left side of the frame at 2.8 and 11mm has influenced the images I've taken in a very minimal way, I didn't even need to shoot the lens at 2.8 at 11 mm until the yesterday where I was in a museum exhibit with sensitive fabrics so it was very dark. Her the subject was just in the middle of the portrait orientation image..

That a decentered lens can't be fixed may or not be true, they could replace the optics if that was the cause of the issue.. Though they probably just replace the whole lens..
Click to expand...
Well, only you can be a judge of your own lens, but the Pentax lens quality has been judged (and convicted) many, many times :-( :-( :-(
Click to expand...
Still they have been bought enough over the years, DA ltd, FA ltd, the Star Series esp. DA' 60-250, 300mm F4 lenses the DA 50-135, DA* 55 see the Pentaxforums reviews and I think the picture is very positive for the Pentax quality..
Click to expand...
I am afraid you are misinterpreting what we are trying to tell you. At first, you showed us what you've found out with your lens. Yes, everyone saw a little bit softness on the left side. Is this a reason to reclaim the lens? Here, majority advised you that yes. But you are not convinced to do so. Fine, that's your lens, and only you need to decide what to do, no one is pushing you towards anything. Here, majority of who replied you only stated that here and there they had similar problems with the Pentax lenses. Some of them had to get the third sample to be somehow satisfied. For sure there are many, who were luckier and always got satisfactory products. So, what else you want to hear from us? That everything is O.K.? I think that any further discussion on this theme is pointless. As few of us advised you, make another test and then the decision is only and only in your hands. I can only wish you good luck regardless of what you decide to do with your lens.

--
Regards,
Peter
 
Last edited:
Joseph Tainter said:
Brentliris said:
Still they have been bought enough over the years, DA ltd, FA ltd, the Star Series esp. DA' 60-250, 300mm F4 lenses the DA 50-135, DA* 55 see the Pentaxforums reviews and I think the picture is very positive for the Pentax quality..
Click to expand...
Pentax has designed, and continues to design, some very fine lenses. There is no question of that. The problem is that they then shoot themselves in the foot by poor manufacturing quality control.

Star lenses, for example, are supposed to be individually hand inspected. Really? My first copy of the DA* 50-135 arrived with an optical element loose and rattling around inside the barrel.

Joe
Click to expand...
Receiving a ratttling DA 50-135 in the early days of the star lenses would leave me very dissappointed so I can understand your skepticism in regards to the Pentax quality control. I'm less used to problems from them staying with DA prime a single FA 43 limitd lenses and the DFA 100 2.8 macro, The used DA 60-250 I bought at a very good price including a repair list that seemed like the lens had been through a hurricane but it's performed very well the 2 or 3 years I've had it. So the DA*60-250 DA 55 1.4 and now the 11-18 2.8 are my first DA * lenses and I'm not noticing any mechanical build quality problems with them as yet.

--
Reflections, understandings, discoveries and intimations..
 
Last edited:
Joseph Tainter said:
Brentliris said:
Still not enough photographic evidence to support the claim that it should be expected to be better.. DAVID MANZE specifically stated that the test for decentring is best done at infinity focus, the distance in my example is at 6 feet.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why David said this. I test lenses on a brick wall at a distance of a few feet--much like your test, except I use a tripod..

Joe
Click to expand...
If a lens is de-centered at six feet you would have to do an accurate brick wall test to see it .......

....... a de-centered lens could be focused at six feet in the frame centre and have the plane of focus at 5ft 9 inches on the left and 6ft 3 inches on the right .... difficult to spot at those distances in a normal shot .... although a good brick wall test will show it too ...... but a good one!

...... at infinity it's blatantly obvious straight off the bat .......

........ and infinity turns up a lot in everyday shooting .... it's the bread and butter of where a wide angle lens needs to be well centered ... not six feet ........ I don't shoot brick walls but I do shoot astro photography where you are shooting wide open and it's nice to have good left and right sharpness ......

That is why !!

--
Dave's clichés
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Meeces
The XF500/X-T5 goes to the Blue Angels airshow . . .
Replies
8
Views
1K
Morris0
Morris0
H
A beginner's guide to tripod selection
Replies
12
Views
37K
HRC2016
H
D
Sigma 300-600 4 DG OS Sports – Review After 14 Days of Testing
Replies
1
Views
15K
jerste
J
R
  • User review User review
Well rounded
2 3
Replies
42
Views
48K
RLight
R
S
  • User review User review
** LUMIX G9 Mk2 Review. First Impressions? Excellent! **
2 3
Replies
52
Views
22K
Stevie Boy Blue
S

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top