Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Is this DA*16-50 a keeper
Yes 1285.71%
Now 214.29%
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-22-2008, 12:50 PM   #1
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, United States
Posts: 3
Second DA*16-50, need help to decide if this one is a keeper

Hi Everyone,

This is my first message on the group. I'm only recently started taking my photography seriously and I thought that the best investment would be a couple of good lenses. (I purchased my k10d in Dec 2006).

I decided to start with the DA*16-50 & the DA*50-135 (it's always raining here in the Pacific Northwest, which really tilted the scales).

Cutting to the chase -- here are some test shots that I took of a newspaper about 70 cm (27 inches) away from the front of the lens.

http://www.flickr.com/gp/99821030@N00/5bXs0v

My question is -- is this lens a keeper or not?

All the images are unsharpened, were shot RAW and converted using ACR.

Please say it as it is folks, I still have about 10 days to return the lens to B&H and I already have returned a copy of a Warehouse deals lens, which literally ghosted every shot I took with it.

Thanks in advance.

06-22-2008, 01:49 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
I'll tell you the same thing I tell everyone that comes here and ask the very same question.

First ask yourself two questions:

1) Is this lens giving me the quality I expected?
2) Was it worth the money I put into it?

If you have to answer no to both of them, return it.

Stop wasting time shooting newspapers, walls, dots etc. There are much more intresting motifs out there. Go out on a picnic or trip for a day and fill a memory card with pictures, using only that lens. If you get back home and see that a great number of pictures are bad and you can honestly say, "it's because of the lens", not lighting, you, randomness, ugly motifs or bad weather or any other excuse. Then get back into this thread and post some of them bad pictures and let people judge from them.

There is many variables to what can screw up a wall, paper or any other test subject, what makes more sense and what really counts is how the lens perform in the wild. Shooting motifs, you will be shooting at for real.

I hope you enjoy your shooting trip and I am looking forward to see the results.
06-22-2008, 10:14 PM   #3
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, United States
Posts: 3
Original Poster
I agree with you.

But there have been numerous reports of a focusing issues with this particular lens hence my concern.

I like this particular copy. My last copy was bad, with actual ghosting of the image and I knew I would not keep that one.

This copy looks good to me and the price is also acceptable to me. I just wanted to be sure that I didn't get a bad one -- edge sharpness is of questionable value, but focusing accuracy not so much. I'm not looking for the best 1% of the production run, just an average good sample.

Since many folks on this forum have experience with what to expect I just wanted a second opinion before I accept a $700 purchase as final. I could not go out and take pictures this weekend as I had hoped to because of an out of the blue bad back.

I'm traveling to Alaska this Friday and wanted to be sure that I don't have a lemon.
06-22-2008, 11:33 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nowhere, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 654
QuoteOriginally posted by vishal Quote
I agree with you.

But there have been numerous reports of a focusing issues with this particular lens hence my concern.

I like this particular copy. My last copy was bad, with actual ghosting of the image and I knew I would not keep that one.

This copy looks good to me and the price is also acceptable to me. I just wanted to be sure that I didn't get a bad one -- edge sharpness is of questionable value, but focusing accuracy not so much. I'm not looking for the best 1% of the production run, just an average good sample.

Since many folks on this forum have experience with what to expect I just wanted a second opinion before I accept a $700 purchase as final. I could not go out and take pictures this weekend as I had hoped to because of an out of the blue bad back.

I'm traveling to Alaska this Friday and wanted to be sure that I don't have a lemon.
Well, I can understand your concern, because of all the reports of bad copies. But really, there is no way for me atleast, others may disagree, to see from shots of walls and newspapers etc if a copy of a lens is good or bad. What really matters is if you think it is good or bad, every lens will be a bit different. Thats just a fact that we have to live with.

By looking at the pictures, it looks like it might be a bit soft in the corners and have a bit of distortion on 16mm. But I don't know if thats how the lens is or not. It seem very sharp in the middle though. So sharp infact that I wouldnt use it as portrait lens, but rather for landscape . Once again thats a subjective opinion, I don't like too sharp portraits, shows how disgusting our skin is .

06-23-2008, 03:37 PM   #5
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, United States
Posts: 3
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Zewrak Quote
Every lens will be a bit different. Thats just a fact that we have to live with.
Yes, I know, but I think it's also fair to want a lens that is with-in tolerances, not a lens that should have been rejected by Pentax QC.

QuoteOriginally posted by Zewrak Quote
By looking at the pictures, it looks like it might be a bit soft in the corners and have a bit of distortion on 16mm. But I don't know if thats how the lens is or not. It seem very sharp in the middle though. So sharp infact that I wouldnt use it as portrait lens, but rather for landscape .
I want to be able to use it as a landscape lens at the wide end, though I doubt I'll be using 16mm + f/2.8 much.

Those who voted No could you please elaborate on what specifically did you think is wrong with the test shots just so that we can be sure it's the lens and not the photographer. From reading the forum the impression I got was if the lens is very sharp in the center at f/4, still sharp at f/2.8 and focuses correctly it's a keeper.

Disappointingly, my DA*50-135 back focuses 100% of the time by about 20 cm even 3 m away at 50mm Though, B&H is shipping me a 2nd copy for free in time for my Alaska trip. (They just rock.)

I'm going to try to get out and take some real pictures today.
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!
da*16-50, k-mount, keeper, lens, pentax lens, shot, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kx vs K7 keeper rate kytra Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 08-31-2010 12:03 AM
Is this FA 31mm a keeper? Edmund Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 25 08-06-2010 09:24 AM
People Canon Keeper Cactisboy Post Your Photos! 1 08-06-2010 07:42 AM
What's your keeper ratio? jct us101 Pentax DSLR Discussion 48 03-17-2010 01:56 PM
Keeper vs PK mel Post Your Photos! 5 05-10-2009 07:31 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:05 PM. | 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