Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-05-2008, 11:24 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 269
18-55 vs 18-55 II

i read that there are two 18-55 versions:
- 18-55mm (old)
- 18-55mm II (new)

there are differents? II version is really better?

05-05-2008, 11:27 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
the optical constructions is different, version II is better
see this posting, unfortunately the pictures don't show
DA 18-55 (I) vs. DA 18-55 (II) on DS - comparison shots [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
05-05-2008, 11:31 AM   #3
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
on paper its better, but will you notice a difference? maybe if you use 18mm often otherwise probably not. it does have a different lens cap though.
05-05-2008, 11:33 AM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by k100d Quote
the optical constructions is different, version II is better
see this posting, unfortunately the pictures don't show
DA 18-55 (I) vs. DA 18-55 (II) on DS - comparison shots [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

hello!
you are very kind! thanks for link ...but images are not available.

there is an online test about 18-55 II?
about you, the II version is good like 16-45?

05-05-2008, 11:55 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
can't really help you there, but i'd imagine the 16-45 is much better. however, the 16-45 blocks the built in flash at its widest point.

try searching in google for postings in dpreview about the 18-55 ii, there maybe be more
site:dpreview.com pentax 18-55 ii
05-05-2008, 12:00 PM   #6
PFH
Site Supporter
PFH's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 482
I previosly owned the old version,now i own the new mkII
As far as I can se the edge shapness is significantly better on the mkII, and so is the contrast.
05-05-2008, 12:20 PM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by k100d Quote
can't really help you there, but i'd imagine the 16-45 is much better. however, the 16-45 blocks the built in flash at its widest point.
i dont' understand here. what do you mean?

sorry, please can you tell me more info using other easy words?
05-05-2008, 12:23 PM   #8
Veteran Member
KjetilH's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oslo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 309
The lens extends when you zoom out to 16mm. Because the flash is mounted pretty low on the camera, you get a shadow in the bottom of the frame, caused by the extended lens barrel blocking the flash light.

The 18-55 is at its shortest as 35mm, and extends a centimeter or two either way.

05-05-2008, 12:23 PM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
Pentax SMC-DA 16-45mm f/4 ED AL - Review / Test Report
when the lens is at its widest (16mm), it needs to extend out very far. if you use the built-in flash at this focal length, the lens will block the built-in flash and you get a strange shadow. this is not uncommon for other lenses as well.

haha what KjetilH said :P
05-05-2008, 12:36 PM   #10
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
vigneting?

QuoteOriginally posted by PFH Quote
I previosly owned the old version,now i own the new mkII
As far as I can se the edge shapness is significantly better on the mkII, and so is the contrast.
Ok if sharpness is better, how is the vignetting? At 18mm in Mk I it's quite visible (the front element seems to be bit underdesigned) Does Mk II suffer from the same?
05-05-2008, 01:00 PM   #11
PFH
Site Supporter
PFH's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 482
I donīt think vigneting is a major problem
Attached Images
 
05-05-2008, 01:04 PM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 269
Original Poster
vey thanks for info! :-)

about you 16-45 or 18-55 II ?
05-05-2008, 01:15 PM   #13
PFH
Site Supporter
PFH's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 482
I own them both and I wonīt part with any of them.
I like 16-45 for is outstanding picture quality but itīs rather bulky.
I like 18-55 for itīs small size and relatively good picture quality.

Last edited by PFH; 05-06-2008 at 02:47 AM.
05-05-2008, 01:32 PM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 269
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by PFH Quote
I own them both and I wonīt part of any of them.
I like 16-45 for is outstanding picture quality but itīs rather bulky.
I like 18-55 for itīs small sice and relatively good picture quality.
about 16-45 i read that has a lot of chromatic aberrations.
do you know?
05-05-2008, 01:58 PM   #15
PFH
Site Supporter
PFH's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 482
OK thereīs some purple fringing with the 16-45, but again I must say I donīt think itīs a major problem.
To completely avoid the problem you might have to invest in star or limited lenses.
Once again Iīm not disturbed by the amount of ca with my 16-45 or even the 18-55.
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!
18-55mm, ii, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:03 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