DA* 16-50mm Serial Number Database. - Page 25

lithos · 06-28-2009, 12:34 AM

Originally Posted by little laker

I've seen some stunning results from this lens.
However I'm wondering why Pentax hasn't told Tokina to either fix the issues, or just shove it

I think after the merger (and therefore, after gaining the rights to SDM technology,) Hoya wanted to crank out some Pentax SDM gear as fast as possible. I'm hoping to do a massive upgrade soon, and would like to buy Pentax over a third-party alternative.

It's a shame, really, and not a good look for Pentax. First impressions, as Lynx tells me, last. Maybe it wasn't selling too well under the Tokina badge, because of the problems, and they slapped the Pentax label on there to expedite things. And maybe Tokina's nowhere near as good as Pentax. Granted, they do make that 35mm Macro, but maybe that was in collaboration with Pentax, and the 16-50 wasn't.

I'm hoping to get this lens for a job I'm going for (I hope I get it!) but I don't want to have to tell the boss, "Yeah, like I said, I could supply my gear, except I've had to send half of it back because the main lens I'm using was busted when they made it."

*walay* · 06-30-2009, 02:38 PM

My lens SN9029354 purchased brand new and well kept, de-centered, left half side of photo is always blur at all apertures and taken and tested at different angles. Sent it in for repair, received back SN9028009, the lens arrived with lens cap missing, and front elemental was scuffed up by the loose lens hood, the plastic around the front glass is also scratched up and uneven(as if someone try taking it off). Unsmooth/tight zooming and have clicking sound at certain points when turning the zoom. Did not even want to try taking a test shot with it.

Called them up, and will send the lens back again for inspection. VERY dissappointed

*thomascdk* · 07-01-2009, 11:53 AM

Got mine today. SN9022551. Seems OK. Not as sharp (a quick try @ 50/f4) as my A50/1.4. But then, what is? I'll shoot some more and report back if anything is wrong.

*thomascdk* · 07-01-2009, 01:39 PM

Here's an image. Not quite sure yet...

*stl09* · 07-09-2009, 12:59 PM

Got mine a couple of weeks ago #9029850 and the shots are sharp, clear all I can say is Wow...

VAV · 07-10-2009, 11:21 AM

Tentatively good copy 9032xxx purchased one week ago from B&H New York store.

jstevewhite · 07-15-2009, 08:31 PM

9030722 : Not bad, but not what I had hoped for from this lens - the 50-135 makes it look particularly bad. Exchange (Amazon) for 9028971 - like night and day. The second unit is stunningly sharp throughout the zoom, with excellent center sharpness (slightly soft corners) wide open at either end.

inferno10 · 07-15-2009, 10:10 PM

9027725. Was usable on the K20D, although seemed somewhat soft even with -7 AF correction. On the K-7, lens front focuses even with -10 AF correction. Sent back to Pentax for repair. We'll see how it turns out...

**Buddha Jones** · 07-16-2009, 02:00 PM

I have always wondered how this thread kept getting posted to so long after the fact. Now I see... I will be sending my copy in for service after the aperature got stuck on me in NY.

*nostatic* · 07-16-2009, 08:30 PM

I have one showing up tomorrow from Amazon. Hopefully it'll be close to my 50-135* in performance. I had one a year or so ago that wasn't very good, took it back to my local store and swapped it for a 16-45 and some other stuff.

PentaxPoke · 07-17-2009, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Buddha Jones

I have always wondered how this thread kept getting posted to so long after the fact. Now I see... I will be sending my copy in for service after the aperature got stuck on me in NY.

Sorry to hear that. Yet another victim of the Sometimes Doesn't Move syndrome of the DA*'s

*nostatic* · 07-17-2009, 05:07 PM

So far so good. There is vignetting at 2.8 but that is to be expected. It also is a tad soft on the edges at 2.8 but is pretty damn sharp in the center. Stopping down to 4.0 makes a significant difference and above that there is no vignetting.

I've always regarded the 16-45 as an incredible lens for the money. I shot the 16-50* back to back with the 16-45 and the 16-45 is still the value leader. But I have to say that at 16mm with both at f4.0 the 16-50* was sharper than the 16-45.

Now I'm thinking K20d w/16-50* and 50-135* as the "do everything" setup and get a K7 with 15/31/35/43/77 as the "street/prime" setup.

Now I just need another $2K

little laker · 07-18-2009, 03:48 PM

nostatic, are you sure that the f-stop is the cause of your vignetting

that's usually caused by something at the front of the lens, like a hood, or even a filter.
And usually only at the wide end.
so if your lens has vignetting it should only ocure at the 16 - 18mm range or so, and it shouldn't mater what f-stop your using.

*nostatic* · 07-20-2009, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by little laker

nostatic, are you sure that the f-stop is the cause of your vignetting
that's usually caused by something at the front of the lens, like a hood, or even a filter.
And usually only at the wide end.
so if your lens has vignetting it should only ocure at the 16 - 18mm range or so, and it shouldn't mater what f-stop your using.

You tell me.

At 50mm

f2.8

f5

f2.8

f5.6

little laker · 07-21-2009, 12:13 AM

Originally Posted by nostatic

You tell me.

At 50mm

f2.8

f5

f2.8

f5.6

Your right, it sure looks like vignetting at 50mm to me

I wonder if anyone else has that happening. I've never seen that occur while a lens is zoomed out