[Dewman]

About two months ago, I acquired two lenses via a Craig's List ad in Ohio. One was the aforementioned Pentax DA 16-45mm and the other was a Tamron 18-250mm. Both were in pristine, like-new condition and in their original boxes with factory paperwork. Clean.... VERY clean, both of them!
I paid $200 for then, combined, plus $25 shipping.


I haven't had a chance to put the Tamron through it's paces yet, but I've shot maybe 50-70 shots with the 16-45mm and I'm really impressed with it. Being one of those who's OC about sharpness, it leaves nothing to be desired in that department. It seems to favor the warm colors a little more, but overall, I'd have to give it a solid 8.5 - 9...... in MHO. I was surprised at how much difference the two millimeters on the short end made. I was a little leery about buying the lens at first, but the price for both seemed quite reasonable, so I took the chance. I'm very pleased with the decision.


As far as the 18-250mm Tamron, if it's anywhere near as good as my old 28-200mm Tammy, I'm sure I'll be happy with it. I'm pretty flush with super-zooms, but.... like I said, the price for both lenses was one of those deals I couldn't pass up. Even if the Tamron doesn't work out, the Pentax 16-45mm was worth the price I paid for both.


So.... any of you have the 16-45mm, and if so, what's YOUR opinion of it?

[pathdoc]

Speak to Tsuken; he's done a couple of single-in challenges with this lens, and can give you a user's appraisal.

You really should try single-in - it's the ideal activity for the LBA sufferer, or perhaps not, as it feeds their desire for new lenses to try. But if you save buying a new lens until after you've run with all the others for a month each, it can keep things in check a little.

[kh1234567890]

So.... any of you have the 16-45mm, and if so, what's YOUR opinion of it?

The DA16-45 is an excellent lens. At 16mm and wide open it is sharp except in the very corners, much better than the DA15 Ltd. What possibly lets it down is the build quality and the mechanical design.

Some shots taken with mine are here.

[Dewman]

The DA16-45 is an excellent lens. At 16mm and wide open it is sharp except in the very corners, much better than the DA15 Ltd. What possibly lets it down is the build quality and the mechanical design.

Some shots taken with mine are here.

Yours also seems to be quite sharp. Very nice images in your portfolio. So far, I haven't noticed any build quality issues, although I've read about the barrel wobble problem that sometimes develops. Mine was virtually brand new, so maybe that's why.

[Billk]

I got rid of mine and then regretted it. The build quality is ordinary but it is versatile and gives pretty good pictures for a cheaper lens.

[Snappertim]

I have the 16-45 purchased instead of the 17-50 because of the unreliable SDM, the 16-45 is excellent, contrast and sharpness both very very good, and (their is another thread today from a guy talking about problems using the Pentax HD 1.4 converter on the 18-55) I use a 1.5 Kenko SHQ converter on my 16-45 and fitted to a MZ-S (Pentaxs last full frame) the results are Fantastic and I get a 24-67.5.

[Arjay Bee]

See this old thread for my and many other people's thoughts in 2009. I am still using my copy for the same sort of work. It is a large lens so now I carry a DA21 as a every day carry lens. Pairs very nicely with the Sigma 8-16.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/77028-da-16...-examples.html

There are many other comparison threads if you put 16-45 in the forum search facility and nearly all of them positive regarding image quality. Negatives mention barrel looseness, CA in the corners on wider angle end and the fact that it gets longer as it goes wider,

All I can add to my 2009 post is that the money made off the images with this lens supported all the subsequent gear purchases and has been my main working lens over the years.

[MikeW]

I like it a lot. It has some minor issues, but its versatility keeps it on my camera most of the time. I do wish it were weather sealed, however. (Originally posted in the DA Zoom club.)

[fiveo]

I have had mine for several years and I love it. At one time it was very well regarded here on the forum. I use it more than any other lens especially when traveling.

[robert]

This lens stays on my camera probably 90% of the time.

[pacerr]

I was surprised at how much difference the two millimeters on the short end made.

My only concern with the DA 16-45 has been the occasional inconvenience of a fully extended lens barrel when using it at the wide end -- which is the reason I'd be using it rather than a faster, mid-range zoom.

And a note regarding those two millimeters: 2mm at 200mm is only a one percent difference - hardly noticeable - but a 2mm difference at 16 mm is about 12 percent. I find it useful to consider FL differences as a percentage rather than a 'label'. Greatly simplifies the decisions over which lenses to carry; especially at the long end.

[MJSfoto1956]

I like all my travel lenses to be 67mm filter or smaller.
As such, I'd be in favor of Pentax remaking this f/4 lens with better build, WR, and HD coatings.
Note: I don't believe reintroducing it would affect sales of the 16-50mm f/2.8 as this is a different lens altogether.

Michael