RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Two New Mini Reviews for the HD DA 20-40mm

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Two New Mini Reviews for the HD DA 20-40mm

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=5454&news=pentax+ricoh+20-40mm+f2.8-4+variable+aperture+zoom+K-5+IIs

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2427404,00.asp

My Conclusions: Ugly Lens Outlook, Mediocre Image Quality, Ridiculous High Price, Poor Investment for Future (of APS-C Image Circle Only)!

Comments (21)

Logging you in...

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

Logged in as

+13 Vote up Vote down

Yoku2 · 589 weeks ago

delirium has set in....:))))

The lens has only one weakness - soft corners at 20mm@2.8. The center is sharp at all apertures and all focal ranges. The corners are sharp from f4 at all focal ranges with peak sharpness at f5.6-8. CA is very low.

7 replies · active 589 weeks ago

-3 Vote up Vote down

RiceHigh 110p · 589 weeks ago

Inspect the samples yourself instead of reading words only!

+9 Vote up Vote down

Yoku2 · 589 weeks ago

Already done it several days ago.

+9 Vote up Vote down

Bukaj · 589 weeks ago

They look damn good! But I understand, you have to bash Ricoh at all cost, even if it includes closing your eyes.

-1 Vote up Vote down

RiceHigh 110p · 589 weeks ago

So, it's time for you boys to buy this "lovely and tough" lens at all costs, then!

+4 Vote up Vote down

querdenker · 589 weeks ago

I will be the first to laugh my own ass off, when the first real veteran Pentax user discovers that this lens could potentially be of use on a 135 film-body...

<... pure speculation on my part! But why else would they provide such a joke for a lens-hood (if it not hints at a much bigger image-circle than the FOV of a APS-C size sensor would need)

-4 Vote up Vote down

pentaxfools · 589 weeks ago

pure speculation, LOL

+2 Vote up Vote down

Yoku2 · 589 weeks ago

Don't you think it will be evan softer on the corners with a larger image circle.

+4 Vote up Vote down

davidmanze · 589 weeks ago

What on earth is an ugly lens outlook?

1 reply · active 589 weeks ago

+4 Vote up Vote down

querdenker · 589 weeks ago

my english to german dictionary does not contain that word, either :P

+7 Vote up Vote down

Heiko · 589 weeks ago

As images can be "worth a thousand words",

I tried to ignore the text and went straight to the images...
...what my eyes see is

on the positive ...
+ very pleasing contrast and colors
+ nearly-round aperture-"blobs" in shape (with the variety of working-aperture provided)
+ very, very sharp throughout, with very smooth transition to oof-areas

- pronounced "harshness" / visible outlines of the oof-"blobs" when shooting into strong (back-)light
(probably a matter of the optical design - but I am in no way a qualified expert to back up this claim)

And that's really it for the "negative" side of things - If you can justify to name it that way, anyway. So yes, this seems to be a very, very fine lens when used for what it is suited best. I probably would not want to shoot into strong backlight at f/5.6 to f/8 with finely-detailed, distinctive texture near the point of interest in the frame (as you can see on the fine-cut lawn in one of the shots at f/8 -- unless I deliberately wanted to go for this "harsh" look.

Thanks for the link, Rice!

1 reply · active 589 weeks ago

+4 Vote up Vote down

Heiko · 589 weeks ago

have to correct myself on this:

Take a look at the photo of the stone-path: the withered, brown pine-tree fall-off which reflect the strong back-light which the photo is shot right into: you see corona-style artefacts in the small-ish OOF-blobs.

That's what I mean with down-side. And truth be told: many modern lenses exhibit this phenomenon. So: no big deal - if you know how to avoid it. Simply "pack" another lens for this type of shot. That is after all the secret behind Pentax limited-style lenses: small enough to take two or three with you in your coat-pocket.

Try THAT with your Sigma f/1.8-zoom! (You might have a pocket big enough to fit one - but it will look rediculous so don't expect me to hold my laughter when you do^^ - that said: I am the first to admit: I'd rather have both of these special, luxury lenses)

+10 Vote up Vote down

Bukaj · 589 weeks ago

My Conclusions: Great Lens Outlook, Image Quality seems good (superb for a zoom), Price OK for a WR, all metal, internal focus/ zoom sharp compact lens, good investment for people who are not misguided by the current FF hype (99% people whinning for a FF sensor do not need it and their photos will remain crappy regardless of sensor size). Kudos to Pentax for not abandonig their APS-C line of lenses like the Canikon did.

1 reply · active 589 weeks ago

+7 Vote up Vote down

yeez · 589 weeks ago

"99% people whinning for a FF sensor do not need it and their photos will remain crappy regardless of sensor size"
This sentence can not be repeated too often. Kudos to you for putting it in a nutshell ;).

-9 Vote up Vote down

pentaxfools · 589 weeks ago

DA --> APCS specific, that is the biggest negative, show stopper regarding this lens. The only folks dumb enough to invest in cropped glass are those dumb enough to buy Pentax's current sub-standard second tier offerings......

-3 Vote up Vote down

Joe · 589 weeks ago

Before you star collecting lenses that only work on a Pentax (with a 3rd. Party's cropped image sensor) at $1000.00 a pop consider this between the focal range of 20-40mm (30-60mm equivalent) you can get a brighter used prime with PMC, and have money for a camera bag like a real photographer instead of throwing your other expensive lens in the pocket of a thin coat you have to ware on a hot summer day.

+4 Vote up Vote down

Anonimity is Great · 589 weeks ago

Wow, you really think it has mediocre image quality, Rice? It seems to me it has very good image quality. IQ-wise, the sigma 1.8 beats it, of course, but the DA beats the sigma in features and build quality.

It is a bit more expensive than it should, I think it should not be priced more than 50 dollars more expensive than the sigma 1.8, but-oh my god-even at that price I still would like to own one more than the sigma 1.8.

+1 Vote up Vote down

tipentax · 589 weeks ago

This lovely zoom will be much more usable than a 21mm or 31mm Limited, it's a lot of focals in an unique lens.
But those who can't buy a $1000 lens, just get a M 24-35mm, it's quite the same (may be less contrasty, but with old pentax cooler color) ...

+2 Vote up Vote down

zosX · 589 weeks ago

I find the IQ of the lens to be quite lovely. So did the reviewers. The price is a bit steep, but compare the size of this lens to the sigma 18-35. I would gladly give up a stop or two and carry a lens 3-4x as small. And this lens is small. Smaller than a 31ltd. Really I'm ok with the maximum aperture and it being corner to corner sharp at f4. I can work at 3.5-4 and be more than happy. Pentax has tailored their limited lenses to be mostly small and compact and have done a great job of it so far. This lens along with a 15ltd and a 70ltd would make for a very compact and great kit. Maybe throw in the obligatory 50mm and there you go. It will be interesting to see comparisons with this lens and the da40 and da21.

0 Vote up Vote down

zosX · 589 weeks ago

http://photo.net/equipment/pentax/pentax-limited-...

Some excellent points made here.

0 Vote up Vote down

foton · 589 weeks ago

This lens is good. Certainly better than any kit lenses out there. Much better build quality, size, etc. But it is TOO expensive! If I were to choose between the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and this one, I would certainly go for the Sigma. Mainly, because of its big aperture. This criteria IS the most important one.

Post a new comment

Comment as a Guest, or login:

Tweet this comment

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Two New Mini Reviews for the HD DA 20-40mm

Forgot password?

Comments (21)

Post a new comment

Reference Links (by Others)

My Technical Articles (Latest First)