Pentax DA 18-55mm, why is AL II better than WR?

Newtophotos · 08-30-2013, 05:30 AM

In the lens review database here on Pentax forums, I noticed the 18-55mm AL II is rated much better than the 18-55mm AL WR. What optically is different between the two that causes the difference in the rating?

**savoche** · 08-30-2013, 05:38 AM - **1 Like**

There shouldn't be any optical difference. The ratings in the database are not very consistent - they are based on individuals' impression of a lens,most often without any kind of comparison to other lenses.

Read them as a vague indication, nothing more.

Na Horuk · 08-30-2013, 06:52 AM

Yes, optically they should be the same. the WR is probably a better options because it is.. WR.
The reviews are user reviews, anyone can make a review. I suggest you scroll down and read some individual reviews. Users usually explain why they rated it the way they did.

Mazhe · 08-30-2013, 06:54 AM

Actually, I read somewhere that while the number/grouping of elements do not change, the materials do (the WR have one aspherical element).

**pacerr** · 08-30-2013, 07:30 AM

The II was directly compared to the 1st kit version while the WR was often subjectively compared to the other non-kit WR lenses. Depends on the reviewer and the category the lens was associated with.

carrrlangas · 08-30-2013, 07:37 AM

The WR version, has another feature besides the seals, the SP (super protect) coating. fingerprints, dust, hair, etc. are easilly cleaned which allows not to be so carefull with the lens

bdery · 08-30-2013, 10:19 AM

They are optically identical, Pentax stated as such when they launched the lens. It is more expensive but a better product because of the seals and coeatings.

**Just1MoreDave** · 08-30-2013, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by Mazhe

Actually, I read somewhere that while the number/grouping of elements do not change, the materials do (the WR have one aspherical element).

Ricehigh's site has a set of diagrams showing this, quoting someone else. I suspect that's wrong.

stevebrot · 08-30-2013, 08:32 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Mazhe

the WR have one aspherical element

They all have one aspheric element. That is what the AL in the name stands for.

Steve

Mazhe · 08-31-2013, 06:17 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Just1MoreDave

Ricehigh's site has a set of diagrams showing this, quoting someone else. I suspect that's wrong.

Yes, this must have been the source of the misunderstanding at some point. There should be no optical differences between the (non DA-L) II and WR version so.

08-30-2013, 05:30 AM	#1
Newtophotos Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 439	Pentax DA 18-55mm, why is AL II better than WR? In the lens review database here on Pentax forums, I noticed the 18-55mm AL II is rated much better than the 18-55mm AL WR. What optically is different between the two that causes the difference in the rating?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K30 w/ 18-135mm or K5 w/ 18-55mm AL WR & SMCP-DA 50-200mm WR	biscohuffer	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	06-25-2013 08:30 PM
Is an FA-J 18-35f4-5.6 better than a DA-L 18-55?	Lowell Goudge	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	12-29-2012 10:09 PM
Da 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 al wr vs da 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 al ii	Keroro	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	12-17-2012 12:02 AM
Difference Between Pentax 18-55 AL; AL II; & AL WR?	reivax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	12-11-2011 12:24 PM
DA 18-55mm AL II vs DAL 18-55mm (kit lens) vs DA 18-55mm WR	rustynail925	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	01-08-2010 02:06 PM

08-30-2013, 05:38 AM - 1 Like	#2
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	There shouldn't be any optical difference. The ratings in the database are not very consistent - they are based on individuals' impression of a lens,most often without any kind of comparison to other lenses. Read them as a vague indication, nothing more.

08-30-2013, 06:52 AM	#3
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Yes, optically they should be the same. the WR is probably a better options because it is.. WR. The reviews are user reviews, anyone can make a review. I suggest you scroll down and read some individual reviews. Users usually explain why they rated it the way they did.

08-30-2013, 06:54 AM	#4
Mazhe Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 139	Actually, I read somewhere that while the number/grouping of elements do not change, the materials do (the WR have one aspherical element).

08-30-2013, 07:30 AM	#5
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,349	The II was directly compared to the 1st kit version while the WR was often subjectively compared to the other non-kit WR lenses. Depends on the reviewer and the category the lens was associated with.

08-30-2013, 07:37 AM	#6
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	The WR version, has another feature besides the seals, the SP (super protect) coating. fingerprints, dust, hair, etc. are easilly cleaned which allows not to be so carefull with the lens

08-30-2013, 10:19 AM	#7
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	They are optically identical, Pentax stated as such when they launched the lens. It is more expensive but a better product because of the seals and coeatings.

08-30-2013, 11:00 AM	#8
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by Mazhe Actually, I read somewhere that while the number/grouping of elements do not change, the materials do (the WR have one aspherical element). Ricehigh's site has a set of diagrams showing this, quoting someone else. I suspect that's wrong.

08-30-2013, 08:32 PM - 2 Likes	#9
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Mazhe the WR have one aspherical element They all have one aspheric element. That is what the AL in the name stands for. Steve

08-31-2013, 06:17 AM - 1 Like	#10
Mazhe Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 139	Originally posted by Just1MoreDave Ricehigh's site has a set of diagrams showing this, quoting someone else. I suspect that's wrong. Yes, this must have been the source of the misunderstanding at some point. There should be no optical differences between the (non DA-L) II and WR version so.