I sure miss my DA 16-45 f/4

Ed in GA · 12-29-2007, 04:26 PM

I sold my DA 16-45 with the express purpose of replacing it with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8. Which I did.

Now, I really enjoy the DA* lens, faster, its build and IQ but it sure is bulky. I almost feel like I need to carry a monopod with me all of the time to help me steady my K10D with the "Honking Big" DA* lens.

I found the DA 16-45 much easier for me to handle even with its quirky, extended at the short end, set up.

Anyone else have this experience? Or, is it just me?

SupremeMoFo · 12-30-2007, 05:15 AM

I like bigger lenses, like my Sigma 28-70 f2.8.

roentarre · 12-30-2007, 05:51 AM

To be honest, Da* 16-50 is relatively light and compact to carry.

Comparing competition brands, hell these lenses are much heavier.

There was a period when I had honey moon with A* 300 f2.8 and I called it a walk around lens. My cervical verterbraes have mal aligned due to this chronic hanging process caused by this big fat metal barrel...

vievetrick · 12-30-2007, 07:37 AM

Tell you what, I will send you my DA 16-45 for your 16-50

I just want to thelp

Ed in GA · 12-30-2007, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by vievetrick

Tell you what, I will send you my DA 16-45 for your 16-50

I just want to thelp

I appreciate the offer to help out. I'll take that under advisement and get back to you.

**Canada_Rockies** · 12-30-2007, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Ed in GA

I sold my DA 16-45 with the express purpose of replacing it with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8. Which I did.

Now, I really enjoy the DA* lens, faster, its build and IQ but it sure is bulky. I almost feel like I need to carry a monopod with me all of the time to help me steady my K10D with the "Honking Big" DA* lens.

I found the DA 16-45 much easier for me to handle even with its quirky, extended at the short end, set up.

Anyone else have this experience? Or, is it just me?

I have the grip on my k10d, and I find it very well balanced with the 16-50. Are you using the grip?

superfuzzy · 12-30-2007, 10:21 AM

Off topic: Ed, do you miss your Pentax FA 50mm 1.4? I don't see it in your sig.

Ed in GA · 12-30-2007, 10:24 AM

Originally posted by superfuzzy

Off topic: Ed, do you miss your Pentax FA 50mm 1.4? I don't see it in your sig.

Nope, don't miss it at all. I rarely used it.

I do miss the FA 35 f/2 though. Probably should have kept that one.

Ed in GA · 01-05-2008, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by Ed in GA

I sold my DA 16-45 with the express purpose of replacing it with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8. Which I did.

I borrowed a 16-45 a few days ago from a friend. Have had it on my camera for a couple of days.

I've decided to go ahead and buy it and, most likely, will soon have the DA* 16-50 for sale.

Of course, they're selling now for about $150 less than I paid for mine.

Or, maybe I'll keep it. Who knows.

I definitely like the 16-45 better.

Ed

Finn · 01-05-2008, 02:07 PM

Uh oh, you're giving me seller's remorse already, and I only just listed my 16-45 for sale! I'm going to have to stop reading threads like this...

Ed in GA · 01-05-2008, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by Finn

Uh oh, you're giving me seller's remorse already, and I only just listed my 16-45 for sale! I'm going to have to stop reading threads like this...

Why are you selling yours?

Tbear · 01-05-2008, 02:20 PM

I wouldn't mind if the DA* 16-50mm weighed 5 pounds as long as it performed very well optically. Unfortunately, the copy I recently received, was not even as good as my DA 18-55mm.

tux08902 · 01-05-2008, 03:07 PM

Why is the DA* 16-50mm having so many issues? That's all I've heard since it's release. Yet, the DA* 50-135mm seems to be a gem.

clawhammer · 01-05-2008, 03:18 PM

There seems to have been some Quality Control issues with the first DA*'s- the 50-135 also had some bad copies, but not (seemingly) as many as the 16-50. It seems that pentax has fixed most of the issues, but there are either a)some bad copies still floating around or b)some bad lenses still slipping through the QC teams.

Finn · 01-05-2008, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Ed in GA

Why are you selling yours?

I find that nearly all the shots I take with it are at either 16 or 45mm. I already own an FA43, so I think a wide angle prime will fit my needs a lot better. I love the photos produced by the 16-45, but I like using prime lenses better. I know I'll probably regret it...

12-29-2007, 04:26 PM	#1
Ed in GA Guest	I sure miss my DA 16-45 f/4 I sold my DA 16-45 with the express purpose of replacing it with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8. Which I did. Now, I really enjoy the DA* lens, faster, its build and IQ but it sure is bulky. I almost feel like I need to carry a monopod with me all of the time to help me steady my K10D with the "Honking Big" DA* lens. I found the DA 16-45 much easier for me to handle even with its quirky, extended at the short end, set up. Anyone else have this experience? Or, is it just me?

01-05-2008, 01:02 PM	#9
Ed in GA Guest	Update Originally posted by Ed in GA I sold my DA 16-45 with the express purpose of replacing it with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8. Which I did. I borrowed a 16-45 a few days ago from a friend. Have had it on my camera for a couple of days. I've decided to go ahead and buy it and, most likely, will soon have the DA* 16-50 for sale. Of course, they're selling now for about $150 less than I paid for mine. Or, maybe I'll keep it. Who knows. I definitely like the 16-45 better. Ed Last edited by Ed in GA; 01-05-2008 at 02:17 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sports Almost perfect?! What do I miss?	Scubadoo	Photo Critique	8	04-23-2010 08:06 PM
People Little Miss P	Falcons	Post Your Photos!	3	12-21-2009 01:00 PM
Why do I ALWAYS miss?	KierraElizabeth	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	24	11-11-2009 12:30 AM
I miss her already!	Canada_Rockies	Photographic Technique	1	07-14-2009 02:10 AM
What I miss (and don't miss) about my K10D	switters	Pentax DSLR Discussion	35	01-06-2008 02:51 AM

12-30-2007, 05:15 AM	#2
SupremeMoFo Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Queensland, Australia Posts: 668	I like bigger lenses, like my Sigma 28-70 f2.8.

12-30-2007, 05:51 AM	#3
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	To be honest, Da* 16-50 is relatively light and compact to carry. Comparing competition brands, hell these lenses are much heavier. There was a period when I had honey moon with A* 300 f2.8 and I called it a walk around lens. My cervical verterbraes have mal aligned due to this chronic hanging process caused by this big fat metal barrel...

12-30-2007, 07:37 AM	#4
vievetrick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,183	Tell you what, I will send you my DA 16-45 for your 16-50 I just want to thelp

12-30-2007, 08:49 AM	#5
Ed in GA Guest	Originally posted by vievetrick Tell you what, I will send you my DA 16-45 for your 16-50 I just want to thelp I appreciate the offer to help out. I'll take that under advisement and get back to you.

12-30-2007, 09:29 AM	#6
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by Ed in GA I sold my DA 16-45 with the express purpose of replacing it with the DA* 16-50 f/2.8. Which I did. Now, I really enjoy the DA* lens, faster, its build and IQ but it sure is bulky. I almost feel like I need to carry a monopod with me all of the time to help me steady my K10D with the "Honking Big" DA* lens. I found the DA 16-45 much easier for me to handle even with its quirky, extended at the short end, set up. Anyone else have this experience? Or, is it just me? I have the grip on my k10d, and I find it very well balanced with the 16-50. Are you using the grip?

12-30-2007, 10:21 AM	#7
superfuzzy Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NJ, USA (close to NYC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 278	Off topic: Ed, do you miss your Pentax FA 50mm 1.4? I don't see it in your sig.

12-30-2007, 10:24 AM	#8
Ed in GA Guest	Originally posted by superfuzzy Off topic: Ed, do you miss your Pentax FA 50mm 1.4? I don't see it in your sig. Nope, don't miss it at all. I rarely used it. I do miss the FA 35 f/2 though. Probably should have kept that one.

01-05-2008, 02:07 PM	#10
Finn Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Phoenix Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,056	Uh oh, you're giving me seller's remorse already, and I only just listed my 16-45 for sale! I'm going to have to stop reading threads like this...

01-05-2008, 02:16 PM	#11
Ed in GA Guest	Originally posted by Finn Uh oh, you're giving me seller's remorse already, and I only just listed my 16-45 for sale! I'm going to have to stop reading threads like this... Why are you selling yours?

01-05-2008, 02:20 PM	#12
Tbear Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 269	I wouldn't mind if the DA* 16-50mm weighed 5 pounds as long as it performed very well optically. Unfortunately, the copy I recently received, was not even as good as my DA 18-55mm.

01-05-2008, 03:07 PM	#13
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	Why is the DA* 16-50mm having so many issues? That's all I've heard since it's release. Yet, the DA* 50-135mm seems to be a gem.

01-05-2008, 03:18 PM	#14
clawhammer Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Logan, Utah Photos: Gallery Posts: 971	There seems to have been some Quality Control issues with the first DA*'s- the 50-135 also had some bad copies, but not (seemingly) as many as the 16-50. It seems that pentax has fixed most of the issues, but there are either a)some bad copies still floating around or b)some bad lenses still slipping through the QC teams.

01-05-2008, 04:02 PM	#15
Finn Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Phoenix Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,056	Originally posted by Ed in GA Why are you selling yours? I find that nearly all the shots I take with it are at either 16 or 45mm. I already own an FA43, so I think a wide angle prime will fit my needs a lot better. I love the photos produced by the 16-45, but I like using prime lenses better. I know I'll probably regret it...