[Ronald Oakes]

Hah, thanks. But you do have a 20-40 for when you want better pictures, I guess.

Is your 18-50 the SMC or the HD version, Ronald?

I have the SMC version.
I'm not going to say that the 20 to 40 comes out when I want better image quality, I just usually only take it when it's not going to be subject to water and sand of kayaking and fishing trips. Actually when I'm stopped down I can't tell the difference between the 20-40 Limited and the 18-50 unless I look at the exif data.

[ChristianRock]

I have the SMC version.
I'm not going to say that the 20 to 40 comes out when I want better image quality, I just usually only take it when it's not going to be subject to water and sand of kayaking and fishing trips. Actually when I'm stopped down I can't tell the difference between the 20-40 Limited and the 18-50 unless I look at the exif data.

That is high praise indeed... thanks for your thoughts!

[bdery]

I'm wondering if some issues I'm seeing with SMC DA 21mm Limited pictures, might be due to copy variation? I see pictures where micro-contrast is good but not great, and I also have seen some fringing and color bleeding in the edges of the frame.
Is the secret, to get a good copy?

Based on your comments, I would turn things around and say that you got a subpar copy, and that good copies are not unique.

Have a look at samples from the image, you will see if they represent what you get with your lens.

[normhead]

it even states that images are not sharper at f8 than they are wide open

The argument that you stopping down a lens makes it sharper ignores one huge effect, diffraction. Most lenses are sharpes at ƒ5.6 and get softer from there. Lenses 200mm and over not as much, but for wide angle to normal APS_c lenses the "ƒ8 and be there" should be revised to "ƒ5.6 and be there."

Every test chart ever published confirms this.

My definition of the 21 ltd. is "smooth" for sunsets, pastel looking natural scenes etc.)
My definition of the kit lenses would be "harsher". (Higher contrast ec.)
Different lenses for different purposes.

21 to the max.

Smooth, smooth, smooth

DA 18-50, harsher

Not everyone appreciates the 21, but it definitely adds a dimension to some images you won't get from other lenses.

---

Last edited by normhead; 02-26-2021 at 08:15 AM.

[ChristianRock]

The argument that you stopping down a lens makes it sharper ignores one huge effect, diffraction. Most lenses are sharpes at ƒ5.6 and get softer from there. Lenses 200mm and over not as much, but for wide angle to normal APS_c lenses the "ƒ8 and be there" should be revised to "ƒ5.6 and be there."

Every test chart ever published confirms this.

My definition of the 21 ltd. is "smooth" or sunsets, pastel looking natural scenes etc.)
My definition of the kit lenses would be "harsher". (Higher contrast ec.)
Different lenses for different purposes.

21 to the max.

Smooth, smooth, smooth

DA 18-50, harsher

Not everyone appreciates the 21, but it definitely adds a dimension to some images you won't get from other lenses.

Thank you for this analysis... I think you are really getting what I'm trying to say here.

In regards to those two images you linked, I think they are a perfect example...

And I find it interesting, how we see things a bit differently... you're seeing "smooth" and "harsh"... I'm seeing a picture that lacks a bit of definition in color transitions (21) compared to the other (18-50) that has well defined color edges with no color bleeding... That 2nd picture looks nicer, more refined to me*, like something I might see out of the DA 35 Limited - so I guess it might all just boil down to personal taste?

*I'm discounting the fact that one image is f16 and the other is f7.1 because at the posted image size, we can't see diffraction. If anything, the f16 image should look sharper at this viewing size because everything should be more in focus.

[ChristianRock]

Based on your comments, I would turn things around and say that you got a subpar copy, and that good copies are not unique.

Have a look at samples from the image, you will see if they represent what you get with your lens.

That wasn't my copy... I haven't bought one yet. The examples I posted, I "cut" from the full-size images posted over the web.

I haven't bought either lens yet.

[normhead]

Thank you for this analysis... I think you are really getting what I'm trying to say here.

In regards to those two images you linked, I think they are a perfect example...

And I find it interesting, how we see things a bit differently... you're seeing "smooth" and "harsh"... I'm seeing a picture that lacks a bit of definition in color transitions (21) compared to the other (18-50) that has well defined color edges with no color bleeding... That 2nd picture looks nicer, more refined to me*, like something I might see out of the DA 35 Limited - so I guess it might all just boil down to personal taste?

*I'm discounting the fact that one image is f16 and the other is f7.1 because at the posted image size, we can't see diffraction. If anything, the f16 image should look sharper at this viewing size because everything should be more in focus.

For sure, the 21 ld. is unusual in that more than any other lens I know, you have to use it when it's effect is desired. High contrast landscape will have issues.

[ChristianRock]

I have had good experiences (knock on wood) in buying from mpb.com I saw that they have the HD version of the 18-50 on sale in excellent condition for $129, shipped with free shipping and at least for my state, no tax charged.

Used Pentax HD Pentax-DA 18-50mm f/4-5.6 DC WR

Ah yes, I emailed them last week about that.

I'm glad they have actual pictures of lenses (unlike B&H, or KEH). If you look closely at the pictures of both copies that they have, it's the SMC version. I emailed them about it over a week ago.

They answered back saying yes the listing is wrong, it's the SMC version, we'll fix the listing.

They haven't fixed the listing yet...

B&H has an HD version, the cheaper one with tax it'll come up at $170, the other close to $200 I think. But I'm not in a hurry... if I do decide to buy one, I'll probably put an ad in the Wanted section of this website's marketplace first. I did that when I wanted a DA*16-50 and I'm very pleased with the copy I was able to buy.

[Jonathan Mac]

The 21mm is the least "loud" DA Limited - so-so focal length, so-so maximum aperture.

It takes some time to really get the feel for it and what it does best, but what it does best is be a lovely little walk-around wide-angle capable of excellent images.

I've never used the 18-50mm but my 21mm is head and shoulders above what the 18-55mm can do.

[ChristianRock]

For sure, the 21 ld. is unusual in that more than any other lens I know, you have to use it when it's effect is desired. High contrast landscape will have issues.

Thank you very much for that analysis, Norm. That really matches what I have been seeing.

I'm starting to come to grips that the 21 just isn't for me, at least not the SMC version. Not a bad lens, but that softness in the color transitions is probably not ideal, but that's just for me and for my desired use of that lens.

If I do decide to give it a try, there's no shortage of copies in excellent condition at very affordable prices, MPB alone has 3 of them.

[ChristianRock]

I've never used the 18-50mm but my 21mm is head and shoulders above what the 18-55mm can do.

At some point, I think I'll have to try both the HD 18-50 and the 21 - preferrably the HD version.

Like you I could not get rid of my 18-55 fast enough. I wouldn't consider the SMC 18-50 either - too similar to the 18-55 in sharpness and rendering.

I'm not in a hurry, in the meantime I'll make myself carry the DA*16-50 in all its weighty glory. I know that lens is also one that some people like and some people much prefer the Sigma and Tamron alternatives. I personally think that if you just look at images as a whole, it's clearly capable of more pleasing colors and rendering - for my own personal taste - than any alternative - including the 21 and 18-50, and also the 16-85, 18-135... those of course are for people who want or need the extra range. I'll just carry my little DA 70 with me or perhaps the SMC-M 100 2.8 or Takumar Bayonet 135 2.8 (great lens, or perhaps I have a very good copy).

But at some point this year, I think I'll be getting the HD 18-50 and then at a later time the HD 21. I think I'll skip the SMC 21, as attractive as it is for the low prices that I keep seeing, sometimes well under 200 dollars... there's a reason why there's always so many being sold, and why it's being sold for such low prices...

[seventysixersfan]

Ah yes, I emailed them last week about that.

I'm glad they have actual pictures of lenses (unlike B&H, or KEH). If you look closely at the pictures of both copies that they have, it's the SMC version. I emailed them about it over a week ago.

They answered back saying yes the listing is wrong, it's the SMC version, we'll fix the listing.

They haven't fixed the listing yet...

You beat me to it -- I actually deleted my post because I noticed the pictures were of the SMC version even though the description said HD. I've found MPB to offer very reasonable prices, though.

Good luck!

[ChristianRock]

You beat me to it -- I actually deleted my post because I noticed the pictures were of the SMC version even though the description said HD. I've found MPB to offer very reasonable prices, though.

Good luck!

Yes... I just got my DA 70 Limited (SMC) from them recently and I'm very pleased with my purchase (and especially with the price I paid...)

[Cambo]

So I have the perfect walk-around lens (IMHO) in the DA*16-50mm f/2.8. Fast enough to use indoors, and when using it outdoors, set it at f8 and the colors, micro-contrast and overal "pop" of the images is basically as good as any good primes I have in its range. OF course it won't make me sell my DA 35 Limited or my K 50 f1.2, but overall I'm very pleased with it.

Yet sometimes I don't want to (or can't, really) take it due to size - on a bike ride for example, or when I'm going to walk around all day. For those days I thought I'd buy a DA 21mm SMC (around 200 dollars, hopefully I find it for less - the HD is out of my budget I think. I bought my 35 Limited for 179 shipped and the 70 Limited for 174 shipped, which is the reason I was able to get these fine lenses in the first place).

But the thing is, I'm not overly excited about the images from the SMC 21. The HD version, I think has subtle but noticeable improvements in contrast and micro-contrast in particular, and balancing of colors in general, which make the images as a whole more appealing. I should probably mention that I had the DA 21 before, for a couple of weeks. I got it on a trade back in my K20D days and when the other person suggested after a few days that we should revert the trade because they were not overly excited with the DA 16-45mm f4 either, I jumped on it because I was less excited with the 21 (my first Limited!!) that I thought I would be. And I also missed having a general walk-around zoom and the 16-45 was perfect for that (if the "wobble" of the internal lens barrel hadn't gotten worse I wouldn't even have bought the 16-50, I'd be happily shooting the 16-45 still).

So to make a long story short, I'm seeing a nicer look to the images in the HD DA 18-50mm f4-5.6, than I see in the SMC 21mm. I've been looking over the internet everywhere for pictures of both lenses and while the 21mm is probably much better than my initial experience would suggest, it's not on the same level as the HD 21mm or the HD 18-50mm. (the SMC 18-50mm, on the other hand, seems to be a bit disappointing in terms of micro-contrast, colors and sharpness - on the same level as the 18-55mm old kit lens).

Now I know the HD 18-50mm is probably going to require being more careful with it, as the build quality is a bit disappointing, but what I'm after is the look of the images, and a very small carry-around lens (134g for the 21mm, 158g for the HD 18-50, not much difference, and both are small when the 18-50 is retracted). Oh and the HD 18-50mm is WR.

With either one, I'd carry the SMC DA 70mm on a pocket somewhere, in case I need something longer.

Go ahead and tell me I'm crazy for considering this cheaply made lens instead of a Limited for my intended purpose.... (something small and light to carry on the K-S1 when I don't want to carry the K-3+DA*16-50mm).

Flickr search on the HD 18-50mm... Search: HD 18-50mm pentax | Flickr
Flickr search on the SMC 21mm... Search: SMC 21mm limited pentax | Flickr
(I'm viewing the images on a 32" 4K monitor, and the best SMC 21mm images seem to be taken with a K10D... the ones with newer cameras don't seem to have the same "pop").

I've looked at review pictures, the 21mm Limited threads, and in explorecams as well.

If I had to choose just one lens forever, this would be it. See my thread about travelling with it in a kit, and I wound up using it 95% of the time. Focuses to 6" or less, the rest of the time, zoom with your feet. Teeny, leave your battery pack at home and just carry a spare battery or thew AA adapter.

The lens that suprised you the most. - Page 7 - PentaxForums.com

Pentax DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited samples - Page 17 - PentaxForums.com

and in the studio...
Pentax DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited samples - Page 18 - PentaxForums.com

Cheers,
Cameron

[Jonathan Mac]

... there's a reason why there's always so many being sold, and why it's being sold for such low prices...

Yep, there is. As I stated earlier: It takes some time to really get the feel for it and what it does best, but what it does best is be a lovely little walk-around wide-angle capable of excellent images.

On paper it offers very little over a kit zoom. People expect to be dazzled at the outset and it doesn't do that, so many get sold off quickly, but it's worth the time and effort needed to learn what it can do.