As one who shoots weddings and portraits regularly, I have to caution on too wide a shooting. Although the prime is probably better corrected for linear distortion, you have to be cautious about shooting too close with too wide a lens. The reason is that a rectilinear lens distorts in a different fashion than a fisheye. All the lines are straight, but the closer to the outside edges, the objects get squished and fatter looking. The net result is that the people on the outside edge will look short and fat (comparatively). This can be really bad if they really are a little short or fat.
I think for the DSLR, around 24mm is about as wide as you would want to shoot. Right now, there is no limited lens in that focal length. Your choices are FA*24/2, A 24/2.8 or K24/2.8. From my experience and what I have seen, I would lean towards the A or K 24/2.8. Hope this helps. You can take your DA 16-45 (great lens, BTW) and do a little test by shooting closer subjects around 20mm and observing them in the center outside edges. You will see that they have been squished to keep the lines straighter. That is the real problem shooting bigger groups - they tend to fill the image and start to exhibit that kind of distortion. -- Bruce Friday, January 19, 2007, 12:53:58 AM, you wrote: BD> Would anyone who has both of these care to comment on whether the 21 limited BD> is better than the 16-45 at 21? BD> I have the 16-45 and am wondering if the 21 would be better for photographing BD> large groups of people. ( i.e. the mild distortion probably isn't an issue, BD> but resolution is important ) BD> Brian BD> -- BD> Brian Dunn Photographic BD> http://www.bdphotographic.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
