Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-24-2010, 06:40 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
DA 16-45mm Vs 17-50mm/2.8 , which one ?

have read and search in this forum but still doubt ..which one is from these both lense better in value and perfomance

DA 16-45/f4 :

pros :
- good colour rendition
-sharp and wide open in f/4 already enough

cons :
-barell distortion in wide angle or in 16 mm
-just f4 stop and CA issue had been removed

TAmron 17-50/f2,8 ;

pros :
- wide open make a wonderfull bokeh, it doesnt matter if you want to take the widest angle of this lens, cause wides mean above f8
- faster one stop than f4 but the price is also higher

cons :
-different 1mm is a big thing considered in APC sensor is gonna like 24 mm vs 26mm
- filter too big 77 mm

any suggestion from user , who had been use this produk ??

thx anyway for the tip

regard


Last edited by ewig; 11-24-2010 at 07:22 AM.
11-24-2010, 06:51 AM   #2
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
I don't own either, and both of these lenses will have strong proponents. I will be surprised if there is a consensus about what the OP should do, but perhaps some of the owners of these lenses can answer the specific questions posed.
11-24-2010, 07:31 AM   #3
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
I don't own either, either, but I was very temped by the Tamron before I went and blew my budget on other things . My opinion is purely theoretical, but I would go with the tamron for two reasons.

1) It is faster, and I find the difference between f4 and f2.8 very large (I can get away with 2.8 indoors with ok light, but f4 is flash territory only).

2) f2.8 + 50mm reach = reasonable portraits. You might lose a few degrees on the wide end (which you might, or might not, miss), but you gain more on the long end and you get the nicer bokeh. I'd imagine you can take much nicer portraits with the Tamron than the 16-45.

Therefore you get a wide angle, normal, and portrait lens all in one, which I believe would justify the cost difference between it and the 16-45 which would essentially be a wide angle and normal lens.

Wait for the people who own it to be sure, though .
11-24-2010, 08:30 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 452
The DA 16-45/4 was one of my first lenses and is still my go to lens if I can only carry one. Normally I carry the DA 12-24/4 and a Tamron 28-75/2.8. Your assessment of the 16-45 strengths and weaknesses is spot on. The two cons you list can be taken care of in software pretty easily. CA can require some effort depending how had it is. PTLens will go a long way to correct both.

I'd say it really depends on what kind of photos you are going to take. As mentioned if you are shooting in lower light (indoors for example) you are going to miss those few extra stops between f4 and f2.8. Then again if you are doing landscape you'll miss the reach between 16mm and 17mm. I picked the 16-45mm/4 because at the time I was doing more landscape. I picked up the 28-75/2.8 because my subject matter grew to include lower light and close shots.

Tough choice, from the reviews I've read of the 17-50mm you really can't go wrong with either lens for really good, general-use glass.

11-24-2010, 08:33 AM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 134
I do own the 16-45. It has a lot for it: accurate color rendition, sharp, 16mm is adorable in-town or for landscapes, excellent macro capabilities. The most annoying con with this lens is that it extends outwards when you go wide. This means that if you want to take an indoor shot with the in-built flash, you got a problem: the barrel shadow is visible on the pic!!!

I don't have the Tammy so can't comment on it. But I have seen great pics coming out of it!
11-24-2010, 10:09 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by tybeck Quote
The DA 16-45/4 was one of my first lenses and is still my go to lens if I can only carry one. Normally I carry the DA 12-24/4 and a Tamron 28-75/2.8. Your assessment of the 16-45 strengths and weaknesses is spot on. The two cons you list can be taken care of in software pretty easily. CA can require some effort depending how had it is. PTLens will go a long way to correct both.

I'd say it really depends on what kind of photos you are going to take. As mentioned if you are shooting in lower light (indoors for example) you are going to miss those few extra stops between f4 and f2.8. Then again if you are doing landscape you'll miss the reach between 16mm and 17mm. I picked the 16-45mm/4 because at the time I was doing more landscape. I picked up the 28-75/2.8 because my subject matter grew to include lower light and close shots.

Tough choice, from the reviews I've read of the 17-50mm you really can't go wrong with either lens for really good, general-use glass.
i was plan to doing some landscape that's why it could not go wrong with 16 mm, but sometimes for "all in' lens, i think we are going to miss this difference between 4 and 2,8 because i use my *ist DS and cannot do high iso shoot to make compensation with it when im going tomake some indoor foto, so stick with f4 and hopefully super good flash blitz ...

in other case sometimes bokeh which produced by tamron are tempting me, and some review says, this lens is versatile and had a body build like WR lens ..
therefore lets wait for other user that use tamron ..
11-24-2010, 10:11 AM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ybo1 Quote
I do own the 16-45. It has a lot for it: accurate color rendition, sharp, 16mm is adorable in-town or for landscapes, excellent macro capabilities. The most annoying con with this lens is that it extends outwards when you go wide. This means that if you want to take an indoor shot with the in-built flash, you got a problem: the barrel shadow is visible on the pic!!!

I don't have the Tammy so can't comment on it. But I have seen great pics coming out of it!
thats why i said ..combinated with super flash ..will work fine in indoor activity, do you think AF 240 enough to do that ???
im plan to get this flash too , because the price seem reasonable ..
11-24-2010, 10:52 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
ewig have read and search in this forum but still doubt ..which one is from these both lense better in value and perfomance
The value of each lens is dependent upon your needs--you must evaluate your needs.

QuoteQuote:
ewig: Tamron: 17-50 2.8
cons :
-different 1mm is a big thing considered in APC sensor is gonna like 24 mm vs 26mm
- filter too big 77 mm
I own a Sigma 10-20, but find the 17mm of the Tamron to be enough most of the time. BTW, the Tamron 17-50mm uses 67mm filters, not 77mm.

Good luck on your choice.

11-24-2010, 01:40 PM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
The value of each lens is dependent upon your needs--you must evaluate your needs.
i need to go wide but looks like DA 12-24 or sigma 10-20 doesnt suit with my pocket.... i have already evaluated ...and i am just beginner not even a hobby.... it just passion .... it only "like" not "must "

QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
I own a Sigma 10-20, but find the 17mm of the Tamron to be enough most of the time. BTW, the Tamron 17-50mm uses 67mm filters, not 77mm.
ok then perhaps you can share your experience here..so we can read it together .... thx anyway ..

QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
Good luck on your choice.
thanks you ...
11-24-2010, 01:48 PM   #10
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
ewig, the 16-45 is a decent lens, but don't expect to get top results at f/4 and 16mm - this is the lens's weak point. Otherwise it really is a winner for landscapes.

The Tamron 17-50 on the other hands ticks a lot of other boxes, which also makes it quite an attractive option for people of a tight budget. Being faster by a stop it can also be used quite effectively for portraits as well, which the 16-45 is not so well suited for. Nevertheless, for landscapes both are no doubt good options. All the best.
11-25-2010, 01:02 AM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
@Ash : yeah ..you quiet right ... some review says , with DA we will get the best result at f8 if we are going to make landscape...
i think its also adorable considered the purpose and with tamron 2,8 stop very useful for portrait especially in length 50 mm right ?
11-25-2010, 02:33 AM   #12
Veteran Member
KxBlaze's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,594
I have seen some MTF50 test (although I do realize that these test are not universal across the board) that have the 16-45 just barely behind the DA* 16-50 which seems very impressive to me. I cannot speak on the 17-50 but have heard some good things. I just bought a 16-45 and very curious to see if the IQ is as great as I have heard, I certainly hope so.
11-25-2010, 02:53 AM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
owh really ... where you see it ? MTF is not all but it can be a measure or something to decided which one is the right objective for the right purpose ..
11-25-2010, 03:02 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
To Kit or not to Kit ? Three Pentax Kit Lenses ERPhotoReview

this MTF 50 comparison ??
11-25-2010, 01:13 PM   #15
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
QuoteOriginally posted by KxBlaze Quote
I have seen some MTF50 test (although I do realize that these test are not universal across the board) that have the 16-45 just barely behind the DA* 16-50 which seems very impressive to me. I cannot speak on the 17-50 but have heard some good things. I just bought a 16-45 and very curious to see if the IQ is as great as I have heard, I certainly hope so.
I went through a similar discussion some time ago and naively also believed MTF was the holy grail of IQ tests, but alas it's not that simple.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/49602-da*-16-5...e-quality.html

Jay Sherman rightly states that the MTF data fails to reflect microcontrast,
which impact on sharpness and colour rendition, which then along with resolution makes up the remainder of IQ (incorporating that X or 'wow' factor.

So there is a *big* difference between the 16-50 and 16-45, despite the similar numbers presented. My experience with the 16-50 has been nothing but excellent, whereas with the 16-45 it was less impressive.
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!
angle, cons, da, f4, k-mount, mm, pentax lens, pros, slr lens, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA* 16-50mm versus DA 16-45mm navcom Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 09-06-2010 09:30 AM
Wanted - Acquired: Tamron 17-50mm, Sigma 18-50mm, Pentax 16-45mm, or similar Big I Sold Items 1 06-05-2010 12:12 PM
Da 16-45mm f/4.0 ED AL vs Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro vs Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Deni Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 32 01-14-2010 11:13 PM
DA 16-45mm VS Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 robcap13 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 2 03-11-2009 09:44 AM
DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 or 16-45mm f/4 Toshi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 05-12-2007 11:00 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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