Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-20-2017, 01:18 PM   #1
Veteran Member
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,996
DA 16-85 and DFA 28-105 differences and my initial assessment

I have acquired both these two lenses within a couple of months this year. I bought the DA 16-85 in Japan as they have a brand new 'no-frill' version of the lens (same as retail except no box) for cheaper price and no tax; and then recently by shear luck (with a great price I can't resist) I bought the DFA 28-105 as well after my visit to Japan. Now, just to do a quick comparison between the two, I have noticed the differences in the following.

1) in my case, the DA 16-85 costs more than the DFA 28-105; should it be the case in general?
2) DA 16-85 has a red ring on the barrel, whereas the DFA 28-105 has the green ring. What does that mean? my thought is that 'green' stands for 'consumer' grade, 'red' stands for semi-pro grade, do you agree?
3) the DA 16-85 has the guard on the back end of the lens, whereas the DFA 28-105 has none. I suspect that "if" the guard is removed, it could be used on the k-1 without much vignetting (currently it has very obvious vignette issue), don't know if anyone agree with that.
4) the front element of DA 16-85 requires a 72mm filter whereas the DFA 28-105 takes a smaller 62mm filter (may be the reason DA 16-85 costs more to produce).
5) using both lenses on the same camera, I noticed that the maximum aperture at given focal length is more favorable on the DFA 28-105 than the DA 16-85, for example, I can set at f4.0 up to focal 38mm in the DFA but not with the DA lens.

I tested both lenses on my k-3 and k-1 and after setting the AF fine adjustments on respective camera, I have say without any hesitation that both can produced fantastic images. I would like to hear what your thoughts on those two lenses if you have either one or both of them.

12-20-2017, 01:52 PM - 1 Like   #2
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
The 16-85 is the current "standard" for consumer lenses on APS-c.
The 28-105 is the current standard as an FF lens.

But the 16-85 is wider on APS-c than 28-105 is on FF. As they are both the most recent in their class, you wouldn't think there'd be a lot of difference optically. But since they are designed for different formats, they really aren't competitors. In FF numbers the 16-85 is 24 to 128, so a more useful range on the 16-85 but then, that's part of the APS0c advantage.
12-20-2017, 02:07 PM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,152
These two lenses have different goals. The point of the DFA 28-105 is to provide a relatively inexpensive option for FF that, for the most part, can take advantage of the 36 mp sensor of the K-1. To meet the $500 price point, the lens gives up some range, starting at 28mm and ending at 105mm. Since the lens is produced to try to entice people to buy the K-1, it's sold at narrower margins. With the DA 16-85, you have a different situation. Quite a few relatively inexpensive options already exist on the APS-C side of things (DA 18-55, DA 18-50, DA 18-135, DA 17-70, DA 18-270), the DA 16-85 was not designed to be one of the less expensive options on APS-C, but was given greater range to fit into a missing niche (essentially a slow aperture zoom lens that starts at 16mm, perfect for landscape and travel photography). The longer range, particularly on the longer end, increases cost and makes it more of a specialty lens, which allows it to be sold at higher margins.
12-20-2017, 02:17 PM - 2 Likes   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 4,501
The DA 16-85mm has a greater zoom range than does a 28-105mm lens, hence the greater cost factor and larger filter size, all other quality issues being similar. Evidently, you've done the right thing in getting great walk around zoom lenses for both cameras!

12-20-2017, 03:17 PM - 1 Like   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
The DFA28-105 may nominally be a green-ring lens, but it seems to have stolen a sprinkle of Pixie Dust. I was considering one, but the number of things my kids are in that require photographs in relatively poor light at a distance is pushing me toward the D-FA* 70-200 first. In the meantime, the 100WR is my go-to foul weather lens, as it almost always has enough FOV for most outdoor shots I want, and when the passing parade passes close, it gives me the close-up details if I want them.
12-20-2017, 04:22 PM - 1 Like   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Missouri
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 134
I think the red ring was use to signify HD coating when it was introduced. New lenses don't have red rings now that HD coating has become standard.
12-20-2017, 05:49 PM - 1 Like   #7
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 51,558
QuoteOriginally posted by aleonx3 Quote
I have acquired both these two lenses within a couple of months this year. I bought the DA 16-85 in Japan as they have a brand new 'no-frill' version of the lens (same as retail except no box) for cheaper price and no tax; and then recently by shear luck (with a great price I can't resist) I bought the DFA 28-105 as well after my visit to Japan. Now, just to do a quick comparison between the two, I have noticed the differences in the following.

1) in my case, the DA 16-85 costs more than the DFA 28-105; should it be the case in general?
2) DA 16-85 has a red ring on the barrel, whereas the DFA 28-105 has the green ring. What does that mean? my thought is that 'green' stands for 'consumer' grade, 'red' stands for semi-pro grade, do you agree?
3) the DA 16-85 has the guard on the back end of the lens, whereas the DFA 28-105 has none. I suspect that "if" the guard is removed, it could be used on the k-1 without much vignetting (currently it has very obvious vignette issue), don't know if anyone agree with that.
4) the front element of DA 16-85 requires a 72mm filter whereas the DFA 28-105 takes a smaller 62mm filter (may be the reason DA 16-85 costs more to produce).
5) using both lenses on the same camera, I noticed that the maximum aperture at given focal length is more favorable on the DFA 28-105 than the DA 16-85, for example, I can set at f4.0 up to focal 38mm in the DFA but not with the DA lens.

I tested both lenses on my k-3 and k-1 and after setting the AF fine adjustments on respective camera, I have say without any hesitation that both can produced fantastic images. I would like to hear what your thoughts on those two lenses if you have either one or both of them.
Nobody really knows why some of the HD lenses have red rings and others don't. The first HD lenses to be launched got red rings (compared to their predecessors' green rings), but then Pentax started making HD lenses with green rings and stopped launching the red rings. IMO, both types look nice

The 16-85mm doesn't cover FF, with or without the baffle.


Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:
12-20-2017, 06:19 PM - 2 Likes   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,034
The 16-85 lens is excellent. I have one on my K-3II. I like the barrel ring color.
12-20-2017, 07:36 PM   #9
Veteran Member
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,996
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The 16-85 is the current "standard" for consumer lenses on APS-c.
The 28-105 is the current standard as an FF lens.

But the 16-85 is wider on APS-c than 28-105 is on FF. As they are both the most recent in their class, you wouldn't think there'd be a lot of difference optically. But since they are designed for different formats, they really aren't competitors. In FF numbers the 16-85 is 24 to 128, so a more useful range on the 16-85 but then, that's part of the APS0c advantage.
Thanks, Norm, agree, both lenses are designed for APS-C and FF camera respectively as general purpose walk around lens. While the DA 16-85 lens have heavy vignetting issue (set to FF), the DFA 28-105 can be used on the k-3 with no apparent limitations. And it is also lighter and seems to be a tad faster at given focal lengths.

---------- Post added 12-20-2017 at 09:40 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by C_Jones Quote
The 16-85 lens is excellent. I have one on my K-3II. I like the barrel ring color.
I agree, I like the red ring on the 16-85 lens, looks sharp. It has a smooth focusing feel and I also like the tone color coming out of it. This will be my go-to lens along with my DA 20-40 ltd for my k-3.

---------- Post added 12-20-2017 at 09:43 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Nobody really knows why some of the HD lenses have red rings and others don't. The first HD lenses to be launched got red rings (compared to their predecessors' green rings), but then Pentax started making HD lenses with green rings and stopped launching the red rings. IMO, both types look nice

The 16-85mm doesn't cover FF, with or without the baffle.
Thanks, Adam, I agree, either red or green ring looks nice on the new DC motor lens. Good to know that the 16-85 is designed straightly for APS-C with or without the baffle on the back of the lens. However, I found out that although the DA 20-40 ltd was designed for APS-C, I use it on my k-1 without much trouble in most cases.

---------- Post added 12-20-2017 at 09:45 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by blucoala Quote
I think the red ring was use to signify HD coating when it was introduced. New lenses don't have red rings now that HD coating has become standard.
Agree, when the DA 55-300 was updated with HD coating, it has a red ring; now all new lenses have the HD coatings so back to the original lens ring color scheme.

---------- Post added 12-20-2017 at 09:48 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by mikesbike Quote
The DA 16-85mm has a greater zoom range than does a 28-105mm lens, hence the greater cost factor and larger filter size, all other quality issues being similar. Evidently, you've done the right thing in getting great walk around zoom lenses for both cameras!
Thanks, I intend to use these two lenses as default for the k-1 and k-3. As for the back up or second lens, I will take the DA 20-40 ltd, FA 31, 43 or 77 depending on the needs for the k-1, DA* 16-50 and 50-135 for the k-3.

---------- Post added 12-20-2017 at 09:50 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
The DFA28-105 may nominally be a green-ring lens, but it seems to have stolen a sprinkle of Pixie Dust. I was considering one, but the number of things my kids are in that require photographs in relatively poor light at a distance is pushing me toward the D-FA* 70-200 first. In the meantime, the 100WR is my go-to foul weather lens, as it almost always has enough FOV for most outdoor shots I want, and when the passing parade passes close, it gives me the close-up details if I want them.
Thanks for your comments, I agree, the DFA 28-105 will likely my choice for outdoor shots, for indoors, the DA 20-40 gets the call for now with either k-1 or k-3. For indoor shots, I also use flash when I see the need to do it, so not a big problem.

---------- Post added 12-20-2017 at 09:53 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
These two lenses have different goals. The point of the DFA 28-105 is to provide a relatively inexpensive option for FF that, for the most part, can take advantage of the 36 mp sensor of the K-1. To meet the $500 price point, the lens gives up some range, starting at 28mm and ending at 105mm. Since the lens is produced to try to entice people to buy the K-1, it's sold at narrower margins. With the DA 16-85, you have a different situation. Quite a few relatively inexpensive options already exist on the APS-C side of things (DA 18-55, DA 18-50, DA 18-135, DA 17-70, DA 18-270), the DA 16-85 was not designed to be one of the less expensive options on APS-C, but was given greater range to fit into a missing niche (essentially a slow aperture zoom lens that starts at 16mm, perfect for landscape and travel photography). The longer range, particularly on the longer end, increases cost and makes it more of a specialty lens, which allows it to be sold at higher margins.
Yep, absolutely agree, the higher range 16-85 zoom probably has more element and harder to design, hence the higher cost expected. Although some Can-nikon friends seem to think that FX lenses should always costs more than DX lenses.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aps-c, camera, color, costs, da, dfa, dfa 28-105 differences, ff, filter, hd, japan, k-1, k-3, k-mount, lens, lenses, ltd, pentax lens, pm, rings, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: (all sold) K-1 body, DFA 15-30, FA77, DFA 28-105, Zeiss ZK 35 f/2 kaspy Sold Items 16 10-14-2017 09:31 PM
DFA 28-105 or DFA 100mm? surfar Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 10-06-2016 08:36 PM
My totally useless assessment of K-01 Fontan Pentax K-01 74 01-04-2013 01:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top