Is the DA* 16-50 really as bad as everyone says?

runslikeapenguin · 11-20-2012, 02:01 PM

Pictures of children, cats and flower macros are all automatically bad. There are virtually no exceptions to this rule.
They're so bad i can't even look at them.

**LaurenOE** · 11-20-2012, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by runslikeapenguin

Pictures of children, cats and flower macros are all automatically bad. There are virtually no exceptions to this rule.
They're so bad i can't even look at them.

LOL. Ok.

**wtlwdwgn** · 11-20-2012, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by snake

Thank you. This is what I mean- I don't know the drive for people to cover for Pentax, whether it be the SDM or decentering. We're supposed to be helping one another and denial of problems being used to nullify the problems of others (as above in the thread somewhere) is just plain weird.

It would be nice if people put more pressure on Pentax- in public, interviews, etc. At the least, the German market is not holding back in their complaints, as well as leaning on consumer authorities to get resolutions with Pentax.

I figured this would happen.

I don't and have not ever covered for Pentax. I wrote letters and emails, and called on the phone. When the second round of SDM failures occurred I wrote an email to the president of Pentax Imaging that I was going to send him and the president of Pentax Japan my 16-50 and 50-135, both of which failed a month after the replacement warranty was up, to use as paper weights. Both were replaced within a week or so.

If you don't like the lenses Pentax makes, don't buy them.

NeverSatisfied · 11-20-2012, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by snake

But once again, I haven't got a clue of who you are and why you took it as if the internet was talking directly to you.

Nice. Maybe because you only joined in June?

I was an early adopter of the 16-50, and caught a decentered sample. It was immediately replaced under warranty, and that replacement copy is still going strong. After a while, like Norm mentioned in his own experience, other lenses in my collection were more appropriate for my needs. A need to "thin the herd" placed the 16-50 into another forum member's hands, who I'm pretty sure is still using and enjoying it. It did take a lot of great shots for me, and there are times I would still find it useful, enough so that I'd probably buy another if I had a bit more discretionary income. This thread started out with a lot of good constructive comments about a particular lens, both pro and con, but seems to be degenerating into yet another name-calling and SDM-bashing exercise. Pentax, Sigma, Tamron, take your pick. I think it's been pretty well hashed-out by now.

Blue · 11-20-2012, 03:53 PM

Lets get this thread back on task regarding the DA* 16-50mm by discussing the pros and cons objectively or the thread will be closed.

**Rondec** · 11-20-2012, 04:27 PM

I do think SDM discussions get old pretty fast. Life is inherently risk and if the riskiest thing about your life is the fact that you own a couple of SDM lenses, I would say that you are in pretty good shape.

NeverSatisfied · 11-20-2012, 04:27 PM

One of the virtues of the 16-50 is the weather sealing, of course. At the time, I only owned that, and the DA*50-135, and it was a great two-lens kit for motorcycle touring. In a case like that, zooms are just a lot easier to deal with and use while on the road exploring unknown locations. I plan on doing a lot more motorcycle touring and camping in the near future, thus my renewed interest in possibly re-acquiring a 16-50.

I was reading a "ride report" on another forum, about a guy's motorcycle trip from Arizona to Alaska, which has really sparked my imagination. He's a fellow Pentaxian, using a K5 and the DA*16-50 (plus a couple others), and came up with some really amazing shots:

WAY UP NORTH - To The Arctic Ocean & Back to Arizona - ADVrider

So it all depends on your needs. Tamron and Sigma equivalents are also good lenses, but, at least for what this gentleman did, it was the perfect choice, and I don't think you can argue the quality of his work. (And I hope those of you that follow the link enjoy the thread!

)

lightbulb · 11-20-2012, 05:01 PM - **1 Like**

I know the DA.*16 50 is supposed to be wr. Mine went into the drink, all 4 feet of it, and still working now! What SDM problem? If it was Tamron or Sigma, I am not sure. ..... pentax are tough SOB!

**Ex Finn.** · 11-20-2012, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by NeverSatisfied

One of the virtues of the 16-50 is the weather sealing, of course. At the time, I only owned that, and the DA*50-135, and it was a great two-lens kit for motorcycle touring. In a case like that, zooms are just a lot easier to deal with and use while on the road exploring unknown locations. I plan on doing a lot more motorcycle touring and camping in the near future, thus my renewed interest in possibly re-acquiring a 16-50.

I was reading a "ride report" on another forum, about a guy's motorcycle trip from Arizona to Alaska, which has really sparked my imagination. He's a fellow Pentaxian, using a K5 and the DA*16-50 (plus a couple others), and came up with some really amazing shots:

WAY UP NORTH - To The Arctic Ocean & Back to Arizona - ADVrider

So it all depends on your needs. Tamron and Sigma equivalents are also good lenses, but, at least for what this gentleman did, it was the perfect choice, and I don't think you can argue the quality of his work. (And I hope those of you that follow the link enjoy the thread!

)

Thank you for the link, what a great adventure they had and fantastic reporting they did.

lightbulb · 11-21-2012, 08:17 AM

16-50 @ 16mm @ different aperture. Edited in LR4 with identical settings (pardon the over saturation);

JinDesu · 11-21-2012, 08:23 AM

We don't seem to have permission to go to those flicker pages and see the large image - can you allow us?

lightbulb · 11-21-2012, 08:33 AM

done.

JinDesu · 11-21-2012, 08:40 AM

Thanks.

To me, this thread is trying to address two different things simultaneously - the SDM failure, and the image quality.

As far as the SDM failure goes, the SDM poll thread should answer that. I believe most of the current SDM lenses lack failure, even the 16-50.

As far as image quality goes - we know this lens isn't as sharp as the 17-50s, and some copies can be pretty bad. That being said, sharpness isn't everything.

audiobomber · 11-21-2012, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by lightbulb

16-50 @ 16mm @ different aperture. Edited in LR4 with identical settings (pardon the over saturation);

The saturation didn't bother me at all, but oh, that white balance. Unless you have a dark blue Pentax lens cap?

lightbulb · 11-21-2012, 09:22 AM

haha, it was a rush job. And perfectionist I am not. Seriously though. Under good sun it really shines. Check out the scales on this heavily cropped image;

11-20-2012, 04:27 PM	#52
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	*A Perfect Application for the DA16-50** One of the virtues of the 16-50 is the weather sealing, of course. At the time, I only owned that, and the DA50-135, and it was a great two-lens kit for motorcycle touring. In a case like that, zooms are just a lot easier to deal with and use while on the road exploring unknown locations. I plan on doing a lot more motorcycle touring and camping in the near future, thus my renewed interest in possibly re-acquiring a 16-50. I was reading a "ride report" on another forum, about a guy's motorcycle trip from Arizona to Alaska, which has really sparked my imagination. He's a fellow Pentaxian, using a K5 and the DA16-50 (plus a couple others), and came up with some really amazing shots: WAY UP NORTH - To The Arctic Ocean & Back to Arizona - ADVrider So it all depends on your needs. Tamron and Sigma equivalents are also good lenses, but, at least for what this gentleman did, it was the perfect choice, and I don't think you can argue the quality of his work. (And I hope those of you that follow the link enjoy the thread! )

11-21-2012, 09:22 AM	#60
lightbulb Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 691	haha, it was a rush job. And perfectionist I am not. Seriously though. Under good sun it really shines. Check out the scales on this heavily cropped image; Last edited by lightbulb; 11-21-2012 at 09:30 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is the DA 18-135 really that bad?	Rich7333	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	09-17-2012 10:18 AM
Nikon: “A Photographer Is Only as Good as the Equipment He Uses”	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	60	10-31-2011 11:24 PM
Hey photogs! You're only as good as your gear. Says Nikon...	einstrigger	Photographic Technique	76	10-11-2011 05:43 PM
QC issues as bad as they seem?	nsolarz	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	06-21-2011 12:47 AM
DA* 50-135 is not as good as people think	m42geo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	06-15-2009 07:49 PM

11-20-2012, 02:01 PM	#46
runslikeapenguin Banned Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 19 Original Poster	Pictures of children, cats and flower macros are all automatically bad. There are virtually no exceptions to this rule. They're so bad i can't even look at them.

11-20-2012, 02:31 PM	#47
LaurenOE Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Back in Florida, but worldwide gigs! Photos: Albums Posts: 3,690	Originally posted by runslikeapenguin Pictures of children, cats and flower macros are all automatically bad. There are virtually no exceptions to this rule. They're so bad i can't even look at them. LOL. Ok.

11-20-2012, 03:08 PM	#48
wtlwdwgn Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Billings, MT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,838	Originally posted by snake Thank you. This is what I mean- I don't know the drive for people to cover for Pentax, whether it be the SDM or decentering. We're supposed to be helping one another and denial of problems being used to nullify the problems of others (as above in the thread somewhere) is just plain weird. It would be nice if people put more pressure on Pentax- in public, interviews, etc. At the least, the German market is not holding back in their complaints, as well as leaning on consumer authorities to get resolutions with Pentax. I figured this would happen. I don't and have not ever covered for Pentax. I wrote letters and emails, and called on the phone. When the second round of SDM failures occurred I wrote an email to the president of Pentax Imaging that I was going to send him and the president of Pentax Japan my 16-50 and 50-135, both of which failed a month after the replacement warranty was up, to use as paper weights. Both were replaced within a week or so. If you don't like the lenses Pentax makes, don't buy them.

11-20-2012, 03:47 PM	#49
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	Originally posted by snake But once again, I haven't got a clue of who you are and why you took it as if the internet was talking directly to you. Nice. Maybe because you only joined in June? I was an early adopter of the 16-50, and caught a decentered sample. It was immediately replaced under warranty, and that replacement copy is still going strong. After a while, like Norm mentioned in his own experience, other lenses in my collection were more appropriate for my needs. A need to "thin the herd" placed the 16-50 into another forum member's hands, who I'm pretty sure is still using and enjoying it. It did take a lot of great shots for me, and there are times I would still find it useful, enough so that I'd probably buy another if I had a bit more discretionary income. This thread started out with a lot of good constructive comments about a particular lens, both pro and con, but seems to be degenerating into yet another name-calling and SDM-bashing exercise. Pentax, Sigma, Tamron, take your pick. I think it's been pretty well hashed-out by now.

11-20-2012, 03:53 PM	#50
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Lets get this thread back on task regarding the DA* 16-50mm by discussing the pros and cons objectively or the thread will be closed.

11-20-2012, 04:27 PM	#51
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	I do think SDM discussions get old pretty fast. Life is inherently risk and if the riskiest thing about your life is the fact that you own a couple of SDM lenses, I would say that you are in pretty good shape.

11-20-2012, 05:01 PM - 1 Like	#53
lightbulb Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 691	I know the DA.*16 50 is supposed to be wr. Mine went into the drink, all 4 feet of it, and still working now! What SDM problem? If it was Tamron or Sigma, I am not sure. ..... pentax are tough SOB!

11-20-2012, 08:07 PM	#54
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Originally posted by NeverSatisfied One of the virtues of the 16-50 is the weather sealing, of course. At the time, I only owned that, and the DA50-135, and it was a great two-lens kit for motorcycle touring. In a case like that, zooms are just a lot easier to deal with and use while on the road exploring unknown locations. I plan on doing a lot more motorcycle touring and camping in the near future, thus my renewed interest in possibly re-acquiring a 16-50. I was reading a "ride report" on another forum, about a guy's motorcycle trip from Arizona to Alaska, which has really sparked my imagination. He's a fellow Pentaxian, using a K5 and the DA16-50 (plus a couple others), and came up with some really amazing shots: WAY UP NORTH - To The Arctic Ocean & Back to Arizona - ADVrider So it all depends on your needs. Tamron and Sigma equivalents are also good lenses, but, at least for what this gentleman did, it was the perfect choice, and I don't think you can argue the quality of his work. (And I hope those of you that follow the link enjoy the thread! ) Thank you for the link, what a great adventure they had and fantastic reporting they did.

11-21-2012, 08:17 AM	#55
lightbulb Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 691	16-50 @ 16mm @ different aperture. Edited in LR4 with identical settings (pardon the over saturation);

11-21-2012, 08:23 AM	#56
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	We don't seem to have permission to go to those flicker pages and see the large image - can you allow us?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-21-2012, 08:33 AM	#57
lightbulb Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 691	done.

11-21-2012, 08:40 AM	#58
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Thanks. To me, this thread is trying to address two different things simultaneously - the SDM failure, and the image quality. As far as the SDM failure goes, the SDM poll thread should answer that. I believe most of the current SDM lenses lack failure, even the 16-50. As far as image quality goes - we know this lens isn't as sharp as the 17-50s, and some copies can be pretty bad. That being said, sharpness isn't everything.

11-21-2012, 08:43 AM	#59
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by lightbulb 16-50 @ 16mm @ different aperture. Edited in LR4 with identical settings (pardon the over saturation); The saturation didn't bother me at all, but oh, that white balance. Unless you have a dark blue Pentax lens cap?