what has been your most "disappointing" lens?

surfar · 11-29-2016, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

A 35-105. A clunky heavy abomination which is anything but a 'stack of primes'.

Yes, nowhere near primes but not as heavy as the A28-135.

---------- Post added 11-30-16 at 07:52 AM ----------

Originally posted by chti

The DA 18-135. My copy produced a particularly ugly form of vignetting, corners were soft and AF was a hit and miss roulette. Le Beau Monde | Facebook

Mines good on APSc but total disappointment on FF.Havent tried it on square crop though.

**gofour3** · 11-29-2016, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

Or you can just leave it in A and let the camera set the aperture

Problem is I don't use the "A" setting and mostly use aperture priority or fully manual on my film cameras.

The aperture ring gets used a lot, so a plastic assembly does not cut it.

Phil.

reh321 · 11-29-2016, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by gofour3

The A50/1.7.

Stellar optics wasted on a lens with a plastic aperture assembly, that is prone to getting stuck. If only Pentax had spent a few extra yen and used a metal assembly.................

Phil.

That is the lens which was kitted with my Super Program {see left side of my signature photo}. From the day I got it, the aperture ring tended to stick/shudder @ f/9.5; after determining that this was not a repairable issue, I decided to use it until it broke. For the next eleven years, the Super Program was my primary camera, and the A50 f/1.7 was on it unless I was using my Vivitar telephoto zoom lens {IIRC, the only way to use that camera in what we call "Av" mode today was to set the camera to "auto" shutter speed and use the aperture ring to set the aperture, and of course, the aperture ring was also used in the equivalent of what we call "M" mode today, so I used that ring a lot}. When I came back to Pentax last year after twenty years of using Canon, I ended up tossing the Vivitar lens, but I still use the A50 f/1.7 on occasion, and I've been known to call it the sharpest lens I own {my AF lenses are all modern zooms - I've never been able to justify the cost of a Limited}

**boriscleto** · 11-29-2016, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Probably the FA 28-200. I was hoping for a lens as useful on the K-1 as my 18-135 is on APS-c. So far it doesn't really measure up.

This isn't a surprise. I have the older Tamron version of this lens. The guy I bought it from said he couldn't ever get any good pictures out of it...But I wasn't really buying the Tamron. I was buying the FA 50/1.7 for the $100...

**clickclick** · 11-29-2016, 04:23 PM

I think it is my old M28 2.8. I was really excited to put this on my first DSLR, the K3II. Just wasn't what I was hoping for. Not truly bad, but not what I was expecting. Stopping down helps, but it has kinda become pointless because of what was almost my hands down worst lens experience, a DA* 16-50. If it weren't for the great customer service from B&H, it would have been the DA* 16-50. The first copy just wasn't right and was visibly softer on the left side of the frame. The box looked like hell, so I'll blame UPS for the optics getting knocked out of alignment. The second copy was funky, and the focus was sporadic in whether it would work or not. The third is a charm. It's much sharper wide open than my M28 2.8 - part of the sadness of that lens - just no reason to use it given how good the final copy of the DA* 16-50 is. And yes, the DA* 16-50 benefits from stopping down just a notch, and wide open performance improved with some fine focus tuning in the camera. Now just hoping it doesn't fail, or it will have to go on the list. I feel I must say that now I have a good copy of the DA* 16-50, it is very nice, but I fully understand the wide range of experiences and unhappy owners from what I went through.

**Scorpio71GR** · 11-29-2016, 06:46 PM

I have really been too disappointed in a lens. Most of my lenses are mid grade lenses purchased used so my expectations are not too terribly high. My copy of the DA 18-135 is not the best. Below 24mm it really is bad so I just do not use it there. However for me that is a highly used focal range so I just end up using my 16-50. I still use the 18-135 but I would use it more often if the wider end was better.

reh321 · 11-29-2016, 08:08 PM

Originally posted by gofour3

Problem is I don't use the "A" setting and mostly use aperture priority or fully manual on my film cameras.

The aperture ring gets used a lot, so a plastic assembly does not cut it.

As I already commented, I used this lens for eleven years on a film camera and it "is still ticking". When used on a modern camera, the aperture ring is immaterial, since you can make exactly the same decisions from the body that you can from the lens. My personal belief is that Pentax regulars are too disdainful of modern plastics; during my twenty years as a Canon user, I had plastic everythings, and they got the job done, and done, and done again for me.

Jonathan Mac · 11-29-2016, 11:12 PM

The A 50 f/1.7 has great optics but the aperture mechanism is cheap plastic. Mine doesn't move smoothly but it's usable and if you leave it on the A setting then there's no problem. However, the M 50/1.7 is just as good and has no such problems, so I'd go for that over the A an day. Other A series lenses are much better built - the 50mm macro or 28/2.8 for example.

So I'd agree the A 50/.7 is disappointing.

**BigMackCam** · 11-30-2016, 01:17 AM

Originally posted by reh321

As I already commented, I used this lens for eleven years on a film camera and it "is still ticking". When used on a modern camera, the aperture ring is immaterial, since you can make exactly the same decisions from the body that you can from the lens.

Originally posted by Jonathan Mac

The A 50 f/1.7 has great optics but the aperture mechanism is cheap plastic. Mine doesn't move smoothly but it's usable and if you leave it on the A setting then there's no problem.
...
So I'd agree the A 50/.7 is disappointing.

My own A50/1.7 and A50/2 work fine, whether used manually or in the A position, but I can see why long-term use could cause enough strain or wear on the plastic ring for it to become a problem. Either way, they're like the DA35/2.4 as far as I'm concerned - too much plastic in the construction, but optically excellent, so I'm prepared to see past the build quality. And for what I paid (the f/2 was essentially free, the f/1.7 cost about less than £30 / $40, I think they were bargains...

**ffking** · 11-30-2016, 02:13 AM

Not really the sort of thread you can enter more than one lens in, but I'm going to, anyway - the previous one I mentioned was disappointing purely because of my naivety at the time I bought it - well over 30 years ago - since then I've bought various kit lenses, knowing that they wouldn't be great, but they were all I could afford - so, I was happy to have them, not disappointed. However, I am slightly disappointed in the new 24-70 - not because it's not a very good lens, but because the 70-200, which I bought with it, is a great lens. Maybe I'm prejudiced by its heritage, but to me the 24-70 lacks character, and the particular character of a system is what attracts you to it and keeps you with it - so it has to go down as a disappointment, while being a lens that is very competent and sometimes excellent in fulfilling its function.

Sandy Hancock · 11-30-2016, 02:24 AM - **1 Like**

By a long margin, it would have to be the HD Pentax-DA 20-40 limited. It was so bad at the wide end I posted it back to the USA for a refund. It's still the only lens I have ever returned.

I've "made do" with other lenses in the focal range ever since and never missed it.

**UncleVanya** · 11-30-2016, 07:34 AM - **2 Likes**

This thread is quite interesting. Some of the lenses people cite as their most disappointing are some of my favorites. The only disappointing lens I can think of is a cheap Sigma UC 70-210 that I sold. The grip was sticky and the zoom mechanism broke soon after it arrived so I refunded the money. I had only asked peanuts for it and it was a disappointing way to start selling off unused gear.

Optically I don't think any of my lenses have disappointed me. I have had either a good crop of glass or a lack of critical viewing perhaps. Or maybe my expectations are different.

gzub · 12-06-2016, 02:48 PM

Well due the problems with sdm autofocus I would say it is DA 17-70 lens. I liked the color rendition this lens is capable to do, same with sharpness but autofocus is always making a problem with the silent drive mode inside which simply stucks

**UncleVanya** · 12-06-2016, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by gzub

Well due the problems with sdm autofocus I would say it is DA 17-70 lens. I liked the color rendition this lens is capable to do, same with sharpness but autofocus is always making a problem with the silent drive mode inside which simply stucks

That does suck. I really really like the DA 17-70 my dad bought and gave to my step brother's daughter. I think it is a superb lens but sadly underappreciated because of the SDM issues. Ours was a refurb and it just stuns me how good it is.

GeneV · 12-06-2016, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by gzub

Well due the problems with sdm autofocus I would say it is DA 17-70 lens. I liked the color rendition this lens is capable to do, same with sharpness but autofocus is always making a problem with the silent drive mode inside which simply stucks

Yes, it was my favorite lens for several years. The SDM only stopped working at the long end on mine after 7 years of heavy use, so I was hesitant to put it on the "disappointing" list.It is still an excellent lens at 17-55.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post your "Park Bench" "or "Picnic Table" images	tessfully	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	2201	2 Days Ago 03:25 PM
What are your "Hidden Gems" in your lens inventory?	Dewman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	67	03-15-2016 07:47 AM
NBC hacked: "Breaking News! Ground Zero has just been attacked"	jogiba	General Talk	2	09-10-2011 01:14 AM
What is your "Walking Around Lens?"	DebLewis	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	132	07-10-2011 12:53 PM
What is difference "APO" and "ED" glass in a lens?	kathyk	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-06-2008 08:59 AM

11-29-2016, 01:48 PM	#91
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,142	Originally posted by kh1234567890 A 35-105. A clunky heavy abomination which is anything but a 'stack of primes'. Yes, nowhere near primes but not as heavy as the A28-135. ---------- Post added 11-30-16 at 07:52 AM ---------- Originally posted by chti The DA 18-135. My copy produced a particularly ugly form of vignetting, corners were soft and AF was a hit and miss roulette. Le Beau Monde \| Facebook Mines good on APSc but total disappointment on FF.Havent tried it on square crop though.

11-29-2016, 02:06 PM	#92
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,092	Originally posted by boriscleto Or you can just leave it in A and let the camera set the aperture Problem is I don't use the "A" setting and mostly use aperture priority or fully manual on my film cameras. The aperture ring gets used a lot, so a plastic assembly does not cut it. Phil.

11-29-2016, 03:54 PM	#93
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,184	Originally posted by gofour3 The A50/1.7. Stellar optics wasted on a lens with a plastic aperture assembly, that is prone to getting stuck. If only Pentax had spent a few extra yen and used a metal assembly................. Phil. That is the lens which was kitted with my Super Program {see left side of my signature photo}. From the day I got it, the aperture ring tended to stick/shudder @ f/9.5; after determining that this was not a repairable issue, I decided to use it until it broke. For the next eleven years, the Super Program was my primary camera, and the A50 f/1.7 was on it unless I was using my Vivitar telephoto zoom lens {IIRC, the only way to use that camera in what we call "Av" mode today was to set the camera to "auto" shutter speed and use the aperture ring to set the aperture, and of course, the aperture ring was also used in the equivalent of what we call "M" mode today, so I used that ring a lot}. When I came back to Pentax last year after twenty years of using Canon, I ended up tossing the Vivitar lens, but I still use the A50 f/1.7 on occasion, and I've been known to call it the sharpest lens I own {my AF lenses are all modern zooms - I've never been able to justify the cost of a Limited}

11-29-2016, 04:02 PM	#94
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by normhead Probably the FA 28-200. I was hoping for a lens as useful on the K-1 as my 18-135 is on APS-c. So far it doesn't really measure up. This isn't a surprise. I have the older Tamron version of this lens. The guy I bought it from said he couldn't ever get any good pictures out of it...But I wasn't really buying the Tamron. I was buying the FA 50/1.7 for the $100...

11-29-2016, 04:23 PM	#95
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903	I think it is my old M28 2.8. I was really excited to put this on my first DSLR, the K3II. Just wasn't what I was hoping for. Not truly bad, but not what I was expecting. Stopping down helps, but it has kinda become pointless because of what was almost my hands down worst lens experience, a DA* 16-50. If it weren't for the great customer service from B&H, it would have been the DA* 16-50. The first copy just wasn't right and was visibly softer on the left side of the frame. The box looked like hell, so I'll blame UPS for the optics getting knocked out of alignment. The second copy was funky, and the focus was sporadic in whether it would work or not. The third is a charm. It's much sharper wide open than my M28 2.8 - part of the sadness of that lens - just no reason to use it given how good the final copy of the DA* 16-50 is. And yes, the DA* 16-50 benefits from stopping down just a notch, and wide open performance improved with some fine focus tuning in the camera. Now just hoping it doesn't fail, or it will have to go on the list. I feel I must say that now I have a good copy of the DA* 16-50, it is very nice, but I fully understand the wide range of experiences and unhappy owners from what I went through.

11-29-2016, 06:46 PM	#96
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,014	I have really been too disappointed in a lens. Most of my lenses are mid grade lenses purchased used so my expectations are not too terribly high. My copy of the DA 18-135 is not the best. Below 24mm it really is bad so I just do not use it there. However for me that is a highly used focal range so I just end up using my 16-50. I still use the 18-135 but I would use it more often if the wider end was better.

11-29-2016, 08:08 PM	#97
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,184	Originally posted by gofour3 Problem is I don't use the "A" setting and mostly use aperture priority or fully manual on my film cameras. The aperture ring gets used a lot, so a plastic assembly does not cut it. As I already commented, I used this lens for eleven years on a film camera and it "is still ticking". When used on a modern camera, the aperture ring is immaterial, since you can make exactly the same decisions from the body that you can from the lens. My personal belief is that Pentax regulars are too disdainful of modern plastics; during my twenty years as a Canon user, I had plastic everythings, and they got the job done, and done, and done again for me.

11-29-2016, 11:12 PM	#98
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,910	The A 50 f/1.7 has great optics but the aperture mechanism is cheap plastic. Mine doesn't move smoothly but it's usable and if you leave it on the A setting then there's no problem. However, the M 50/1.7 is just as good and has no such problems, so I'd go for that over the A an day. Other A series lenses are much better built - the 50mm macro or 28/2.8 for example. So I'd agree the A 50/.7 is disappointing.

11-30-2016, 01:17 AM	#99
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,686	Originally posted by reh321 As I already commented, I used this lens for eleven years on a film camera and it "is still ticking". When used on a modern camera, the aperture ring is immaterial, since you can make exactly the same decisions from the body that you can from the lens. Originally posted by Jonathan Mac The A 50 f/1.7 has great optics but the aperture mechanism is cheap plastic. Mine doesn't move smoothly but it's usable and if you leave it on the A setting then there's no problem. ... So I'd agree the A 50/.7 is disappointing. My own A50/1.7 and A50/2 work fine, whether used manually or in the A position, but I can see why long-term use could cause enough strain or wear on the plastic ring for it to become a problem. Either way, they're like the DA35/2.4 as far as I'm concerned - too much plastic in the construction, but optically excellent, so I'm prepared to see past the build quality. And for what I paid (the f/2 was essentially free, the f/1.7 cost about less than £30 / $40, I think they were bargains...

11-30-2016, 02:13 AM	#100
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,039	Not really the sort of thread you can enter more than one lens in, but I'm going to, anyway - the previous one I mentioned was disappointing purely because of my naivety at the time I bought it - well over 30 years ago - since then I've bought various kit lenses, knowing that they wouldn't be great, but they were all I could afford - so, I was happy to have them, not disappointed. However, I am slightly disappointed in the new 24-70 - not because it's not a very good lens, but because the 70-200, which I bought with it, is a great lens. Maybe I'm prejudiced by its heritage, but to me the 24-70 lacks character, and the particular character of a system is what attracts you to it and keeps you with it - so it has to go down as a disappointment, while being a lens that is very competent and sometimes excellent in fulfilling its function.

11-30-2016, 02:24 AM - 1 Like	#101
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,275	By a long margin, it would have to be the HD Pentax-DA 20-40 limited. It was so bad at the wide end I posted it back to the USA for a refund. It's still the only lens I have ever returned. I've "made do" with other lenses in the focal range ever since and never missed it.

11-30-2016, 07:34 AM - 2 Likes	#102
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,445	This thread is quite interesting. Some of the lenses people cite as their most disappointing are some of my favorites. The only disappointing lens I can think of is a cheap Sigma UC 70-210 that I sold. The grip was sticky and the zoom mechanism broke soon after it arrived so I refunded the money. I had only asked peanuts for it and it was a disappointing way to start selling off unused gear. Optically I don't think any of my lenses have disappointed me. I have had either a good crop of glass or a lack of critical viewing perhaps. Or maybe my expectations are different.

12-06-2016, 02:48 PM	#103
gzub Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Bydgoszcz Photos: Gallery Posts: 98	Well due the problems with sdm autofocus I would say it is DA 17-70 lens. I liked the color rendition this lens is capable to do, same with sharpness but autofocus is always making a problem with the silent drive mode inside which simply stucks

12-06-2016, 03:02 PM	#104
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,445	Originally posted by gzub Well due the problems with sdm autofocus I would say it is DA 17-70 lens. I liked the color rendition this lens is capable to do, same with sharpness but autofocus is always making a problem with the silent drive mode inside which simply stucks That does suck. I really really like the DA 17-70 my dad bought and gave to my step brother's daughter. I think it is a superb lens but sadly underappreciated because of the SDM issues. Ours was a refurb and it just stuns me how good it is.

12-06-2016, 03:07 PM	#105
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by gzub Well due the problems with sdm autofocus I would say it is DA 17-70 lens. I liked the color rendition this lens is capable to do, same with sharpness but autofocus is always making a problem with the silent drive mode inside which simply stucks Yes, it was my favorite lens for several years. The SDM only stopped working at the long end on mine after 7 years of heavy use, so I was hesitant to put it on the "disappointing" list.It is still an excellent lens at 17-55.