Fine landscape lens

As a multi-year users of this ultra wide-angle zoom (since 2007) I look forward regularly the much larger field of view (max. 99 ° diagonal) compared to the standard Kitzoom 18-55 (max. 76 °). It fits horizontally around 50 per cent more on landscape's image! However, at 12 mm wide-angle barrel distortion typical already seen - out it is less. (Above all, one has - to do with perspective distortion when the camera is not exactly aligned straight on the horizon, but slightly tilted held - as with any wide-angle lenses: Actually vertical objects such as poles or trees etc. then tend strongly to page - keyword:... converging lines) The best to my taste focal length for landscape photography - without panorama stitching or similar - is with APS-C sensor more so to the 15/16 mm (up to 24 mm can I find the way, also still useful). As an alternative, for example, would still offer in the case, the 15er- "Limited". This is built much more compact - and now even to have much cheaper than this zoom (that was a difference ...). The projecting lens hood of 12-24ers claimed alone a lot of space in the camera bag - especially if you do not want to turn off every time and vice versa set up. But one is of course more flexible compared to the fixed focal length when you comfortably between the extremes (12 mm) and the moderate WW range can zoom (24 mm), without having to change its location.

All in all I am satisfied with the 12-24 zoom and happy. When times compares the image quality between this and the standard zoom 18-55 in a parallel experiment with 18 mm focal length, show up on closer inspection resolution / sharpness differences, at least in the peripheral areas of the images. Here the Kitzoom drops quite significantly. Also has this visible vignetting at 18mm, so Eckenabdunklungen - in contrast to 12-24er. It is clearly the standard Zoom In addition, the barrel distortion (18 mm is indeed the lower stop of the zoom range), very moderate in 12-24er other hand (18 mm equivalent here the middle of the zoom range). An advantage especially for architectural shots. The overall "best" aperture is f / 8 - as the (marginal) is the highest resolution and the classical physical aberrations are with lowest. (But not in the middle!) The maximum aperture is against the edge of the picture a little softer, but this is normal and not a concern. Landscape photos I would do anyway basically almost only with aperture 8.

The aforementioned color fringing ("CA") such as "Photo Zone" also criticized at test sites - even though these are at all relevant to practice only in certain light / motif conditions. At least the newer Pentax DSLR as K-5, K-7, Kx and Kr offer but to an automatic correction of those aberrations. If you have this feature enabled, a brief moment it takes longer because of the computing time until the still picture appears on the monitor. (The same applies to the distortion that offer these cameras.)

It would be desirable in the future a weatherproof / dust-sealed version of the lens ("WR") - which was supposed to be at the high price of it! How ever the feel of the current model is not completely convinced me, even if the structural quality is always good. We also criticize the very considerable price premium that there have been a couple of years back for this lens (about 50 percent since my purchase !!).

Another Accessories Tip: Because of the large field angle as in filters (diameter: 77 mm) are recommended only the flat "Slim" filter. With normal filtering occurs at maximum angle for shading the corners. This may - depending on the height of the filter - even be an issue at 14/15 mm focal length, but not later than 12/13 mm. Unfortunately, the handling of such ultra-thin polarizing filters etc. often fiddly and their supplied protective caps are often a nuisance (keep not sure). So we can ever screw filter - which is not at all because of a strong UWWs bulging front lens so! Personally, I work at landscape photos very often with a neutral density filter (Cokin), to achieve a bluer, less "white blown-out" heaven and a harmonious overall exposure. An apparently not compatible filter Wide (such as the new Sigma 8-16 mm) came to me therefore probably out of the question.