Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-20-2010, 01:53 PM   #1
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Any chances on DA* 16-45mm?

Currently it's a logical position in lens lineup. Since it belongs more to the higher end it's kind of disappointing to dismiss the WR of camera body just because you don't want the 16-50.

16-45 is:
-A lot cheaper,
-Has less distortions at the wide end,
-direct upgrade candidate to kit, if you don't want to go Hi-end/top/pro,
-I bit smaller
-half the weight of 16-50
-has smaller filter ring (read: cheaper filters)

While it is a nice option in Pentax lens line, without WR it doesn't offer a lot to be chosen over third party competitors. Sigma 17-70, 18-50, tamron 17-50 to name few.

Is there a chance that this or similar WR lens below the 16-50 could be released? Or should i simply plan on getting some third party lens for general use and stick to 18-55WR in bad weather.


Last edited by ytterbium; 06-20-2010 at 08:11 PM.
06-20-2010, 02:10 PM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,957
I could see the feasibility of a 16-45mm WR, but not a DA*. The 16-50 is already out, after all. Such a large overlap would end up killing one of the two lenses.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

06-20-2010, 02:28 PM   #3
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
Yeah, probably that's more correct definition.
I just wrote DA* because i was thinking of "complete" weather sealing - same level as DA*'s and hi-end bodies. Because currently no one says clearly how well sealed are WR kits compared to DA*'s, or k200d to k?0d/k7. Just some speculation and hints that hi-end products are "better" sealed.

Besides that, it seems there are lot of similar (for both da 16-45 and 17-70) discussions or wishes but no indication of such possibility. It's a relatively old lens. With the outcome of multiple new products i'd rather expect bigger changes but not in near future. Like 16-50 II (or different lens DA* 17-40/2.8?) and anoter WR at F4.
06-20-2010, 04:18 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
really wish pentax has something similar to the canon 15-85. pretty crazy range for a lens if you ask me.

06-20-2010, 05:15 PM   #5
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
What we're really asking for is a more reliable updated 16-50...
But if a 16-45 WR came out, I'd get it too.
06-20-2010, 06:59 PM   #6
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by Eagle_Friends Quote
really wish pentax has something similar to the canon 15-85. pretty crazy range for a lens if you ask me.
Maybe closer to the Nikon 18-105. Everyone does a 17-70, so if you're going to add reach, add a bit more and get away from the pack. Canon's 15-85 is hyper-useful, with distortion, weight, and price at just under $800. It's a killer do-all lens for someone who's not into UWA and would maybe get a 70-200/300 on top for a 2 lens zoom kit. Someone less concerned about pixel peeping IQ but just wanting to get the shot.

Not sure about the 16-45. It's non-SDM and that's good. I was completely perplexed by the WR kit lens + 50-200. Why not the 55-300WR? I think one of the reasons why Pentax dropped the 16-45 from production was because it was hard to compete with the 17-50/2.8 crowd.
06-22-2010, 04:18 AM   #7
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
I don't think so...
DA16-45 used to be a workhorse of the stable for sure but now with DA*16-50, DA17-70SDM, DA18-55WR and DA18-55L I just don't see the need for it unless they would dicontinue the 17-70 and replace it with with either WR version or DA16-45WR.

my 2p
06-22-2010, 07:18 AM   #8
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
I don't know if i even liked to see this in a longer range. Of course it would be useful, but probably as another, additional lens.

What i like about 16-45, is that it is very nice optically. In some aspects i'd say even better than 16-50. Wide aperture introduces more design constraints and complexity. I highly dislike distortions at wide end. When extending focal length, thats one of the first things after F number, that gets screwed up.

06-22-2010, 07:19 AM   #9
Veteran Member
rustynail925's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,552
If canon has a 15-85mm f3.5-5.6
is it possible to make a 12-50 f3.5-5.6 ?
so it would be an ultrawide and a standard zoom in one lens.
06-22-2010, 10:21 AM   #10
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,657
for anyone wanting a cheap WR version of the 16-50, I think the logical choice is the 18-55 WR. I wouldn't see any sense in making a 16-45 in addition.

However, I could see the relevance of a 17-70 WR. I sincerely hope that in the future, Pentax will release more (all) of their lenses as WR. This would greatly help in positionning the brand against the competiton.
06-22-2010, 11:31 AM   #11
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by bdery Quote
for anyone wanting a cheap WR version of the 16-50, I think the logical choice is the 18-55 WR. I wouldn't see any sense in making a 16-45 in addition.

However, I could see the relevance of a 17-70 WR. I sincerely hope that in the future, Pentax will release more (all) of their lenses as WR. This would greatly help in positioning the brand against the competition.
My main reason:
DA 12-24@18mm: -0.578% (-2.11%@12mm) Barrel distortion,
DA 16-45@16mm: -2.52% Barrel distortion,
DA 18-55@18mm: -2.54% Barrel distortion,
DA 17-70@17mm: -3.11% Barrel distortion,
DA 16-50@16mm: -3.63% Barrel distortion
(from www.photozone.de)
When correcting this in PP you loose additional mm's of focal length.

I'd go for the 16-50 if it is reintroduced with new AF system. Service nonavailability makes it a nono.
Even being DA*, it's not IF/IZ lens (the lens extends), and has bad corner performance wide open at 16mm.
I'm not after ultra wide and could not afford one, but i'd like my basis kit to be a bit wide'ish and a good performer at that end. Although WR 12-24 could fill this gap in the worst case.

Actually making all of the DA's at least WR would make a lot of sense. Well, maybe except the smallest LTD DA pancakes (still there's not much to seal in them either, so the size could be kept very similar). You'd have the choice of complete lens line.

Last edited by ytterbium; 06-22-2010 at 11:37 AM.
06-22-2010, 11:38 AM   #12
Senior Member
xGene's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 151
QuoteOriginally posted by bdery Quote
However, I could see the relevance of a 17-70 WR. I sincerely hope that in the future, Pentax will release more (all) of their lenses as WR. This would greatly help in positionning the brand against the competiton.
Agreed. Plus, I would gladly give away the SDM for WR!!!

Gene
06-23-2010, 05:28 AM   #13
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,657
Ytterbium (cool name, btw), I honestly think you put a looooooot of weigth on barrel distorsion. I use the DA 21, DA 18-55 WR and Sigma 17-70 for "wide", and I've never been in a situation when barrel distorsion disturbed me. I've NEVER corrected barrel distorsion.

I use the 18-55 WR when hiking, camping, fishing, snowshoeing, anytime I feel the WR is needed. At that time I understand and accept that I'm sacrificing some wuality over the Sigma 17-70, but that's a choice I make. What I gain is a smaller, lighter lens, easier to carry, and fully WR. When the weather doesn't threaten my gear and when weigth is not an issue, I use the 17-70.
06-23-2010, 07:01 AM   #14
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by bdery Quote
Ytterbium (cool name, btw), I honestly think you put a looooooot of weigth on barrel distorsion. I use the DA 21, DA 18-55 WR and Sigma 17-70 for "wide", and I've never been in a situation when barrel distorsion disturbed me. I've NEVER corrected barrel distorsion.
I was thinking the same thing (I own the DA12-24, DA21, and Sigma 17-70). I have yet to find a shot where the distortion bothers me. And the few times I have tried correcting it, I ended up liking the original shot more.
03-01-2011, 05:21 AM   #15
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 54
possible if it has 35mm image circle.. (read: D-FA16-45 WR or D-FA16-35 WR)

might be impossible since pentax seems not interest into FF camera..
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, lens, lot, party, pentax lens, slr lens, third, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what are the chances of? janstew Site Suggestions and Help 4 04-18-2010 01:07 PM
Chances of Holiday Pentax Rebate Program? krs Pentax News and Rumors 9 12-16-2008 09:53 AM
So, what are the chances that the DA*30mm SDM... Isaac314 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 09-23-2008 08:55 AM
So, what are the chances......? rover Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 09-17-2008 10:30 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:04 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top