Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-14-2008, 02:26 AM   #1
Veteran Member
blende8's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bremen, Germany
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,484
My DA 16-50 is back from Japan, NOT

In Dec. I sent my DA16-50 in for focus calibration.
Since Pentax Europe is unable to do this, the lens traveled to Japan.
So far no lenses came back from Japan at all.
After 3 months and nothing, Pentax Germany decided to give us new lenses.
Hearing this, I requested mine to be checked carefully before.
They did so.
I got it yesterday evening, could do only some preliminary tests, which look good so far.

The new lenses sent out now have quite varying serial numbers, e.g.
9015106
9018622
Since there are also reports of bad copies in this range (and the numbering is already up to 9021xxx) I would say that one cannot deduce anything from the S/N.

Well, what does this mean?
Has Pentax Japan so much to do that they are unable to calibrate a lens within 3 months?
Why is there no info or feedback?
Without investigation I would still wait.

03-14-2008, 02:47 AM   #2
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: amsterdam, the netherlands
Posts: 18
Well Wieland, I am very curious how your new copy performs. especially what the major differences will be. I still have doubts about my copy, even after having it matched by pentax with my k10d (BF around 16mm disappeared after this!). Still i have the feeling my wide pictures look less sharp,en "clean" compared to my kit-lens. I want to know for sure once and for all, couse then i could either throw it back to them, or keep shooting until i drop.

Anyway, I will follow your thread closely.

Hope you got a good one this time, and i thinks it's great you are being honestly critical about this lens.
greetz
sven
03-14-2008, 03:55 AM   #3
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: amsterdam, the netherlands
Posts: 18
well, just did the newspapertest compared to my kit-lens ,both on 18mm 3.5,sr off, tripod etc etc.

results were stunning....... could not read a word on the da* pics, the pics with the kit-lens are really a LOT better!!!!
and this after pentax having my lens tested and let me come al the way up to belgium to have it matched with my camera. really , what a joke!!!!
i am furious. no matter what others will say. this is really getting a show-stopper for me.. investing 700euro's to get something worse then a 60euro lens.................pppfffffffff
gimme a break.....

(ps.: sorry for the frustration......)
03-14-2008, 04:12 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia Beach VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,364
I don't blame you in the least. This is supposed to be Pentax's premium pro quality lens. There really is no excuse at all for this terrible QC.

03-14-2008, 06:00 AM   #5
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: amsterdam, the netherlands
Posts: 18
QuoteOriginally posted by roscot Quote
I don't blame you in the least. This is supposed to be Pentax's premium pro quality lens. There really is no excuse at all for this terrible QC.
well thanks.

Just got back from the camerashop, i returned the lens and got my money back. (bought it dec.2007) so a very nice shop, good service, even though its a online shop aswell!!!!!

as for pentax.........well, I hope for all da* 16-50 owners they come up with something good, thats not too much to ask for.
03-14-2008, 10:42 AM   #6
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
so far I am happy with my 16-45. I had a 16-50* with the K10d and ended up taking them both back. Now have K20d and the 16-45 and am favorably impressed. I think I'll get the 50-135* though...tried that at the shop and it seemed to be very sharp.
03-14-2008, 11:07 AM   #7
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
Maybe they would be better off making a v2 version of the 16-50, if they actually managed to fix all the qc issues, so that people wouldnt feel that buying one was such a big risk like it is with the current version.
03-14-2008, 01:36 PM   #8
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 731
QuoteOriginally posted by desame.one Quote
I agree.

I'm glad I only had to exchange mine once. If it's any consolation, once you receive a good copy of the lens...it definitely makes the hassle of going through the return and exchange process worth it. And at that point, I think the DA* 16-50 becomes one of those lenses you'll refuse to part with.

Cheers!
That's good to hear because I am waiting on my second copy and starting to get disenchanted with this lens (after only one bad one!) I hope you right and the wait/hassle are worth it, because for a lense at this price point you should be able to pop it on the camera out of the box and have zero doubt about it capability, instead people are having to go through this mess....

03-14-2008, 02:04 PM   #9
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: nyc
Posts: 33
My copy has just been shipped back from Pentax, I'm curious if i'm going to get the same lens in return or a new one...
03-14-2008, 03:26 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Tom Lusk's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 972
@ desame.one

"It could be worse."

How?

"Canon and Nikon glass cost a lot more."

Some of their lenses cost more, some cost less. Some are better quality, some are worse.

"They have their fair share of problems as well."

Maybe so, but I don't believe there has ever been a photographic product from any manufacturer that has had such a poor record. There is a possibility, that with future failures of the focussing mechanisms due to the rough finish inside the barrel and the defective plastic guide material that every 16-50 ever produced will fail. Those who have received "good" copies may not be so happy some time in the future.

"From what I have heard, Pentax is more consistent than the other two brands when it comes to rolling out gear that functions to spec."

Where/when did you hear that? Must have been before the 16-50 introduction.

On a related note - congratulations to Ben K. for publicly admitting his copy is defective. We have butted heads in the past, but I really respect the fact he did not just quietly return his lens for a replacement. A class move.
03-14-2008, 03:38 PM   #11
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
With the backfocusing problem, I had been discouraged from shooting f2.8

Lately, I have gone back to using Da 14mm f2.8; it definitely focuses fast. Just annoying to use Da 14mm f2.8 in day light - the flare is just too much
03-14-2008, 03:44 PM   #12
Veteran Member
attack11's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, ON - Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 659
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
so far I am happy with my 16-45. I had a 16-50* with the K10d and ended up taking them both back. Now have K20d and the 16-45 and am favorably impressed. I think I'll get the 50-135* though...tried that at the shop and it seemed to be very sharp.
just an fyi, the 16-45 is the same performance as the 18-55; costs more and has worse chromatic aberrations.
03-14-2008, 04:01 PM   #13
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 74
My first lens was a dud - no SDM focus.
My second lens seems ok, not really sure what to look for in faults?? Focus issues.

My serial is 90170XX
03-14-2008, 04:32 PM   #14
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by attack11 Quote
just an fyi, the 16-45 is the same performance as the 18-55; costs more and has worse chromatic aberrations.
I fail to understand how that can be, unless there are design/build flaws with the 16-45. Have you compared the two back to back on the same body? It is constant f4 across the range (which isn't the "same performance") and should have better glass and build. But the photos I've got aren't apples to apples...it is 18-55 on a K10d and 16-45 on K20d.

I just picked up the 50-135* which seems pretty sharp, except for wide open at 50mm. The 16-45 will serve as a general purpose lense, but I'm leaning towards getting a 31mm ltd and maybe a 12-24 for landscape.
03-14-2008, 05:01 PM   #15
Veteran Member
distudio's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Photos: Albums
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by attack11 Quote
just an fyi, the 16-45 is the same performance as the 18-55; costs more and has worse chromatic aberrations.
According to what tests? The 16-45 is pretty good wide open at the short end, the 18-55 vignettes significantly at 18mm and isn't near as sharp, hardly the same.
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!
japan, k-mount, lens, lenses, months, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hello from Japan Ehlacore Welcomes and Introductions 6 10-19-2010 10:41 PM
Hello from Japan!!! jleoni Welcomes and Introductions 4 10-02-2010 07:16 AM
FA31 update - back from Japan joele Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 28 04-18-2010 12:35 PM
Sales of the K-x in Japan pushed back 17 days creampuff Pentax News and Rumors 13 10-11-2009 04:20 PM
Should we now post back those new K-7 threads back to the DSLR forum? RiceHigh Pentax News and Rumors 2 05-22-2009 07:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:07 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