[jna]

Need an advice regarding Pentax lens 16-50. Have used it since it was released on K10D as a main lens for all kinds of shooting. Receantly droped it during a lenschange so now need a replacement.
So, my question is if anybody have used that lens on latest generations of Pentax APS-C cameras like K-70 or KP and how does these lenses perform optically with new high resolution sensors? Is 16-50 a good match for them or better is to wait a while (for something unknown yet to come....)?
I'm interested in16-50 range WR/AW lens with f2.8.
BR

[Rondec]

Your options with weather sealing in (roughly) that range are DA *16-50, DA 18-135, and DA 16-85. Only one of those (the 16-50) is f2.8. That said, I wouldn't hesitate to looks at the 16-85 based on the images I have seen from it.

[clickclick]

Use a 16-50 with a K3II all the time, and it produces great images. There does seem to be variations in copies though. I did several swaps with B&H to get a "good" one.

[AstroDave]

If you don't need the longer end, check out the Sigma and Tamron equivalents to the Pentax 16-50, too. Better price, and in my opinion for the Sigma 17-50, at least as good optical performance. Check the lens review data bases.

Until I got the Pentax 18-135, my Sigma 17-50 was my preferred "walk around" lens for my K5 and K3. It was on there almost all the time, and always performed well. It basically replaced my Pentax 16-50, based on optical performance and focus behavior.

[jna]

I've allready red all available info about 16-50 on this forum and many other places around including Pentax 16-50 /Sigma Tamron 17-50 comparition on this forum.
I know that 16-50 is not an easy lens to shoot with. I do not care about size, weight or even SDM.
My question is - is this lens designed allready 10 years ago still optically up to match high resolution sensors?

[BigMackCam]

My question is - is this lens designed allready 10 years ago still optically up to match high resolution sensors?

Yes, it is absolutely up to the job with current high-res APS-C sensors, and stands comparison with other lenses in the same class. That said, it's not necessarily the best constant aperture lens for Pentax in that focal length range. Depending on your functional and optical priorities, the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are - as you already know - worth considering too (I use the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and I'm very impressed with it). That said, neither of those is weather-resistant, so if that's important to you, the DA*16-50 is your only choice if you want a fast, constant aperture. It's a nice lens, though, and I very much doubt you'd be disappointed with it.

[patarok]

Despite what others might say, i would rate the HD Pentax-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 DC WR RE the best bang for the buck thing.
(no fast aperture -but is that really important? That is for you to decide...according to what you need it for.)

AF speed is really quick unlike on other very expensive lenses.
It is as compact as can get.
Sharpness is also excellent, but maybe i am just lucky and have an extraordinary good copy of this lens.

And pls, use the original lens-hood for achieving the best results.

[BigMackCam]

Despite what others might say, i would rate the HD Pentax-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 DC WR RE the best bang for the buck thing.
...but maybe i am just lucky and have an extraordinary good copy of this lens.

I think - based on the majority of reports on this lens - that you've been lucky and have an extraordinarily good copy In fairness, it is - after all - a consumer-grade kit lens, with build quality very much at that level. Nothing wrong with that, of course (I own and like several consumer-grade lenses myself), but - with respect - it's the last lens I'd recommend for a K-70 and KP covering this focal length range, except perhaps as a versatile economy option. It definitely has its uses, for sure, and I'd happily own one if I needed it. IQ aside, though, it can't compete in the range of use-cases where the DA*16-50 works, and given that the OP already has experience of such a fast lens, I'd personally be wary of recommending anything with variable aperture - especially where stopping down is necessary. There's also a pretty noticeable difference between 16mm and 18mm if the wide end is important...

[Rondec]

I've been pretty happy with the DA *16-50.

[mikesbike]

It all depends on how much you really need the f/2.8 aperture. What do you mostly shoot? For a portrait, the f/2.8 might be best for certain background circumstances, for maximum blurring of the background with a zoom lens. Also for low-light use, where you don't have to kick up ISO as much. And maybe indoor fast-action shots where you cannot use flash and need a higher shutter speed. Optically, the DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 is still a premium pro-style zoom lens, with very fine optical performance.

That said, the new DA 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 is a good alternative choice. Between 16-50mm its aperture can keep to f/3.5-4.5, or about one stop off the f/2.8 lens. When used on an advanced newer DSLR, like the KP, having exceptional high-ISO performance, this can compensate for the one stop difference, since as good or better results can be achieved at twice the ISO compared with other camera models. A good copy of this lens has been shown to perform as good as or even slightly better in some aspects, than the DA* 16-50mm lens. It has the newer DC silent AF system.

[patarok]

I think - based on the majority of reports on this lens - that you've been lucky and have an extraordinarily good copy In fairness, it is - after all - a consumer-grade kit lens, with build quality very much at that level. Nothing wrong with that, of course (I own and like several consumer-grade lenses myself), but - with respect - it's the last lens I'd recommend for a K-70 and KP covering this focal length range, except perhaps as a versatile economy option. It definitely has its uses, for sure, and I'd happily own one if I needed it. IQ aside, though, it can't compete in the range of use-cases where the DA*16-50 works, and given that the OP already has experience of such a fast lens, I'd personally be wary of recommending anything with variable aperture - especially where stopping down is necessary. There's also a pretty noticeable difference between 16mm and 18mm if the wide end is important...

totally agree... IQ of that lens for sure could not compete with the DA* and it aint fast either.
nonetheless its a lens that makes you smile and the AF speed is good for catching funny or remarkable moment (and that in FOCUS.)
(never experienced hunting on that "little bugger")

And for sure there is no need to argue, if you know your gear, you maybe take the same shot with a slower focusing lens... (but AFAIK both lenses are pretty much the same when focusing... So all this is "just sayin"! Sry, its been quite a while since I handled a 16-50 2.8 but my guts say the 18-50 is focusing a bit faster, correct me if I am wrong.)

And you are also right, that 2mm difference make a huge difference at the wide end.

just sayin, that he may be happy with that lens as a cheap replacement until we see a Double-PLM... (Dont know if hes doing production work or just fun shooting/hobby)
(i am sure RICOH will do something about AF-drive soon... whatever that tech will be called...) version of the DA* 16-50 2.8 ... just my 2 cents.

pic below was shot with the aformentioned lens (18-50 DC WR) (mounted on an older K-3 body)
at 30mm with the widest aperture possible at that length(F:4,5) for the 15th of a second(1/15s) - ISO 3200
(as mentioned in my review of the lens ... with harsh light coming from the left and WITHOUT a lenshood.)