DA* 16-50mm Myth

Burgerbrater · 09-29-2009, 07:40 PM

Hey I am planing to buy the 16-50mm DA*. Now as far as I know that some people have had bad experiences with this lense i.e. bad copies. However I found thhis statement on amazon.com where one customer is reviewing this lens:

"
-"Famous urban Internet legend" QA issues: Are done and over with. Blast from the (2008) past. All current lenses in stock do not have any issues anymore (in case you heard). "

Would you guys agree with that statement? Is it true?

*nulla* · 09-29-2009, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Burgerbrater

Hey I am planing to buy the 16-50mm DA*. Now as far as I know that some people have had bad experiences with this lense i.e. bad copies. However I found thhis statement on amazon.com where one customer is reviewing this lens:

"
-"Famous urban Internet legend" QA issues: Are done and over with. Blast from the (2008) past. All current lenses in stock do not have any issues anymore (in case you heard). "

Would you guys agree with that statement? Is it true?

There were early issues with this lens, however the reported number of complaints seemed have have dwindled.

Nobody can say all lenses made are faultless, even the best lenses can have the odd dud.

I took the plunge and got this lens from B&H USA shipped to Aust even when the problem was still being reported as major.. took the risk and am happy as with the lens... its a truly stellar lens

It is actually my most used lens and would be my favourite as well.

*Ari* · 09-29-2009, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by nulla

It is actually my most used lens and would be my favourite as well.

Will have to concur. I got this lens when there was still a lot of reports of bad copies. It is on my k20 90% of the time......

*Ash* · 09-29-2009, 07:55 PM

Yep, another happy 16-50 owner here.

My copy's one of the earlier copies too, with no problems with mine.

You'll find a lot of scaremongering due to the sheer volume of complaints raised in those early teething stages of this first SDM lens. It has been mentioned here on the forum a number of times too that the QC issues are largely resolved. Of course keep your receipts and warranty just in case.

*pentaxman* · 09-29-2009, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by Ash

Yep, another happy 16-50 owner here.

My copy's one of the earlier copies too, with no problems with mine.

You'll find a lot of scaremongering due to the sheer volume of complaints raised in those early teething stages of this first SDM lens. It has been mentioned here on the forum a number of times too that the QC issues are largely resolved. Of course keep your receipts and warranty just in case.

I disagree. I bought 3 different new Pentax 16-50 lenses about two months ago. All three had lens centering problems. I finally returned the last one for a refund. I got tired of boxing them up and shipping them back.

Mike L · 09-29-2009, 08:37 PM

What effect on the number of complaints, especially FF and BF problems, do you guys think the introduction of focus adjustment on the K20D had? I'd love a 16-50 but I'm wary since I only have a K10D and not ability to finetune the focus.

*pdo* · 09-29-2009, 08:57 PM

just got this lens a couple days ago from Adorama and it is tack sharp. Really happy with 16-50mm and 50-135mm. Both lens lens are stellar.

Nubi · 09-29-2009, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by pdo

just got this lens a couple days ago from Adorama and it is tack sharp. Really happy with 16-50mm and 50-135mm. Both lens lens are stellar.

THis is not a criticism of the lens, and in fact, it is more of a complement. But, I have always thought that DA*16-50 was a bit on the soft side.

*Ash* · 09-29-2009, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Nubi

THis is not a criticism of the lens, and in fact, it is more of a complement. But, I have always thought that DA*16-50 was a bit on the soft side.

Soft where? Centrally? In the corners? Wide open?
As long as the lens is not designated a 'soft' lens by the manufacturer, it should give sharp images.

*Ash* · 09-29-2009, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by pentaxman

I disagree. I bought 3 different new Pentax 16-50 lenses about two months ago. All three had lens centering problems. I finally returned the last one for a refund. I got tired of boxing them up and shipping them back.

Sorry you had to go through that - I sympathise going through the process myself with the Tamron 70-200. Who was your vendor? Do they have current stock, or are they selling old batches of gear as well? (Who's to know I guess...)

Did you note their serial numbers? If so, report them on the forum's database and see how they compare...
DA* 16-50mm Serial Number Database.

Nubi · 09-29-2009, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by Ash

Soft where? Centrally? In the corners? Wide open?
As long as the lens is not designated a 'soft' lens by the manufacturer, it should give sharp images.

I know I know. I purposely avoided clarifying that aspect of it. I am talking about overall sharpness of the image itself. For example, DA*50-135 at a focal length of 50 compared to DA*16-50 at the same focal length, shot by the same camera with identical aperture and shutter speed, the images seem to me a bit soft, especially on when printed...... Just an impression..... Sorry for the confusion

*Ash* · 09-29-2009, 09:46 PM

Oh, OK. (btw, you don't suck!

)

I guess I haven't seen (or should I say noticed) the same happening with mine, comparing it to the FA 50/1.4 and Tamron 28-75. Although I've never done any testing. Nevertheless I've done portrait work using this lens and I was quite blown away at its sharpness at all FLs (but I have been shooting at f/4-5.6 for that kind of work).

MikePerham · 09-29-2009, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by Burgerbrater

Hey I am planing to buy the 16-50mm DA*. Now as far as I know that some people have had bad experiences with this lense i.e. bad copies. However I found thhis statement on amazon.com where one customer is reviewing this lens:

"
-"Famous urban Internet legend" QA issues: Are done and over with. Blast from the (2008) past. All current lenses in stock do not have any issues anymore (in case you heard). "

Would you guys agree with that statement? Is it true?

I bought my copy as soon as it was announced ...never had any problem and really happy with IQ and build of this lens.

*pentaxman* · 09-29-2009, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by Ash

Sorry you had to go through that - I sympathise going through the process myself with the Tamron 70-200. Who was your vendor? Do they have current stock, or are they selling old batches of gear as well? (Who's to know I guess...)

Did you note their serial numbers? If so, report them on the forum's database and see how they compare...
DA* 16-50mm Serial Number Database.

I bought them from Adorama who has an amazingly good return policy. The lenses were brand new - I could tell because the packaging had not been disturbed. I only tested the lenses at 50mm, but I could not find a lens that was correctly centered. I tested the exact same setup with my Sigma EX 18-50 at F2.8 and it was perfectly centered.

*Ash* · 09-29-2009, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by pentaxman

I bought them from Adorama who has an amazingly good return policy. The lenses were brand new - I could tell because the packaging had not been disturbed. I only tested the lenses at 50mm, but I could not find a lens that was correctly centered. I tested the exact same setup with my Sigma EX 18-50 at F2.8 and it was perfectly centered.

The serial numbers can tell you approximately at what stage the lenses were manufactured - the serial number database goes into this more. Then again I doubt that Adorama would have sent you 3 first generation 16-50s and even then odds were against you having decentering on all 3! You were just unfortunate.

You could, of course, try another vendor like B&H, who have a similar returns policy but may have a newer (and non-decentered!) copy to ship you...