The DA 12-24 is a superb lens. It would give you an expanded range. The
16-45 is too close to the 20-35.
Paul
On Apr 11, 2006, at 2:00 PM, Jerome Reyes wrote:
Trusty Pentaxians,
To prepare for a trip, I find myself having to e-bay / replace my
16-45mm
lens. There's a scratch on the front element that shows up in photos
if I
close down past f8 or so.
With that in mind, I'm trying to take the opportunity to re-evaluate my
lens situation. In short, the question is: should I get a new 16-45 or
the
12-24mm? More specifically, my main question is how do the two compare
at
16mm? I'm not sure if any one can answer this besides Paul (he came up
on
just about every search in the archives), but any feedback will be
appreciated.
Other thoughts: Current lenses are 20-35, 24-70, 50, 70-200mm. Main
camera
is *ist-D.
How distorted is the 12-24mm at the wide end? I noticed that Paul
corrects
his shots in PS... but I don't own PS, so that won't be an option.
It'll
be used 70% of the time for landscapes / waterfalls. While the 12-24mm
is
nicely wide, I think I'll miss the versatility of the 16-45mm. The
other
option is getting a 14mm... but that's running a distant 3rd right now.
Just thinking aloud.
- Jerome
