[fwcetus]

I just picked up a new HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR lens, [I'm not used to buying new lenses, but I already had a proper (used) S90-140 lens pouch to hide it in, so that will help a bit with the shock.] However, I do have some questions, mostly I guess for current users of the lens:

1. How smooth should the zoom action be when using the zoom ring? On this copy of the lens, it seem fairly smooth (and just a wee bit stiff, though not excessively), from one end of the zoom range to the other,EXCEPT at maybe about 75mm or so. Whether starting at 85mm and zooming out, or starting at 16mm and zooming in, the action seems fairly "normal" except when reaching the neighborhood of 75mm or so, where the zoom action requires more force to keep the zoom action going. The PF review of the lens does say:

"The zoom ring exhibits more friction than we usually see in zoom lenses. This prevents zoom creep, but we'd speculate that with use the friction will become less. The friction lessens in the long end when one zooms past approximately 75mm, probably caused by a change in the pattern of movement of the lens elements at the long end."

However, to my fingers, the friction lessens both above and below 75mm or so, and the friction seems "normal" on both sides of that. Does anyone have any advice for me on this possible issue? Has anyone noticed a change in "zoom feel" over time?

EDIT: After having "exercised" the zoom ring while taking it out for a walk today on a K-3, taking long-, medium-,and short-FL shots of a number of subjects (which optically were all acceptable or better, considering the lack of skill of the "photographer"), I would say that the "zoom feel" has changed somewhat, becoming more like (but not identical to) how the PF lens review described (as quoted above). That is to say that, when zooming from 16mm to 85mm, the zooming is pretty smooth until maybe 75mm, where it becomes a bit balky for the rest of the way out to 85mm, but, when zooming in from 85mm to 16mm, the zooming is more "normal".

2. Gee, the hood seems rather sloppy or wobbly, whether mounted forward or reversed. the PF review did say:

"In one out of the two copies of this lens that we tested, there was some play in the bayonet and the hood rattled slightly when we moved the lens around. This is not a problem for the image quality of course, but it did take a bit away from the otherwise solid impression of the build quality of this lens."

Obviously, this is NOT a "serious" problem, but is surely seems a bit disconcerting to me to actually ~hear~ the lens hood ~rattle~ when carrying the lens attached to a K-3 hanging by a neck strap. Does anyone else notice this or have any comments about this?

EDIT: I can certainly live with this, but my point is still that a hood that had a more secure feel would make the lens feel more "finished" -- some reviews have griped a bit about the lack of a case or pouch for what is certainly not a mere kit lens, but I would fuss (well, I guess I ~am~ fussing) a bit instead about a somewhat floppy hood.

3. Following advice given in several threads, I do plan on trying to test for decentering. However, while I would assume that the aperture should be wide open (right?), I am not sure at what focal lengths would be best to check. Does anyone have some solid advice here?

SO, I do appreciate any comments that might help this 16-85 newbie. Thanks for listening.

---

Last edited by fwcetus; 10-28-2017 at 01:12 PM.

[pentageek]

1. In my copy zoom becomes more stiff when going from 16mm to 50-75, then becomes less stiff before reaching 85mm. It never bothered me.
2. I have noticed it few minutes ago - after reading your post There is some play in the hood (especially in reversed position), but nothing significant. Peak Design anchors make more noise than the hood.
3. I have not tested my copy for decentering.

16-85 is fine lens, I bought it about a year ago to replace 18-135, and never looked back.

[fwcetus]

1. In my copy zoom becomes more stiff when going from 16mm to 50-75, then becomes less stiff before reaching 85mm.

That seems much like the PF review described (but not exactly what I am finding).

It never bothered me.

Well, as an old manual-focuser from Ye Olde Analogue Days of Yore, I still really desire all lenses to focus - and zooms to zoom - nice and smoothly and evenly (even though I have gotten to be less picky about this the last decade or so). I could live with this as "just another annoyance", I guess, except that if no one else's 16-85 is doing what mine is doing, it might be a sign of eventual more serious problems. OTOH, maybe it will "even out" with use over the next few days (?)...

2. I have noticed it few minutes ago - after reading your post There is some play in the hood (especially in reversed position), but nothing significant. Peak Design anchors make more noise than the hood.

It's "just another annoyance", I suppose, but it is indeed annoying to find it, not in an old worn lens, but in a new lens. And it will likely not improve with age.

3. I have not tested my copy for decentering.

It is only from reading about this as being found in a few new copies of this lens that I would like to know if mine is satisfactory within the 30-day return period.

16-85 is fine lens, I bought it about a year ago to replace 18-135, and never looked back.

I have heard lots of good comments on the lens, and I've checked out many sample images (such as in the "show us what it can do" thread) that have been quite impressive overall.

Thanks very much for your comments.

[jgriep]

I do have with my copy a definite tightening at the 75-80 mm area sometimes more than others. A more serious note my copy will not focus to infinity or at least I don't know how to. Stars appear as discs and moon pics are not as crisp as they should be. Camera is K-70. Live view is useless. Any advice here is welcome.

[Adam]

I do have with my copy a definite tightening at the 75-80 mm area sometimes more than others. A more serious note my copy will not focus to infinity or at least I don't know how to. Stars appear as discs and moon pics are not as crisp as they should be. Camera is K-70. Live view is useless. Any advice here is welcome.

For stars you'll always want to focus manually. If the moon is out, you can cheat using that plus live view magnification. Otherwise, trial and error is the name of the game if you can't discern details through the viewfinder. Also, pick a "sharp enough" aperture when shooting, i.e. F8.

[gm4life]

I just picked up a new HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR lens, [I'm not used to buying new lenses, but I already had a proper (used) S90-140 lens pouch to hide it in, so that will help a bit with the shock.] However, I do have some questions, mostly I guess for current users of the lens:

1. How smooth should the zoom action be when using the zoom ring? On this copy of the lens, it seem fairly smooth (and just a wee bit stiff, though not excessively), from one end of the zoom range to the other,EXCEPT at maybe about 75mm or so. Whether starting at 85mm and zooming out, or starting at 16mm and zooming in, the action seems fairly "normal" except when reaching the neighborhood of 75mm or so, where the zoom action requires more force to keep the zoom action going. The PF review of the lens does say:

"The zoom ring exhibits more friction than we usually see in zoom lenses. This prevents zoom creep, but we'd speculate that with use the friction will become less. The friction lessens in the long end when one zooms past approximately 75mm, probably caused by a change in the pattern of movement of the lens elements at the long end."

However, to my fingers, the friction lessens both above and below 75mm or so, and the friction seems "normal" on both sides of that. Does anyone have any advice for me on this possible issue? Has anyone noticed a change in "zoom feel" over time?

2. Gee, the hood seems rather sloppy or wobbly, whether mounted forward or reversed. the PF review did say:

In one out of the two copies of this lens that we tested, there was some play in the bayonet and the hood rattled slightly when we moved the lens around. This is not a problem for the image quality of course, but it did take a bit away from the otherwise solid impression of the build quality of this lens."

Obviously, this is NOT a "serious" problem, but is surely seems a bit disconcerting to me to actually ~hear~ the lens hood ~rattle~ when carrying the lens attached to a K-3 hanging by a neck strap. Does anyone else notice this or have any comments about this?

Well congrats on the great lens! The 16-85 sits on my K3II nearly all the time, as the walk around lens. It is remarkable flexible and really gives DA * optics in my humble opinion. If I was down to ONE piece of glass to do it all this is the lens to do it.

Regarding item 1, yes this is normal from what I can tell with mine since day 1 with it. I figured even though the zoom ring got a little stiffer around 50, 60, 70 it was tack sharp and had good optics no need to get rid of it over that - many lenses from my experience behave like this to some degree. It does get a little easier out closer to 85 as a previous poster mentioned. Then when you zoom back out to wide angle it happens in the reverse - for lack of a better word.

For item 2 the hood does have a little "play" in it I guess you could say. But really not an excessive amount, more than my DA 300 SMC * but that is a lens costing twice as must ditto for my D FA 70-200 HD * but again that lens is three times as much. This again is common on many lenses and is MUCH worse on the more "economy" or entry levels ones. Again nothing to be worried about.

Go out and enjoy taking photos with it!

[jddwoods]

I bought mine used a few months ago to replace my very unreliable DA 17-70. On mine the zoom is very smooth but I do notice that same friction difference at about 70 to 75 mm. It seems to be common with this lens. Also common is the hood being loose and wobbly. Mine has this same characteristic. Fortunately it is only the hood. The inner barrel on mine is solid with no wobble, even fully zoomed. Despite these observations, and they are observations, not complaints, this has become one of my favorite and most used lenses. Its sharp, focuses reliably and has a versatile zoom range. Enjoy yours, it is a fine lens.

[Scorpio71GR]

I bought mine used here on the forums. I do encounter a bit of resistance around 75mm but only when turning the zoom ring very slowly. My hood seems to fit normal and I do not hear any rattle. I strongly recommend checking for decentering as soon as possible. I have seen some copies with really bad decentering. When you get a good copy it really is a fine lens to use. Mine replaced my DA*16-50 and my DA 18-135. It rarely leaves the K3. I have found the best way to check for decentering is too short for a high vantage point. Then rotate the camera 90 degrees. If one side of the image is soft and follows with the rotation then your lens is decentered. Stopping down will not help a decentered lens.

[fwcetus]

I do have with my copy a definite tightening at the 75-80 mm area sometimes more than others. A more serious note my copy will not focus to infinity or at least I don't know how to. Stars appear as discs and moon pics are not as crisp as they should be. Camera is K-70. Live view is useless. Any advice here is welcome.

Thanks for your report on the "zoom feel". I guess I will get used to it on mine (and it has changed a bit with "exercise").

As for the infinity focus, I can't say my lens has that problem -- sorry.

[fwcetus]

Regarding item 1, yes this is normal from what I can tell with mine since day 1 with it. I figured even though the zoom ring got a little stiffer around 50, 60, 70 it was tack sharp and had good optics no need to get rid of it over that - many lenses from my experience behave like this to some degree. It does get a little easier out closer to 85 as a previous poster mentioned. Then when you zoom back out to wide angle it happens in the reverse - for lack of a better word.

For item 2 the hood does have a little "play" in it I guess you could say. But really not an excessive amount, more than my DA 300 SMC * but that is a lens costing twice as must ditto for my D FA 70-200 HD * but again that lens is three times as much. This again is common on many lenses and is MUCH worse on the more "economy" or entry levels ones. Again nothing to be worried about.

Go out and enjoy taking photos with it!

Thanks for your comments.

The "zoom feel" on mine has changed a bit after some use, becoming less objectionable now. So, it is better, and it also helps to know that it might be "normal" or "par for the course". And, my lens does seem to be optically quite good, so it's likely to be a "keeper".

As for the hood, yes, I'm already used to it (helped out by the fact that the 16-85 is the only lens I've used lately) -- perhaps I was just too picky.

[fwcetus]

On mine the zoom is very smooth but I do notice that same friction difference at about 70 to 75 mm. It seems to be common with this lens. Also common is the hood being loose and wobbly. Mine has this same characteristic. Fortunately it is only the hood. The inner barrel on mine is solid with no wobble, even fully zoomed. Despite these observations, and they are observations, not complaints, this has become one of my favorite and most used lenses. Its sharp, focuses reliably and has a versatile zoom range. Enjoy yours, it is a fine lens.

Thanks for the confirming report.

Yes, I agree with you regarding the overall build quality - "The inner barrel on mine is solid with no wobble, even fully zoomed" - same here - the lens construction does seem solid.

I do like the zoom range a lot -- I think, for a walk-around lens, that the extra 2mm at he wide end is actually a fair trade for the loss of 86mm to 135mm, especially since it seems as if the 85m images can stand up to a fair amount of cropping on the K-3 (at least, that's my opinion so far).

[fwcetus]

I bought mine used here on the forums. I do encounter a bit of resistance around 75mm but only when turning the zoom ring very slowly. My hood seems to fit normal and I do not hear any rattle. I strongly recommend checking for decentering as soon as possible. I have seen some copies with really bad decentering. When you get a good copy it really is a fine lens to use. Mine replaced my DA*16-50 and my DA 18-135. It rarely leaves the K3. I have found the best way to check for decentering is too short for a high vantage point. Then rotate the camera 90 degrees. If one side of the image is soft and follows with the rotation then your lens is decentered. Stopping down will not help a decentered lens.

Thanks for the "encouraging" (or at least "supporting") comments on the zoom action. As for the hood, well, I've already gotten used to it.

Thanks also for the info on decentering. I have not looked into this extensively just yet, but, at least so far, sharpness seems nominally symmetrical. However, one of these days, in the very near future, I will definitely check it out more specifically.

[jddwoods]

Thanks for the confirming report.

Yes, I agree with you regarding the overall build quality - "The inner barrel on mine is solid with no wobble, even fully zoomed" - same here - the lens construction does seem solid.

I do like the zoom range a lot -- I think, for a walk-around lens, that the extra 2mm at he wide end is actually a fair trade for the loss of 86mm to 135mm, especially since it seems as if the 85m images can stand up to a fair amount of cropping on the K-3 (at least, that's my opinion so far).

Loose fitting hoods seem to be prevalent with newer Pentax lenses. My 55-300 PLM also has a slight rattle in the lens hood. Despite this both the 16-85 and the 55-300 have a very robust construction with no barrel wobble or zoom creep with either lens.

[clackers]

I do have with my copy a definite tightening at the 75-80 mm area sometimes more than others. A more serious note my copy will not focus to infinity or at least I don't know how to. Stars appear as discs and moon pics are not as crisp as they should be. Camera is K-70. Live view is useless. Any advice here is welcome.

Forget the idea of the hard stops embossed on a lens, Jgriep, since even if the manufacturing tolerance was spot on, it varies according to temperature, anyway.

To focus at infinity at night, turn on Live View. Go to maximum magnification, and find a very bright star. Focus until the disc is minimal in size, and that's it.

[bdery]

However, to my fingers, the friction lessens both above and below 75mm or so, and the friction seems "normal" on both sides of that. Does anyone have any advice for me on this possible issue? Has anyone noticed a change in "zoom feel" over time?

I wouldn't worry about this. The weather sealing of the lens/camera combo, plus some internal friction in the lens, mean it is indeed somewhat stiff, but it works just fine nonetheless.

3. Following advice given in several threads, I do plan on trying to test for decentering.

Except if you have strong reasons to suspect a problem, I would not test for this. No lens is perfect and you WILL find problems if you look for them, but that doesn't mean the lens is bad. Just that nothing is perfect.