Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-19-2008, 10:18 PM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
DA*16-50 vs DA* 50-135

I have my heart set on the 16-50 until I read some of the reviews here that it's not all that it's crack up to be. Now I like the 50-135 however, I wanted to get the 16-50 now. The 50-135 will have to wait as it is so expensive.

I was hoping to get the 16-50 to replace the kit lens 18-55 as I like this focal length. I already have the 77 ltd so the 50-135 really can wait.

So tell me, is the 16-50 worth getting. I want my lens sharpity sharp like my 77.

Oh, I am also considering the 100 macro.

LK

06-19-2008, 10:19 PM   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,535
QuoteOriginally posted by LittleSwans Quote
I have my heart set on the 16-50 until I read some of the reviews here that it's not all that it's crack up to be. Now I like the 50-135 however, I wanted to get the 16-50 now. The 50-135 will have to wait as it is so expensive.

I was hoping to get the 16-50 to replace the kit lens 18-55 as I like this focal length. I already have the 77 ltd so the 50-135 really can wait.

So tell me, is the 16-50 worth getting. I want my lens sharpity sharp like my 77.

LK
I like my 16-50 DA* very much indeed. There are a few shots on the Flickr site in my signature.
06-19-2008, 10:24 PM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
Original Poster
You have the 12-24 which I have my eye on as well! Ok, of the 3 that you have, 12-24, 16-50 and 50-135, which is the sharpest and which is your fave. (yes, I know it all depends on what you shoot)?
06-19-2008, 10:42 PM   #4
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
DA* 50-135 is in completely different league to DA* 16-50.

Buying a DA* 16-50 is like playing Russian Roulette, it is truly the DOG STAR, siriusly.

06-20-2008, 12:46 AM   #5
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
It also depends on what camera you are using. As far as I know, the DA*1650 lens has more problem w/ K 10D than w/ K20D or K200D. If you are using a K20D or K200D camera, most likely you'd be happy w/ the lens
06-20-2008, 01:41 AM   #6
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
Original Poster
I am still using the K10D. I'm waiting for the next model from K20D before I upgrade.
06-20-2008, 03:59 AM   #7
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
LittleSwans,

I see you are in Australia, if you are considering buying 16-50 from US by mail order - Don't even think about it.

I have sent off for my Imternational Warranty from Pentax US, have never heard back.
06-20-2008, 04:25 AM   #8
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
Original Poster
selar, are you saying that your copy was bad?

06-20-2008, 05:33 AM   #9
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by LittleSwans Quote
selar, are you saying that your copy was bad?
Certainly was and still is 7 months after buying. Still waiting for a good copy, ridiculous state of affairs from Pentax for a lens from its premier range.
06-20-2008, 05:36 AM   #10
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
Original Poster
Oh dear.... back to the drawing board....
06-20-2008, 01:41 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 750
I was worried about getting the 16-50 before I got it. As a result, I went to a store where I could try it out before I bought it.

Overall, I'm very happy with it. I traded in my FA*24mm f/2.0 to help fun the 16-50 and based on some older shots, I think the 16-50 out-performed the 24mm overall (my impression). I also find the colour of the 16-50 more realistic or natural than the DA 14mm f/2.8. It was a worth-while investment for me. Add to that, the weather-sealing and it's become one of the more used lenses in my collection.

I'd recommend doing the same thing as I did....go to a store and try it out before you buy it. You'll likely pay more for it that way, but I consider the extra money I spent on mine doing that as a cheap premium to ensure I got a good sample.

For what it's worth, I'm still using a k10d.

I've been seriously considering the 50-135mm to replace my tamron 70-300. However, because I have that range covered nicely already, I haven't been in such a rush to do that. Perhaps when my tax refund comes in..........
06-20-2008, 01:59 PM   #12
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
Sad to hear selar,
I remember you talking about getting the 16-50 some time ago.
So you can't even be assured that a vendor will test their copies before sending them out overseas...
06-20-2008, 04:41 PM   #13
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Andrew Faires Quote
I'd recommend doing the same thing as I did....go to a store and try it out before you buy it. You'll likely pay more for it that way, but I consider the extra money I spent on mine doing that as a cheap premium to ensure I got a good sample.
The price difference between buying from a shop here in Aust. vs buying from B&H is approximately AUD 360.00!

Besides, I always find that trying it out in the shop doesn't help anyway. I need to download to the PC and view it big.
06-20-2008, 05:19 PM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,713
Personally I think that it's a foolish move to get that one lens through mailorder, unless the store is willing to test it ahead of time

However if it doesn't have to say Pentax on it and you can live without a motordrive. I was reading this thread about the Tamron 17 - 50 f2.8 and I was very impressed
here's a link to the Tamron page
06-21-2008, 03:52 AM   #15
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 98
Original Poster
I might have to get the Tamron I think since it is such a gamble with the 16-50. I prefer Pentax. I have the Tamron 28-75 as I needed a zoom lens for my holidays and didn't want to carry my primes with me. That one is a bit of a hit and miss for me. I know that lots of members here rave about the Tamron 28-75 but I find that it is not as sharp as my 77ltd. So I am not too keen to get another Tamron if I can help it hence the 16-50. Can't say how disappointed I am that so many people have problems with it! My plan was to get this 16-50 and sell my Tamron 28-75.
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!
k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chinon 135 & Chinar 135 , Good Bad or Ugly seacapt Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 02-26-2010 09:03 PM
shoot out DA*50-135 v.s. A50 A*85 A100 A*135 Douglas_of_Sweden Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 42 12-11-2008 10:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:11 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