Photozone review of the Pentax 15 f/4 Limited

[r.t. dowling]

<p>Photozone has posted their review of the Pentax 15 f/4 Limited:</p>

<p>http://www.photozone.de/pentax/463-pentax_15_4</p>

<p> </p>

[jim_mcdermott]

<p>This far more accurately reflects my own experience with the lens than the DPReview piece, which really puzzled me (no, I don't think they do it deliberately, or because they're Canikon acolytes, but either they used a bad example or their testing methods need some serious overhauling).</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>OK, raise your hands those of you who <em>love</em> pull-out hoods. Don't be shy!</p>

<p>Can we start a petition to get Pentax to incorporate pull-out hoods on all their Ltd lenses?</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>I love pull-out hoods...</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Have I told you guys one thing I really love about this lens...?</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Now that I've read the review, I see this lens is a clear case of optical compromise. Pentax probably asked themselves <em>what can we give up, optically, to make this lens tiny, while still allowing it to do its job?</em></p>

<p>The corners are soft wide open, but then one is unlikely to be shooting landscapes at f/4, you'll be doing that at f/8-11, where the lens performs admirably across the frame. You're likely to use f/4 in non-landscape use, in which case the corners are less important, while the center <em>is</em> , and the lens is <em>very</em> sharp there.</p>

<p>Then you have the vignetting, which isn't all that pronounced anyway. Back in the film days this was a PITA, but nowadays it's taken care of easily in postprocessing with no appreciable loss of quality. Plugins such as PTLens will even correct it automatically (and perfectly) if the lens is in its database.</p>

<p>OK, so when this lens was announced, I didn't much care for it, but having read people's comments on this forum and seen a few reviews, I am now slightly interested and may have to add it to my "perhaps" list :-)</p>

[stephen_van_egmond1]

Arrrgh. So many complaints about the lack of wide aperture on this lens. If this is regarding low light shooting... the stop might help. But

DOF? Doesn't matter. Just look at the DOF markings: http://www.photokina-show.com/news_images/0604_pentax-15mm.jpg

<p/>

 

The focus markings go from infinity, to 0.5m quickly, and then taper slowly to 0.3m off for the rest of the way around the focus range.

<p/>

 

As a result, f/4 or f/2.8 is already absurdly narrow DOF (if it's close up) or most of the way out to inifinity (if it's more than a meter away).

You will rarely get interesting DOF effects out of a DA14 or DA15 limited, unless you're grinding your front element into your subject.

<p/>

 

So relax and use f/8, you'll enjoy the lens.

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>Arrrgh. So many complaints about the lack of wide aperture on this lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Who's complaining? Nobody in this thread. But give it some time... :-)</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>I recall that some of our members blasted it for not being 2.8 or faster; not in this thread, obviously, but in past threads, like when the lens was first announced.</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>R.T., you may have noticed we're <em>really</em> good at complaining about lenses around here :-)</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>I wish it were smaller... like the DA21...</p>

<p>and cheaper, too.</p>

<p>See, there! no rants about DOF. :-)</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>I got this lens last week and it is quite good. Just fine the way it is. If it were f2.8 it would be as big as the 14mm. Distortion? What distortion? Flare resistance is incredible.You can't use the B + W rubber hood on it because of the petals on the pull out lens hood. A polarizer works fine but you have to push the petals in to rotate it. It is about the same size as the DA 35. I don't like the screw on lens cap *I* know *I* will lose it ...so I will just use cheap pinch on 49mm caps.</p>

<p>It's a keeper.</p>

<p>End of rant. :-)</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>This lens has been high on my list since announced. Pentax has a perfectly good DA14/2.8 for those who want the larger max aperture and its associated drawbacks in size. The DA15 lags slightly in border quality vs. the DA14 at f4 and f5.6 but is better in the center. The DA12-24 is very sharp across the frame at this focal length but is even larger than the DA14 and relinquishes some of this advantage with higher CA. It seems to me this is an excellent compact companion to other DA limited glass.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>Andrew,<br>

The DA 21 and 12-24 were the first lenses I bought and both are very good. I'll post some pics taken with the 12-24 and the DA 15 @ 15mm for a comparo.</p>

[rparmar]

<p>I love pull-out hoods.</p>

<p>(Though this lens does not fill a niche for me I am glad Pentax have something small and wide.)</p>

<p>But... I love pull-out hoods.</p>

[lance_blackburn1]

<p>Based on the examples I have seen from the DA15 and now the Photozone review, I have decided to purchase this lens. I pick it up today. :-)<br>

I also have the DA14 and the DA12-24 but I am not as enamoured with the DA12-24 as many others are. Yes, it is sharp and contrasty, but it's lack of DOF scale, the fact that it can only focus to 300mm and is quite large are factors that play against it and I use the DA14 much more due to these issues. Also, I think that the DA14 has a better colour rendition and overall IQ, but that is just my opinion. For me, the DOF scale is something I use regularly.<br>

The fact that both the DA12-24 and the DA14 are large (the DA14 less so) I am looking forward to a smaller lens like the DA15. When you pack a camera bag with the K-7, battery grip, and the DA17-70 (or DA*16-50 or FA*128-70), DA*300, DA*60-250, DA35 macro, FA43, FA31, then any bit of weight and space saving is a boon. The beauty of the DA15, from the image reaults I have seen, is that there is no IQ penalty.<br>

The other thing is, the Limiteds seem to give a very nice colour rendition and micro contrast.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>"The other thing is, the Limiteds seem to give a very nice colour rendition and micro contrast." :-)</p>

<p>The DA 12-24 and DA 17-70 are very good lenses but *I* prefer the small primes. I know I will sell the 17-70 but am still undecided about the 12-24. I don't think there are any 'dogs' in the Pentax lenses. It takes a little trail and error to find out what works best for you. *I* think we obsess too much about the *best* lenses and should just take more pictures. I'm guilty.</p>

<p>There may be redemption for you pull out hood fetishists...but don't look here.....I like 'em too.</p>

[marike1]

<p>Now I know to let reviews (especially DPReview's Pentax reviews, see 15 f4 and K2000/K-m) taint my view of a lens before I buy it. <br>

I really do love these Limited Series lenses. But I do feel that Pentax needs to either begin making some more Full Frame lenses, and/or stop discontinuing perfectly good lenses like the 35 f2. As much as I like the many of the DA lenses, I really don't want to build a large collection of them as at some point I hope to go FF. <br>

And yes, I too love the pull out lens hoods. My DA 35 2.8 Macro has one, and it is a perfect, metal hood, like all lens hoods should be.</p>

 

[michael_elenko]

<p>Hi Lance,<br>

You wrote,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am not as enamoured with the DA12-24 as many others are. Yes, it is sharp and contrasty, but it's lack of DOF scale, the fact that it can only focus to 300mm and is quite large are factors that play against it and I use the DA14 much more due to these issues.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Could you please clarify what you meant by the "focus to 300mm" comment?<br>

Thanks,</p>

<p>ME</p>

[tomadakis]

<p>ME,<br>

I think he means minimum focus distance of 3 meters.</p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Antoni,<br>

Thanks for the effort, but nope that doesn't square with my reality; I happen to have the DA 12-24mm on my camera right now. Got a sharp shot about 6-8 inches away from the venerable Bon-Ami cleanser can.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[tomadakis]

<p>I am with Markus on this issue. When it comes to long lenses the crop sensor is of great benefit. But on the wide end I want my wide lenses back. FF will be nice for that and no other reason for me. So I will not invest on any wide DAs. Wide FAs, As and Ms are a different story... Now, Pentax, listen, like the VW bug and the Thunderbird, bring those babies back to production for a couple of years... The R&D is already done, no need for extras on them. I bet you will sell tons of them...<br>

ME, it was just a wild guess on my part, how wrong I was... obviously, I don't own the lens...</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Interesting lens. I don't like pull out hoods, usually because they don't actually work ! but this one seems a good size. It's suprising how low you can go with the shutter when you have stabalization and a lot of width. f/4 is no problem at all.</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>300mm = 12" but this is from the sensor plane. From the front of the lens, about 6" - 8" seems about right.</p>

[tomadakis]

<p>300mm = 30 cm NOT 3 meters</p>