DA Limited VS DA*

**Rondec** · 09-02-2013, 03:32 AM

Originally posted by wmf2012

I own DA*55 and DA*16-50 before with K5 , i might be get a "bad copy" because i'm not happy with the result in term of image quality. somehow i feel my cheap kit lens 18-55 WR produce a better image quality. Now i'm a bit confuse... i sold the lens to others and they are very happy with the result... this is either my K5 not good to use those or something else... thinking to buy the limited now..

I wonder if your lenses needed some auto focus adjustment on your camera. That isn't uncommon with lenses and is just as likely to happen with DA limiteds as with the DA * lenses.

bassek · 09-02-2013, 03:48 AM

Originally posted by TenZ.NL

Hmm, that`s confusing indeed...you mean both DA*`s performed worse than the WRkitlens?

I have seen this also in a copy of the german magazine Colorphoto, the kit lens was clearly sharper than the DA*16-50.
I guess it was a good kit/bad DA*zoom copy issue. The main advantage for the DA*16-50 is the f2.8 speed and the 2mm wide difference.

Seb

**Rondec** · 09-02-2013, 04:03 AM

Originally posted by bassek

I have seen this also in a copy of the german magazine Colorphoto, the kit lens was clearly sharper than the DA*16-50.
I guess it was a good kit/bad DA*zoom copy issue. The main advantage for the DA*16-50 is the f2.8 speed and the 2mm wide difference.

Seb

Must be a copy issue, because my 16-50 is sharper at all focal lengths than the 18-55. Particularly considering that it is at a 3 stop advantage at the long end. If you are shooting landscapes at f8, you might or might not see much difference. But at f4 you definitely would.

TenZ.NL · 09-02-2013, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Rondec

Must be a copy issue, because my 16-50 is sharper at all focal lengths than the 18-55. Particularly considering that it is at a 3 stop advantage at the long end. If you are shooting landscapes at f8, you might or might not see much difference. But at f4 you definitely would.

+1
This is a fullsize unsharpened sample of my specimen wide open, DoF is offcourse really small but it`s sharp. Not something my 18-55WR can produce wide open (I`m talking about sharpness wide open, not DoF)

All sizes | One more colleague (fullsize sooc) | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: DA Limited 21mm / DA Limited 35mm Macro / DA Limited 70mm	top-quark	Sold Items	3	04-23-2013 05:01 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA 21mm limited, DA 40mm limited, DA* 16-50mm, DA* 50-135mm	kphelan	Sold Items	13	05-24-2011 02:47 PM
DA 35mm macro limited vs. DA 43mm limited	Vote4Pedro	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	12-10-2010 06:59 PM
DA* 16-50mm at 16mm vs DA 15mm Limited	braver	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	03-11-2010 10:28 AM

09-02-2013, 03:32 AM	#16
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by wmf2012 I own DA55 and DA16-50 before with K5 , i might be get a "bad copy" because i'm not happy with the result in term of image quality. somehow i feel my cheap kit lens 18-55 WR produce a better image quality. Now i'm a bit confuse... i sold the lens to others and they are very happy with the result... this is either my K5 not good to use those or something else... thinking to buy the limited now.. I wonder if your lenses needed some auto focus adjustment on your camera. That isn't uncommon with lenses and is just as likely to happen with DA limiteds as with the DA * lenses.

09-02-2013, 03:48 AM	#17
bassek Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 706	Originally posted by TenZ.NL Hmm, that`s confusing indeed...you mean both DA`s performed worse than the WRkitlens? I have seen this also in a copy of the german magazine Colorphoto, the kit lens was clearly sharper than the DA16-50. I guess it was a good kit/bad DAzoom copy issue. The main advantage for the DA16-50 is the f2.8 speed and the 2mm wide difference. Seb

09-02-2013, 04:03 AM	#18
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by bassek I have seen this also in a copy of the german magazine Colorphoto, the kit lens was clearly sharper than the DA16-50. I guess it was a good kit/bad DAzoom copy issue. The main advantage for the DA*16-50 is the f2.8 speed and the 2mm wide difference. Seb Must be a copy issue, because my 16-50 is sharper at all focal lengths than the 18-55. Particularly considering that it is at a 3 stop advantage at the long end. If you are shooting landscapes at f8, you might or might not see much difference. But at f4 you definitely would.

09-02-2013, 01:03 PM	#19
TenZ.NL Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Below sealevel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,100	Originally posted by Rondec Must be a copy issue, because my 16-50 is sharper at all focal lengths than the 18-55. Particularly considering that it is at a 3 stop advantage at the long end. If you are shooting landscapes at f8, you might or might not see much difference. But at f4 you definitely would. +1 This is a fullsize unsharpened sample of my specimen wide open, DoF is offcourse really small but it`s sharp. Not something my 18-55WR can produce wide open (I`m talking about sharpness wide open, not DoF) All sizes \| One more colleague (fullsize sooc) \| Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search