![]() If the lens were weather sealed, though, I'd have one on pre-order to replace the DA* 16-50. My biggest gripe - I would have preferred if they made it 16-30 f/1.8, but that won't change the fact I will most likely get it sometime around Christmas time after seeing some comparisons against the FA 31 and maybe even the Sigma 30 f/1.4 ART (not the old version) should Sigma decide to release it for Pentax. I settled for Av mode and RAW (which was another pain to try to change - whomever claims Canon's menus are superior to Pentax's is out of their damn minds). I had a hard enough time changing settings. Also there is a bit of noise because I didn't get a chance to change the ISO. Keep in mind that glare also is a bit of an issue with reducing sharpness because they are through glass windows with a lot of overhead store lights. I lined up the Sigma 8-16 and its cap to mimick the exact placement of when mounted as well.Įach of these are different shots, all at f/1.8 with their 100% crops included, no sharpening applied - the only processing was RAW into Lightroom with slight exposure fixes - nothing more. The store owner was very nice to let me use a DA 16-45 he had on the shelf because I didn't have anything wide enough to get all of them in the same shot from so closeĭA* 55, Sigma 8-16, Sigma 18-35, DA* 16-50, FA 77 LTD, K-30Ī top down look with the Sigma 8-16 to show its size when mounted. From left to right, also with their focusing windows so you can see what I meant by the direction of travel. Still no CPL window that is standard among Pentax's lens hoods though! I also liked that it was narrower to the body when reversed, something the DA 12-24 and the DA* 16-50 could learn a lot from. I liked the grip along the edge of the hood's widest part - nice touch. LENS HOOD: A super tight to screw on for both regular and reversed on the lens.No where near as much as a fisheye or the Sigma 8-16, but it is far more bulbous than any standard rectilinear I've ever seen. FRONT LENS OBJECTIVE/GLASS: It is bulbous, but not much.I didn't notice it until today, but my Sigma 8-16 is the same way, so I guess it would be safe to say that you won't find that a hindrance Also, I noticed that the zoom ring "zooms" in the same direction as Pentax lenses, however the focus ring is in the opposite direction. Makes me think if you put a rubber o-ring on the mount it might be weather sealed. Beautifully damped and again, the super tight tolerances are apparent here. ZOOM AND FOCUS RINGS: The tightest rings I've ever felt on a lens, but in no way in a bad way.Yes it's mostly plastic and rubber, but there's nothing cheap about it, except maybe the rear lens cap (I hate Sigma's caps - the epitome of cheap). Super tight tolerances and a beautiful finish. BUILD: The build quality is beautiful.Granted "fat" is relative, but I expected it to have a bit more girth. But it isn't fat, which I was expecting for an f/1.8 zoom lens. It is taller than the DA* 16-50 and even taller than the Sigma 8-16. Must be because I've been working out, though, huh? According to B&H the difference is quite a bit - 565g vs 811g, but in the hand the difference appeared much closer. Heavier than the 16-50, although when I picked them up one in each hand, it didn't seem to be too far off. Made the 700D a bit front heavy, but I think with the Pentax K-5 it would be a perfect balance. I like it, and there is NEVER any chance of it accidentally being switched to MF or AF without you consciously doing so. AF/MF SWITCH: Without any question the toughest switch to activate of any lens I've ever tried.No focus accuracy issues I saw, but I only played with it for maybe 10 minutes. ![]() The DA*16-50 was only a bit slower although the 18-35 was obviously the winner. AUTOFOCUS: Super quick on the Canon 700D (which the store owner let me play with, and I must say - wow.the Chinese plastic is strong with that one), although with such a short focus throw (it's 18-35mm), it isn't expected to be too slow.In no way shape or form is this meant to be a review, however for those on the fence of pre-ordering (I still haven't made the plunge but I am *VERY* seriously considering it right now), here are my first impressions: I stopped by the local camera store a few days ago just to poke around, and to my surprise they had the 18-35! I returned this morning with my camera bag with the hopes of being able to do a comparison (physically only, since it was a Canon mount). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |