I haven't used the DA12-24/4, but it sounds similar physically to the FA20-35. I think the latter is smaller and lighter. You already know it's my favorite zoom lens, nearly the only one I use at all. I rate it right up there with a lot of primes.
It is better wide open than the DA16-45, in my opinion, and produces nicer OOF results at corresponding focal lengths, particularly at the corners and edges of the field of view, with remarkably good rectilinear correction for a zoom. The step between the FA20-35 and the DA14, in terms of maximum field of view, is about 20 diagonal degrees (91.7 degrees for the 14mm, 71.6-44.8 degrees for the 20-35mm). This puts the 20-35 into a perfect "wide to normal" range for my uses. Godfrey On Jun 16, 2006, at 9:03 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'd have to say that my favorite zoom is the DA 12-24/4. It doesn't > extend to any great degree at either end. It's extremely sharp, > even in the corners, and provides a true wide for the D. I like the > DA 16-45 as well. It's a very handy range.I've actually found it to > be very flare resistant. I've even shot directly into the sun with > it. I use both it and the FA 50/1.4 extensively. Of course, the > real benefit of the FA is its speed, but in terms of resolution, > the DA 16-45 seems to be its equal at 5.6 through 11. I've used it > for commercial work on several occasions, and wouldn't hesitate to > use it for any project. > Paul > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Having used a friends DA 16-45 for almost a week now, I'm >> beginning to >> enjoy the convenience of using a zoom lens. I'm still of mixed >> feelings >> about the 16-45, and before making any decision about buying it or >> another >> zoom I've decided to wait and see what the forthcoming 16-50/2.8 >> is like >> and see about trying other zoom lenses. >> >> Some of the issues that Godders has with the 16-45, namely its >> size and the >> way it extends at the short end, don't bother me too much, >> although I can >> certainly see his point, and would probably like the lens a little >> more if >> it didn't extent so much, or at all. My biggest issue is >> sharpness and the >> ability of the lens to render fine detail in certain situations. >> It seems >> like a fine "walking around" lens, but thus far casual comparisons >> with, >> for example, the A50/1.4 and a couple of other primes, seem to >> indicate >> that the 16-45 is not the best for certain subjects and certainly >> certain >> situations. I don't like the way the lens flares in some lighting >> conditions. >> >> So, as I'd like to try other zooms before making a final decision, >> perhaps >> you can suggest your favorite zoom, and why you like it. This >> might help >> me decide which zoom to seek out and try next. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
