Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-30-2007, 10:05 AM   #1
Forum Member
Dr_Watso's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 65
So, at this point: 16-50, or 16-45

Which will give me the better image? (assuming I get a "good" copy of the DA*)

09-30-2007, 11:31 AM   #2
Veteran Member
MJB DIGITAL's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: st. louis
Posts: 1,173
thats like asking, "will the 9/16 or 5/8 wrench be better for turning this bolt?"

there is a tool for the job, and you grab the one you need.

so, do you want a wider lens or a longer lens?
09-30-2007, 11:34 AM   #3
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,906
QuoteOriginally posted by MJB DIGITAL Quote
thats like asking, "will the 9/16 or 5/8 wrench be better for turning this bolt?"

there is a tool for the job, and you grab the one you need.

so, do you want a wider lens or a longer lens?

Or, spend twice the money for a negligible difference?
09-30-2007, 12:42 PM   #4
Veteran Member
FotoPete's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,710
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
Or, spend twice the money for a negligible difference?
haha, well said, SpecialK!

09-30-2007, 03:05 PM   #5
Veteran Member
Finn's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Phoenix
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,056
Yeah, I briefly thought about the 16-50, but decided $500 was an awful lot to spend for one stop.
09-30-2007, 08:37 PM   #6
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
All depends on if you need the F2.8 speed, if you need SDM (quieter and smoother focusing), and most of all, if you need weather sealing?

If none of the above is important to you, you'd be happy with the 16-45
09-30-2007, 10:19 PM   #7
Forum Member
Dr_Watso's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 65
Original Poster
Will either one be sharper? Image quality is my main concern. All else, including price is secondary. IF the DA* will give me a noticable difference, I'd probably go that way.
09-30-2007, 11:12 PM   #8
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
QuoteOriginally posted by Dr_Watso Quote
Will either one be sharper? Image quality is my main concern. All else, including price is secondary. IF the DA* will give me a noticable difference, I'd probably go that way.
Well, some users reported that the DA*16-50 is sharper at F2.8 than the DA1645 at F4, and all the way to F8 where the DA1645 catches up in sharpness. CA is about on par.

But for general use, IQ wise I don't think you'd be disappointed with either one.

One thing for sure, w/ the DA1645 you can never take a photo at F2.8 ...

10-01-2007, 12:33 AM   #9
Veteran Member
MJB DIGITAL's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: st. louis
Posts: 1,173
what do you want the lens for?
10-03-2007, 06:07 PM   #10
Forum Member
Dr_Watso's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 65
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by MJB DIGITAL Quote
what do you want the lens for?
Taking pictures!

More seriously, I generally do landscapes, and use my 12-24 most of the time. But for closer work, I found that I really like the range of the kit-lens, so I'd like to replace it with a lens that has about the same range, but with a nicer end image.

I just can't seem to find out if the extra dead presidents are warranted for the DA*, again, in terms of image quality. The larger aperture and other features are being ignored for my current comparison. I just want the sharpest image edge to edge, and the best color/contrast. Distortion control is actually probably the most important aspect for me in terms of glass, but I hear both the 14-45, and the 16-50 do well in that department.
10-03-2007, 07:16 PM   #11
Veteran Member
philmorley's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia
Posts: 472
hi, in the end its your choice. For me I really couldn't see enough value at US$899 for the 16-50 compared to the 16-45 or sigma 18-50. Then I managed to get a brand new 16-45 for $330 from henrys on ebay by the time I paid postage and convert to $AU the difference was $400 compared to about $1100 so to me it was almost a no brainer. Phil
10-08-2007, 06:38 PM   #12
Veteran Member
Mike Bokeh's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Queens, New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 597
QuoteOriginally posted by philmorley Quote
hi, in the end its your choice. For me I really couldn't see enough value at US$899 for the 16-50 compared to the 16-45 or sigma 18-50. Phil
Phil, it's funny you should mention the Sigma 18-50.

I just noticed this lens, and am considering it and the Pentax 16-45.

I really prefer the look of a portrait taken with an f2.8 lens wide-open, but I could live with the 16-45's f4.0 aperture.

And at $419, it's pretty tempting. 581109 Sigma 18mm - 50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro Autofocus Zoom Lens for Pentax Digital SLR Cameras

Does anyone have any comments about or experience with this lens?

Mike
10-08-2007, 07:13 PM   #13
Senior Member
ricosuave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 299
anyone's thoughts on the Sigma 17-70?

debating b/n that and the 16-45.
10-08-2007, 11:30 PM   #14
Veteran Member
philmorley's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia
Posts: 472
hi, there is quite a number of people on dpreview forum that really like the sigma 18-50. there is 2 versions the macro and the non macro, the macro is the later version and supposed to be better (how much in real life I couldn't say). There are reviews on photozone (for nikon I think). There is the standard reports of numerous bad copies (like any sigma lens) which I've had my share of bad sigmas so really dont like buying them. So with that dislike, the cheaper price, 16 instead of 18 I went the 16-45, but then I am looking for a landscape lens (I have the tamron 28-75 for portraits) and so f4 is no porb for me. Phil
10-09-2007, 03:57 PM   #15
Veteran Member
offertonhatter's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North West UK
Posts: 377
Could'nt wait for the DA* lens, so bought the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 EX DG Lens, and I will advise that it is excellent, so it does not have the Power Motor, but for portraits and as the primary lens, it is excellent. Only down side is that it wont go wide enough so had to use the kit lens for certain landscapes.
Now to get the 12-24 Pentax lens to complement it.

So if you don't want to go very wide and have a cracking lens for general use,go for the Sigma of mine, and at only 278 it is a bargain.
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, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AF point off center?? Judd Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 10-31-2009 05:38 PM
That red point renbing1960 Welcomes and Introductions 5 02-06-2009 10:43 PM
Evening Point.... Amador Post Your Photos! 4 10-12-2007 07:47 PM
Dew Point Rickst Post Your Photos! 1 07-29-2007 12:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:20 PM. | 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