Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-02-2015, 09:05 AM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 23
16-85mm F3.5-5.6 OR 2.8 SMC 16-50 ?

Quality difference between the newer HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR and the SMC 16-50mm f/2.8 DA* ED AL IF SDM K-Mount AF ?
Any opinions on and between these two lenses ??

---------- Post added 03-02-15 at 09:49 AM ----------

Besides how fast both are , how much quality difference can one tell . The 16-50 is larger to handle and wider glass obvisouly . On the other hand , the 16-85 is more comfortable to work with and I've read a lot of discussion that give it high remarks . The SDM has been a big issue with the other but read that the newer ones have been corrected .


Last edited by dudleyg; 03-02-2015 at 09:50 AM.
03-02-2015, 11:03 AM   #2
Veteran Member
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,347
QuoteOriginally posted by dudleyg Quote
Quality difference between the newer HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR and the SMC 16-50mm f/2.8 DA* ED AL IF SDM K-Mount AF ?
Any opinions on and between these two lenses ??

---------- Post added 03-02-15 at 09:49 AM ----------

Besides how fast both are , how much quality difference can one tell . The 16-50 is larger to handle and wider glass obvisouly . On the other hand , the 16-85 is more comfortable to work with and I've read a lot of discussion that give it high remarks . The SDM has been a big issue with the other but read that the newer ones have been corrected .
I personally would go for the 16-85mm.
Any reports of the newer ones SDM being corrected is just forum hearsay because Pentax has not publicly announced a problem even exists in the first place. And besides, how could you be sure when the lens was built even if it were true?
03-02-2015, 11:19 AM   #3
Emperor and Senpai
Loyal Site Supporter
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,920
What do you want to do with it? The 16-50 will likely be sharper and better for low light, both are WR, and the 16-85 has longer reach.
03-02-2015, 11:23 AM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 23
Original Poster
Thank you for you reply . Yes the SDM issue could be hersay, it just seems a Huge issue with that lens. Well I bought both and going to try both out , hopefuly sell one of them LOL , As far as the 16-85 goes , it seems like it's a bit if a step up from the 18-135 wr lens which a lot of people have said . So will see. thanks again . BH photo has it on sale now .

---------- Post added 03-02-15 at 11:26 AM ----------

You actually think the 16 - 50 would be sharper ? what do i want to do with it would be to use as my all around lens but with quality sans the bulkness of the larger one .


Last edited by dudleyg; 03-02-2015 at 11:28 AM. Reason: sale , more information
03-02-2015, 11:45 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,218
I've seen some good images from the 16-85, but an f/3.5-5.6 variable aperture really bugs me. The DA*16-50 gives nice images at f/3.5 or f/4. The 16-85 isn't going to be able to shoot 50mm at those apertures. Even worse, any such lenses I've used in the past don't allow you to keep the aperture stopped down by only 1/3 or 2/3 stops as you zoom in and out. So for near-optimal IQ (while maintaining a wider aperture - my typical shooting scenario) you have to constantly be monitoring and re-adjusting the aperture. This largely defeats the purpose of a zoom, which is for convenience and avoiding "missing the shot" - especially for events or other situations where you have to concentrate on composition and timing.

So in the end such a lens is going to drive my crazy. If I have time to carefully plan my shots I may as well use primes. The DA*16-50 allows me to maintain my spontaneity and doesn't require too much of a compromise in IQ (compared to primes).

---------- Post added 03-02-15 at 10:56 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by dudleyg Quote
You actually think the 16 - 50 would be sharper ? what do i want to do with it would be to use as my all around lens but with quality sans the bulkness of the larger one .
For me there's no perfect all-around lens. The DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 combo is my compromise - and one that I'm very happy with (especially the DA*50-135). If I really need both at the same time I carry two bodies. A zoom that covers most of that range by itself involves too much sacrifice in IQ or capability. I was rather happy with the FA 24-90/3.5-4.5, but I've found f/3.5-4.5 (or constant f/4, for that matter) much more workable than f/3.5-5.6. The only lens I really like that (barely) has more that 1-stop variable aperture is the FA28-105/3.2-4.5. But it already seems a bit slow at times. Constant f/2.8 (or sometimes f/4) is just better for me.

Nevertheless, if you don't shoot at such wide apertures much the 16-85 appears to have very nice IQ.

Last edited by DSims; 03-02-2015 at 12:03 PM.
03-02-2015, 12:49 PM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,692
The big reason to choose the 16-50 is if you need the faster aperture. The problem I always have with variable aperture zooms is that they are fastest on the wide end, where it is least useful, while on the long end, where you could really use the faster aperture, you are stuck at f5.6.

My 16-50 lives at f4, except when I am shooting landscape, when I set it to f8.

03-02-2015, 02:09 PM   #7
Emperor and Senpai
Loyal Site Supporter
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,920
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The big reason to choose the 16-50 is if you need the faster aperture. The problem I always have with variable aperture zooms is that they are fastest on the wide end, where it is least useful, while on the long end, where you could really use the faster aperture, you are stuck at f5.6.

My 16-50 lives at f4, except when I am shooting landscape, when I set it to f8.

I only see one big thing wrong with that picture. All that white stuff.
03-02-2015, 02:47 PM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Richland, Washington, USA
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by dudleyg Quote
Well I bought both and going to try both out , hopefuly sell one of them LOL ,
I like the way you operate

03-03-2015, 06:37 AM   #9
New Member




Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1
I like this
03-03-2015, 02:41 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,692
QuoteOriginally posted by VoiceOfReason Quote
I only see one big thing wrong with that picture. All that white stuff.
Tell me about. And we're supposed to get 6 to 8 inches of sleet/snow tomorrow.

And it was 50 degrees today.

The joys of weather in southern Indiana.
03-03-2015, 03:15 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 23
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Tell me about. And we're supposed to get 6 to 8 inches of sleet/snow tomorrow.

And it was 50 degrees today.

The joys of weather in southern Indiana.
LOL , I notice you live in southern Indiana , across from me on Eastern Parkway. Perhaps maybe it would be nice to hook up and do some photographic shooting , at least talk about it . what's you think ?
03-03-2015, 03:50 PM   #12
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,483
QuoteQuote:
The problem I always have with variable aperture zooms is that they are fastest on the wide end, where it is least useful...
You could also say fast at the wide end is useful indoors where you would normally have lower light. As always..."it depends".
03-04-2015, 09:42 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 23
Original Poster
Personally, I would think the expensive 16-50 would be used outdoors mostly and therfore would not really need the fast 2.8 aperture. I've been testing one that I bought on Ebay and find it quite slow to work with as the shutter does not fire right away a bit , tends to search for focal point, big and heavy and pictures do not seem to have fantastic sharpness for a "high end" lens and Manual operation works better. I just got the HD 16-85 lens today via BHphoto as it's on sale for 650 now, It seems to perform very fast shutter wise and pictures seem to come on sharp too . Seems like a very nice walk around lens compared to the 18-135 and the expensive 16-50. I will do some more testing and probably sell the High End 2.8 16-50mm Pentax lens. Let me know if anyone is interested.
03-04-2015, 12:18 PM   #14
Veteran Member
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,981
QuoteOriginally posted by dudleyg Quote
Personally, I would think the expensive 16-50 would be used outdoors mostly and therfore would not really need the fast 2.8 aperture. I've been testing one that I bought on Ebay and find it quite slow to work with as the shutter does not fire right away a bit , tends to search for focal point, big and heavy and pictures do not seem to have fantastic sharpness for a "high end" lens and Manual operation works better. I just got the HD 16-85 lens today via BHphoto as it's on sale for 650 now, It seems to perform very fast shutter wise and pictures seem to come on sharp too . Seems like a very nice walk around lens compared to the 18-135 and the expensive 16-50. I will do some more testing and probably sell the High End 2.8 16-50mm Pentax lens. Let me know if anyone is interested.
Without pictures it never happened.
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!
16-85mm, 16-85mm f3.5-5.6, aperture, compromise, da*16-50, da*50-135, difference between ..., f3.5-5.6, images, iq, issue, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, primes, quality, sdm, sdm issue, slr lens, smc, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Argument for the 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 rrstuff Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 47 11-25-2014 07:55 PM
HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR: A Closer Look Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 10 09-16-2014 08:22 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K-5, K-7, Pentax 16-50 F2.8, Sigma 18-250 F3.5-6.3 OS terihanright Sold Items 12 12-19-2013 05:16 AM
For Sale - Sold: smc PENTAX-DA* 1:2.8 16-50 lens, just installed new SDM motor, 5.5 months warranty. grahame Sold Items 7 11-24-2013 10:25 AM
Sigma 8-16 f4.5-5.6 or Sigma 10-20 f3.5 Cucho Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 05-14-2013 12:31 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:33 PM. | 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