Nick - I went into the archives I've accumulated since I stopped
updating the web site. As with the comments there, note that some of
these may be taken out of context from longer posts.
stan
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
I have been using for about a month now the SMC PENTAX-A 24-50/4.0
Zoom almost exclusively ( mostly product photos for ebay on
tabletop ) on my *istDS DSLR. Its a two ring zoom so you never get
any annoying "zoom creep" and it holds focus perfectly when
zooming. The F4 speed is a little slow but the lens is so contrasty
that its easy to focus at 50mm ( I use a split image screen -
third party model - in my *istDS ). Anyway, after you figure in
the 1.5X
lens factor you are left with a 35mm SLR equiv of 36mm to 75mm
which is a very versatile "super normal" lens. This model is
extremely contrasty, great color saturation, and freedom from
flaring. It works beautifully for tabletop product photography. I
have never needed wider or longer, as it has a pretty decent
magnification at 50mm and min focus. The constant aperture (F4
thru the zoom range) is great when using manual full > power flash
like I
like to do. Anyway, if you do a lot of ebay or similar product
photography for
web, I recommend this lens very highly. Much more versitile than a
prime or macro 50mm with the 24m capability.
======
Tried one out at one point. It was alright, but not any better than
the 18-55 DA in its range, larger, heavier, harder to manual focus due
to lack of contrast wide open at 24mm. Wasn't much impressed with it
on digital. Of course, I may have had a bad sample.
-Adam Maas
======
I've had both, [A and F versions] and I liked both lenses. The F
version is much better suited to autofocus, since it has a pretty
loose manual focus feel, and it has that particular bulky yet
durable feeling plastic feel that some of the F zooms have. The A
lens is the one I kept (and my only zoom right now) -- it's very
compact, has a very nice focus feel for an A zoom, and more than
acceptable results. It may be a bit more prone to flare, especially
at the wide end, than some other Pentax zooms and primes, but it's
very useable. I also had the M 24-35, which is probably a better
zoom and has a slightly nicer feel, but the zoom range was too
limited for me. I also like the A zoom because to me, at least,
it's about as large as a lens can get without starting to feel too
front-heavy on the compact bodies without winders, like the Super
Program.
[and another post from the same person...]
While the M 24-50 has a mediocre reputation, the A 24-50 was a new
design (same design was used for the F 24-50) and I have one. It
seems similar to the M 24-35 (at least in the 24-35 portion) I had
for a while in terms of color reproduction, flare resistance, and
overall sharpness/resolution, although I have not tested them
rigorously.
The A 24-50 is a constant f/4 and has the A contact, and seems to
be built nearly to the M 24-35 standard, _much_ better than the A
35-70, for instance, in terms of build quality.
Joe Wilensky
======
I would also avoid any 24-50 as you cannot hope to get anything
close to a good 50mm with such a zoom, while the 24-35 is not that
far from the primes it replaces.
Andre Langevin
======
On Feb 24, 2009, at 8:23 PM, Nick David Wright wrote:
Has anyone ever used that lens? Thoughts on it? Sample photos taken
with it? Thanks!
~Nick David Wright
http://pedalingprose.wordpress.com/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
