Pentax 16-85 vs Pentax 17-70

tookiehr · 10-30-2017, 10:03 AM

hi,

i am new to Pentax. In two days i will be proud owner of K-70 and i have big dilemma.
i can buy new 16-85 for cca 560$. i found used Pentax DA 17-70 F4 AF[IS] SDM. the owner says it's in great condition and price is cca 240$.
i heard some really nice things and read some good reviews on 16-85 but is it worth paying more then double?

thanks,
nino

Ketsuppi11 · 10-30-2017, 10:14 AM

if you can afford it I would go for 16-85mm. I have it, and it's annoyingly good.
You get weather sealing, better focusing motor, better focal length range and warranty.
And I also believe that optics of 16-85mm are fair bit better than 17-70mm

Cheers

Steve Grosvenor · 10-30-2017, 10:58 AM

If you are on a budget, after reading a lot of reviews you may wish to consider the 18-135.

As it is offered as a kit lens, bought as such it seems to be a good deal... plus from the reviews performance does not seem to be that far off the 18-135.

timb64 · 10-30-2017, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by Steve Grosvenor

If you are on a budget, after reading a lot of reviews you may wish to consider the 18-135.

As it is offered as a kit lens, bought as such it seems to be a good deal... plus from the reviews performance does not seem to be that far off the 18-135.

....and a year or so down the line when the upgrade bug bites you'll wish you got the 16-85

steve_k · 10-30-2017, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by tookiehr

hi,

i am new to Pentax. In two days i will be proud owner of K-70 and i have big dilemma.
i can buy new 16-85 for cca 560$. i found used Pentax DA 17-70 F4 AF[IS] SDM. the owner says it's in great condition and price is cca 240$.
i heard some really nice things and read some good reviews on 16-85 but is it worth paying more then double?

thanks,
nino

You can also buy the 16-85 used for around $400. It is definitely a better lens and is also wider focal range and weather resistant. I highly recommend the 16-85

**Spodeworld** · 10-30-2017, 11:27 AM

Love the 16-85...my favorite lens now

ronniemac · 10-30-2017, 11:35 AM

I don't have a K-70, but is seems to combine the best features of the K-3ii and the K-S2 which I do have and use with the DA 17-70, DA 16-85 and DA 18-135.

I do like the 17-70, everything at F4 is nice, but I know that one day the SDM might let me down - so far so good for me with SDM and me, but the reports are worrying. For me, WR is important so on that account the 16-85 is the better option. The 17-70 stays on an old K10D at my workplace, not getting used very often.

I did also like the 18-135 but find that the extra 2mm wide angle is more useful than the additional 50mm length that you exchange with the 18-85. When it comes to sharpness, the 18-135 is a big disappointment above 70 so it may be better to crop a 16-85 when you want enlargement.

I can't fault the 16-85, its everything I want for an all rounder, versatile, weather resistant, fast focus, silent, relatively light weight, and sharp. It will team up nicely with your K-70 to give you some very good photographs. If you can afford it, this is the lens to go for.

**jatrax** · 10-30-2017, 12:12 PM

DA 17-70 was an excellent lens in its time. Now there is the 18-135 and the 16-85 both at least as good, probably better, with modern optics and lens motors. Unless budget is the primary consideration I would go with the 16-85 or 18-135 at this point. Both available new and used.

C_Jones · 10-30-2017, 12:47 PM

I have the 16-85 and it delivers high quality images. It is also dependable, water resistant, and the build is stylish. I have used it both with my K-5IIS and with my K-3II.

jddwoods · 10-30-2017, 03:10 PM

There have been many discussions around these two lenses. I suggest you read how others responded to you here and also read the in depth and user reviews of these two lenses.

Here is a copy of what I stated on another similar post:

I have 17-70 that I bought new 8 years ago. Optically it is really good especially close range up to 50mm. From 50mm to 70mm the optical quality is not quite as good. The SDM still works, sometimes. I need to use this lens at least once a week otherwise the SDM stops working. Recently I bought a used 16-85 and now can realistically compare them:
1. Build, 16-85 is much better, it is WR and has a more solid feel with none of the barrel wobble in the 17-70
2. Sharpness, 16-85 is better, especially above 50mm but the difference at 50mm and wider is not huge. Both are very good for zooms.
3. Autofocus, getting the 17-70 to work takes patience and time and several manually focused photos until the SDM wakes up. Above 50mm the autofocus is erratic if there is not good contrast and good light. SDM is the biggest weakness of this lens. Regarding the 16-85, it works fine, all the time, Much Better!
4. size and weight, they are about the same.
5. speed, slight advantage for the 17-70 except wide angle where the 16-85 is f3.5.

UPDATE: the 17-70 SDM died, I now use the 17-70 as a paperweight and the 16-85 as my primary walk around zoom lens.
Bottom line, its a no brainer, I would go straight for the 16-85. If cost is a consideration the 18-135 could be a good choice as well.

Read more at: Question about the 17-70 SDM - PentaxForums.com

**clackers** · 10-30-2017, 04:51 PM

The 17-70 was available for $199 from Pentax Australia a while ago, so I bought it and really like it as a walkaround - two pics below.

But if you had your heart set on a 16-85 or 20-40 Ltd I think you should go straight to them instead of buying this as a stepping stone:

Cardinal15 · 10-30-2017, 07:53 PM

The simple answer to me, is no the 16-85 is not more than twice as good as the 17-70.The AF on the 16-85 is clearly better but the 17-70 is a good lens.If the budget is a concern the 17-70 is a pretty good deal at that price.Also it depends on what resources are available to you in Croatia, is Pentax a widely available or supported brand there? If it were my choice I'd stick with the 17-70 and save the difference for your next lens purchase, depending on your tastes an ultra-wide or perhaps a superzoom...

**luftfluss** · 10-30-2017, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by tookiehr

hi,

i am new to Pentax. In two days i will be proud owner of K-70 and i have big dilemma.
i can buy new 16-85 for cca 560$. i found used Pentax DA 17-70 F4 AF[IS] SDM. the owner says it's in great condition and price is cca 240$.
i heard some really nice things and read some good reviews on 16-85 but is it worth paying more then double?

thanks,
nino

Relative to the price of a new 16-85, the used 17-70 for $240 is too expensive: $180-200 would be better. Also find out if the owner bought it new and how long ago.

You might be interested in looking at the serial number database for the 17-70. SMC Pentax-DA 17-70mm F4 AL [IF] SDM Serial Numbers - Pentax Serial Number Database - PentaxForums.com

tookiehr · 10-31-2017, 12:17 AM

So many replies, thank you all. The main problem is that in Croatia Pentax is not so supported and therefore there are not many used lenses to buy. I found just one 17-70 (it looks pretty used on pictures) and no 16-85. After reading all your replies and many many reviews i think i am closer to 16-85.
Thank you all once more.

northcoastgreg · 10-31-2017, 07:09 AM

I've owned both the DA 17-70 and the DA 16-85. Optically, the DA 16-85 is a hair sharper in the 17 to 40 range, and significantly sharper at the long end. The 16-85 is also a bit contrastier, especially in bright light. My main issue with the 17-70, however, was the AF. I owned two copies of the lens and neither focused accurately at any focal length, so I had to focus manually to get sharp images out of the lens, which was challenging due to the short, undampened focusing ring.

10-30-2017, 10:03 AM	#1
tookiehr New Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Zagreb Posts: 10	Pentax 16-85 vs Pentax 17-70 hi, i am new to Pentax. In two days i will be proud owner of K-70 and i have big dilemma. i can buy new 16-85 for cca 560$. i found used Pentax DA 17-70 F4 AF[IS] SDM. the owner says it's in great condition and price is cca 240$. i heard some really nice things and read some good reviews on 16-85 but is it worth paying more then double? thanks, nino

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Deciding on new Primary Lens [Pentax 16-85 vs Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50]	Marcus_H	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	38	12-31-2016 07:22 PM
Choosing a lens: Pentax 17-70, 16-85 or sigma 17-70 C	Frispel	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	38	09-14-2016 07:59 PM
sigma 17-70 vs Tamron 17-50 vs Pentax 17-70	dr_romix	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	07-01-2012 10:15 PM
Thoughts on 16-45 vs 17-70 vs Tamron 17-50	fiish	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	07-30-2009 11:03 PM

10-30-2017, 10:14 AM	#2
Ketsuppi11 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Photos: Albums Posts: 217	if you can afford it I would go for 16-85mm. I have it, and it's annoyingly good. You get weather sealing, better focusing motor, better focal length range and warranty. And I also believe that optics of 16-85mm are fair bit better than 17-70mm Cheers

10-30-2017, 10:58 AM	#3
Steve Grosvenor Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Posts: 60	If you are on a budget, after reading a lot of reviews you may wish to consider the 18-135. As it is offered as a kit lens, bought as such it seems to be a good deal... plus from the reviews performance does not seem to be that far off the 18-135.

10-30-2017, 11:21 AM	#4
timb64 Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: /Situation : Doing my best to avoid idiots! Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,510	Originally posted by Steve Grosvenor If you are on a budget, after reading a lot of reviews you may wish to consider the 18-135. As it is offered as a kit lens, bought as such it seems to be a good deal... plus from the reviews performance does not seem to be that far off the 18-135. ....and a year or so down the line when the upgrade bug bites you'll wish you got the 16-85

10-30-2017, 11:24 AM	#5
steve_k Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Shelton, CT Photos: Albums Posts: 708	Originally posted by tookiehr hi, i am new to Pentax. In two days i will be proud owner of K-70 and i have big dilemma. i can buy new 16-85 for cca 560$. i found used Pentax DA 17-70 F4 AF[IS] SDM. the owner says it's in great condition and price is cca 240$. i heard some really nice things and read some good reviews on 16-85 but is it worth paying more then double? thanks, nino You can also buy the 16-85 used for around $400. It is definitely a better lens and is also wider focal range and weather resistant. I highly recommend the 16-85

10-30-2017, 11:27 AM	#6
Spodeworld Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New Joisey Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,370	Love the 16-85...my favorite lens now

10-30-2017, 11:35 AM	#7
ronniemac Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Oxford Photos: Albums Posts: 244	I don't have a K-70, but is seems to combine the best features of the K-3ii and the K-S2 which I do have and use with the DA 17-70, DA 16-85 and DA 18-135. I do like the 17-70, everything at F4 is nice, but I know that one day the SDM might let me down - so far so good for me with SDM and me, but the reports are worrying. For me, WR is important so on that account the 16-85 is the better option. The 17-70 stays on an old K10D at my workplace, not getting used very often. I did also like the 18-135 but find that the extra 2mm wide angle is more useful than the additional 50mm length that you exchange with the 18-85. When it comes to sharpness, the 18-135 is a big disappointment above 70 so it may be better to crop a 16-85 when you want enlargement. I can't fault the 16-85, its everything I want for an all rounder, versatile, weather resistant, fast focus, silent, relatively light weight, and sharp. It will team up nicely with your K-70 to give you some very good photographs. If you can afford it, this is the lens to go for.

10-30-2017, 12:12 PM	#8
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	DA 17-70 was an excellent lens in its time. Now there is the 18-135 and the 16-85 both at least as good, probably better, with modern optics and lens motors. Unless budget is the primary consideration I would go with the 16-85 or 18-135 at this point. Both available new and used.

10-30-2017, 12:47 PM	#9
C_Jones Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,079	I have the 16-85 and it delivers high quality images. It is also dependable, water resistant, and the build is stylish. I have used it both with my K-5IIS and with my K-3II.

10-30-2017, 03:10 PM	#10
jddwoods Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Newark, Delaware Posts: 1,035	There have been many discussions around these two lenses. I suggest you read how others responded to you here and also read the in depth and user reviews of these two lenses. Here is a copy of what I stated on another similar post: I have 17-70 that I bought new 8 years ago. Optically it is really good especially close range up to 50mm. From 50mm to 70mm the optical quality is not quite as good. The SDM still works, sometimes. I need to use this lens at least once a week otherwise the SDM stops working. Recently I bought a used 16-85 and now can realistically compare them: 1. Build, 16-85 is much better, it is WR and has a more solid feel with none of the barrel wobble in the 17-70 2. Sharpness, 16-85 is better, especially above 50mm but the difference at 50mm and wider is not huge. Both are very good for zooms. 3. Autofocus, getting the 17-70 to work takes patience and time and several manually focused photos until the SDM wakes up. Above 50mm the autofocus is erratic if there is not good contrast and good light. SDM is the biggest weakness of this lens. Regarding the 16-85, it works fine, all the time, Much Better! 4. size and weight, they are about the same. 5. speed, slight advantage for the 17-70 except wide angle where the 16-85 is f3.5. UPDATE: the 17-70 SDM died, I now use the 17-70 as a paperweight and the 16-85 as my primary walk around zoom lens. Bottom line, its a no brainer, I would go straight for the 16-85. If cost is a consideration the 18-135 could be a good choice as well. Read more at: Question about the 17-70 SDM - PentaxForums.com

10-30-2017, 04:51 PM	#11
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	The 17-70 was available for $199 from Pentax Australia a while ago, so I bought it and really like it as a walkaround - two pics below. But if you had your heart set on a 16-85 or 20-40 Ltd I think you should go straight to them instead of buying this as a stepping stone:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-30-2017, 07:53 PM	#12
Cardinal15 Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 31	The simple answer to me, is no the 16-85 is not more than *twice* as good as the 17-70.The AF on the 16-85 is clearly better but the 17-70 is a good lens.If the budget is a concern the 17-70 is a pretty good deal at that price.Also it depends on what resources are available to you in Croatia, is Pentax a widely available or supported brand there? If it were my choice I'd stick with the 17-70 and save the difference for your next lens purchase, depending on your tastes an ultra-wide or perhaps a superzoom...

10-30-2017, 08:25 PM	#13
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,618	Originally posted by tookiehr hi, i am new to Pentax. In two days i will be proud owner of K-70 and i have big dilemma. i can buy new 16-85 for cca 560$. i found used Pentax DA 17-70 F4 AF[IS] SDM. the owner says it's in great condition and price is cca 240$. i heard some really nice things and read some good reviews on 16-85 but is it worth paying more then double? thanks, nino Relative to the price of a new 16-85, the used 17-70 for $240 is too expensive: $180-200 would be better. Also find out if the owner bought it new and how long ago. You might be interested in looking at the serial number database for the 17-70. SMC Pentax-DA 17-70mm F4 AL [IF] SDM Serial Numbers - Pentax Serial Number Database - PentaxForums.com

10-31-2017, 12:17 AM	#14
tookiehr New Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Zagreb Posts: 10 Original Poster	So many replies, thank you all. The main problem is that in Croatia Pentax is not so supported and therefore there are not many used lenses to buy. I found just one 17-70 (it looks pretty used on pictures) and no 16-85. After reading all your replies and many many reviews i think i am closer to 16-85. Thank you all once more.

10-31-2017, 07:09 AM	#15
northcoastgreg Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,172	I've owned both the DA 17-70 and the DA 16-85. Optically, the DA 16-85 is a hair sharper in the 17 to 40 range, and significantly sharper at the long end. The 16-85 is also a bit contrastier, especially in bright light. My main issue with the 17-70, however, was the AF. I owned two copies of the lens and neither focused accurately at any focal length, so I had to focus manually to get sharp images out of the lens, which was challenging due to the short, undampened focusing ring.