JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Robust and well-balanced lens for use with K1. They are evidently made for each other. It works well on K3, but the set is definitely unbalanced. Good flare resistance and good sharpness.
Cons:I would say weight, which you get used to, and a price a little high.
Opinion:I made a change with the 16-85, which I found, in my copy, a little 'soft and sometimes a bit' "dark". With the 24 - 70 I immediately found myself better. Once used to weight, out of laziness or comfort, it has become the lens I use the most. Perhaps a "generalist" objective and, in a certain sense, a novelty in the tradition of the peculiar Pentax focal lengths. It's not a cheap goal, but the results it gives make you forget the price. I would rate 9.00 more than 8.9.
Pros:Construction, not excessive weight, blurry, flare resistance and general rendering.
Cons:Not the utmost of clarity. The price too high the performance ratio.
Opinion:Alongside the K1, it is immediately felt that they are designed to work together. Robustness of the system in general is almost insurmountable even with the professional reflexes of other brands. It's okay but nothing remarkable. At maximum aperture the blur is very pleasant to be a zoom but the images are quite soft. By closing a couple of stops, things will improve visibly but without getting to top levels. Last but not least the price. Considering the performance, in my opinion the selling price is too high. A good compromise would have been on 950/1000 euros.
Pros:Construction accuracy, materials, tropicalization and, of course, optical yield
Cons:Difficult to find the cons in a view of the genre, meaning on the contrary some unexpected characteristics; weight and size are not indifferent, as is the front lens diameter, so a polarizer, for example, is quite expensive; the price is certainly not popular and perhaps a little excessive.
Opinion:Bought almost on impulse, to have a high level optics to support the K1; and the 24-70 f / 2.8 Pentax is really a professional level optics: brightness, detail, absence of chromatic aberrations, made more than acceptable at f / 2.8, blurred, what is expected in short, from a glass of this stature but ... costs, perhaps too much, above all, attention, in comparison with the other standard zoom for FF that is 28-105 Pentax, smaller and lighter, even if less luminous, which costs less than half but whose results are very respectable and have little to envy to 24-70.rnA classic, in short, the standard high-level professional zoom that each brand must have and dedicated to those who may have to work there, to those who prefer brightness ... or who wants to take away an expensive whim! rnThe MAF is up to par: precise and fast enough (engine inside the lens) and free from f / b focus phenomena.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
