Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-11-2008, 05:09 PM   #1
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Update**** NOT Returning my Pentax *16-50 f2.8

I will be returning the 2nd copy of my Pentax *16-50 f2.8 lens for another, as it has serious edge resolution problems that are totally unacceptable. I tested it against the Pentax 16-45 f4.0 and it didn't come close to the resolution delivered by it. The Pentax 16-45 f4.0 is not perfect at the edges but is still far superior to the Pentax *16-50 f2.8. I want the next one to be tested for edge to edge resolution. In the mean time I will use the Pentax 16-45 f4.0. If the Pentax *16-50 f2.8 cannot do the trick, I have asked that it be exchanged for the Pentax 17-70 f4.0 when it comes out. Lets hope that the Pentax 17-70 f4.0 performs well. I don't need f2.8 as I shoot most of my stuff with flash and mixed light sources at f5.6 and above so all I demand is good edge resolution.

Ben


Last edited by benjikan; 03-14-2008 at 04:40 PM. Reason: Seems to be OK now..I'm stumped
03-11-2008, 05:46 PM   #2
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
Hope the next one (or the 17-70) works out. I hate seeing these posts as a stellar wide zoom would make me feel all warm and fuzzy. I'd gladly pay $1K for a killer version. But $750 for sketchy qc is downright depressing...
03-11-2008, 06:38 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Buddha Jones's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,591
I thought you were using that lens for months now, and how is it that you only have one?
03-13-2008, 03:42 AM   #4
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
SR Off

I am going to do a test with the SR off on the 16-50. I think that may be one of the reasons that the edge resolution has that "doubled exposure" look to it. If that is the work around, I will be very, very happy..

Ben

03-13-2008, 05:09 AM   #5
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
I took test shots with my DA16-50 on a tripod with SR off and still got the "doubled exposure" at edge. One of the early shots of DA200 also had doubled exposure look, but this time in centre.
03-13-2008, 05:16 AM   #6
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
I took test shots with my DA16-50 on a tripod with SR off and still got the "doubled exposure" at edge. One of the early shots of DA200 also had doubled exposure look, but this time in centre.
SH-T!!! Not good news for me. As to Budah's query, I only have one. I'll give it a try none the less.

Ben
03-13-2008, 01:45 PM   #7
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
is this on a K10d or K20d? I'm about to buy a K20d and it seems as if some of the 16-50 issues are resolved with that body.
03-13-2008, 04:45 PM   #8
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
is this on a K10d or K20d? I'm about to buy a K20d and it seems as if some of the 16-50 issues are resolved with that body.
On my K20D's...

03-13-2008, 04:55 PM   #9
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
well, I picked up a K20d today and got the 16-45 instead of the 16-50*, based on my previous weak 16-50* and the comments here. Seems like by all accounts the 16-45 is very sharp and contrasty for a zoom (my main considerations). I'm willing to get some noise and push higher iso...for what I usually look for noise isn't that big of a deal. Still charging the battery so we'll see what she looks like shortly shooting indoors available light.

Now I'm just trying to decide if I'd actually use the 50-135. My original plan was to shoot mostly primes (31, an old 50/1.4 and 70 or 77) but the lure of a really good zoom is pretty strong.
03-13-2008, 05:21 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 813
Benji, that's bad news. One would think that Pentax would make a maximum effort to resolve the spotty QC record of one of its DA* lenses. This one's still on my LBA list for its weathersealing and the SDM, but I dread the possibility of playing on the product return merry-go-round. As a result, the DA* 16-50 isn't at the top of my list. Wait-n-see, for now.
03-13-2008, 05:22 PM   #11
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
well, I picked up a K20d today and got the 16-45 instead of the 16-50*, based on my previous weak 16-50* and the comments here. Seems like by all accounts the 16-45 is very sharp and contrasty for a zoom (my main considerations). I'm willing to get some noise and push higher iso...for what I usually look for noise isn't that big of a deal. Still charging the battery so we'll see what she looks like shortly shooting indoors available light.

Now I'm just trying to decide if I'd actually use the 50-135. My original plan was to shoot mostly primes (31, an old 50/1.4 and 70 or 77) but the lure of a really good zoom is pretty strong.
I have the 50-135 and it is in my "Brutally Sharp" category. It is definitely a keeper.

Ben
03-13-2008, 05:24 PM   #12
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by christinelandon Quote
Benji, that's bad news. One would think that Pentax would make a maximum effort to resolve the spotty QC record of one of its DA* lenses. This one's still on my LBA list for its weathersealing and the SDM, but I dread the possibility of playing on the product return merry-go-round. As a result, the DA* 16-50 isn't at the top of my list. Wait-n-see, for now.
We will see if the next one is up to par...If not, i'll use my 16-45. It IS a great lens.

Ben
03-13-2008, 05:59 PM   #13
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
We will see if the next one is up to par...If not, i'll use my 16-45. It IS a great lens.

Ben
Doesn't really do us "average joes" any good (returning lens after lens, requesting it to be "checked" ect)... Guess I'll have to put it on my"dog" list...
Good lens poorly executed to keep a pricepoint as far as I can tell... I was really impressed w/ some early photos but too many reported w/ problems (the 21 is on that list as well). I really fail to see how they can continually muff this lens (or any lens above $50 for that matter)
Yes, keep you 16-45.......
03-13-2008, 06:20 PM   #14
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
Doesn't really do us "average joes" any good (returning lens after lens, requesting it to be "checked" ect)... Guess I'll have to put it on my"dog" list...
Good lens poorly executed to keep a pricepoint as far as I can tell... I was really impressed w/ some early photos but too many reported w/ problems (the 21 is on that list as well). I really fail to see how they can continually muff this lens (or any lens above $50 for that matter)
Yes, keep you 16-45.......
The 16-45 was responsible for this image.
Attached Images
 
03-14-2008, 11:28 AM   #15
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
Just received an e-mail from Pentax. They asked that I send them the lens with samples of images highlighting the problem. They will send it to Pentax headquarters in Germany. Hopefully they can rectify it or send me another that has been tested.

Ben
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!
edge, f2.8, f4.0, k-mount, pentax, pentax lens, resolution, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Returning to Photography and Pentax after 30years. Touchwood Welcomes and Introductions 3 10-08-2010 04:38 AM
Greetings from a returning Pentaxian! OregonJim Welcomes and Introductions 5 09-25-2009 01:56 PM
Returning to Pentax Seaslater Welcomes and Introductions 1 06-22-2009 02:56 AM
returning my Sigma flash -- gonna go official Pentax mattdm Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 14 02-24-2008 06:05 PM
Thinking about returning to Pentax Art Vandelay II Pentax DSLR Discussion 53 02-05-2008 02:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:34 AM. | 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