[Ronald Oakes]

I have the HD DA 16-85 and it has proven to be a very good performer .
However I have noticed looking at images online , and reviews that the older DA 16-45 doesn't appear to be a slouch at all !
I often notice the colors seem significantly richer and the sharpness appears to be excellent in a lot of online images I look at.
I'm only talking landscapes at the wider end of 16-20 or so.
I have a beater KS2 that I'm entertaing putting a 2 lens kit together and the 16-45 is high right now on the list , but I don't want to waste any money if this lens can't hold it's weight on the wide end.
I'm hoping Northcoastgreg weighs in on this as he has used both extensively.
What say my Pentax brethren ?
Nice used copies are going for about $125 so it's very tempting !

---

Last edited by Ronald Oakes; 08-28-2021 at 10:30 AM.

[ChristianRock]

I have used it extensively and have no complaints about the optical quality. Colors are rich, maybe not as accurate as the DA*16-50mm f2.8 but very pleasing and nice.
My only complaint is build quality. I babied mine but it still developed a big wobble in the inner barrel.
I never had the 16-85 to compare as the pictures from it never really spoke to me. But I know people here rate it very highly.

[Ronald Oakes]

I have used it extensively and have no complaints about the optical quality. Colors are rich, maybe not as accurate as the DA*16-50mm f2.8 but very pleasing and nice.
My only complaint is build quality. I babied mine but it still developed a big wobble in the inner barrel.
I never had the 16-85 to compare as the pictures from it never really spoke to me. But I know people here rate it very highly.

For some reason it seems to me "LOTS" of images from the DA 16-45 online are speaking to me! Not so much with the 16-85..... I keep telling myself it's nothing more than "gear acquisition syndrome" but then I look at the pictures again and it sure seems the other way around LOL

[AfterPentax Mark II]

look at the pictures again and it sure seems the other way around

You had it in the film days as well, but then you probably turned the negative over by accident .

[Apet-Sure]

However I have noticed looking at images online , and reviews that the older DA 16-45 doesn't appear to be a slouch at all !I often notice the colors seem significantly richer and the sharpness appears to be excellent in a lot of online images I look at.

I don't have either lens, so can't comment on their respective qualities. I only wanted to mention that when looking at images online, you often don't know how much post-processing has been done to adjust color saturation, sharpness, white balance, etc. You may not know if the image is a SOOC (straight out of camera) jpeg, a processed jpeg, or a processed RAW file. Here on PF many members will describe how they made the image look the way it is. Maybe on other sites as well. But often you just see the image with no explanation. So it can be a bit risky to judge a lens only based on posted images. If the lens gets a large number of favorable reviews however, that's a better indication of how it might perform for you. Sorry if I'm being Captain Obvious about this.

[UncleVanya]

The previously mentioned barrel wobble is a real issue with the 16-45. Look at the 17-70 f4 of sdm worries aren’t high on your list as that is a killer lens with less chance for wobble. The other strong option is a screw drive converted 16-50 f2.8 or 17-50 sigma or Tamron f2.8. Just my two cents.

[C_Jones]

I have the 16-85 and it has always given me excellent images. I presently have it on my K-3 II.

[Pentax Syntax]

I had the 16-45 and now use the 16-85 on K-3iii. You are correct in saying the 16-45 is no slouch but it has some fairly obvious CA which presents as purple fringing. The 16-85 is much better corrected. Plus the focal length of the new lens is just so much more useful.

[northcoastgreg]

For some reason it seems to me "LOTS" of images from the DA 16-45 online are speaking to me!

If you like what you see in images online, that may be the best test of all. It's how images look to your eyes that most important of all. The DA 16-45 is a pretty impressive performer (assuming you get a good copy), with very good sharpness edge to edge (at landscape apertures) throughout it's range. I was impressed with it at first, but over time became less so. It's the first of the DA lenses, designed by Saori when he was barely out of school, I suspect when it was designed Pentax was still figuring out how they wanted to define the color scheme for DA lenses and how they wanted it all to mesh with how they fine tuned their digital sensors. There are subtle difference in the DA 16-45 compared to other DA lenses, and eventually I found myself not caring for the color output of the DA 16-45. I can remember one trip to Glacier NP where I took the exact same image with the DA 16-45 and the FA 24-90. I posted both images on my fineartamerica.com account. Even thought the FA 24-90 image was not as sharp away from the center, I've sold four 30 inch prints of that precise image from the FA lens, and none from the DA lens (now admittedly that FA 24-90 does produce gorgeous color which none of the non-star SMC DA zoom lenses can quite match). So my customers didn't care for the colors from the DA 16-45, and so eventually decided to get rid of it. I first replaced it with the DA 17-70, which I liked better, and then later I acquired the DA 16-85, which I still have and still use.

Of course all this is subjective, and there are plenty of photographers out there who really appreciate the output of the DA 16-45.

[DWS1]

I have both lenses and both are very good. At 16 to about 25mm there is very little difference between them with the exception of a lot of CA on the DA 16-45mm that doesn't show up on the DA 16-85mm. Above 25mm the DA 16-85 begins to outperform the DA 16-45mm in both sharpness and color. Like you, I shoot a lot of landscapes at 16-24mm. But, since getting the 16-85mm I've discovered there are some amazing landscapes out there that need to be shot in the 40-60mm or longer range (Grand Canyon and Yellowstone Nat'l Parks comes to mind here). Overall I like the 16-85mm much better than the 16-45. I have relegated the 16-45mm to backup status and the 16-85mm stays on my camera just about all the the time. That is it will again if I ever get it back from Pentax after I banged it against a rock when I stumbled while hiking.

[kh1234567890]

For some reason it seems to me "LOTS" of images from the DA 16-45 online are speaking to me! Not so much with the 16-85..... I keep telling myself it's nothing more than "gear acquisition syndrome" but then I look at the pictures again and it sure seems the other way around LOL

I was tempted to get the 16-85 when it came out, but somehow shots taken with it that I'd looked at lacked something undefinable that my 16-45 had.

SMC Pentax DA 16-45mm f4 ED AL Set | Flickr

[Hythloday]

I was tempted to get the 16-85 when it came out, but somehow shots taken with it that I'd looked at lacked something undefinable that my 16-45 had.

[/url]

I quite agree with you. I have had my DA16-85mm for 6 years and used it only during holidays. When making cycling tours I just used my DA17-70mm, but missed the 1 mm WA so I bought a new (old stock) DA16-45mm. The colour rendition of the DA12-24mm, DA16-45mm and the DA17-70mm is far better than that of the DA16-85mm, in my opinion.

[Kozlok]

Like you say, a nice used copy isn't very expensive. If you were to buy one and not absolutely love it, you could sell it along, and be out nearly nothing. Get one from a company with a generous return policy, and it may only cost you shipping to return it if it doesn't work out.

[normhead]

My wife has the DA16-85, it's OK.

From optical limits.
Pentax HD DA 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR - Review / Test Report - Analysis

And the 16-45
Pentax SMC-DA 16-45mm f/4 ED AL - Review / Test Report - Analysis

A friend had the 16-45 that belonged to her deceased husband, and wondered if I wanted to buy it.

The chart below explains why I didn't.


Having recently purchased my DA*60-250 I was looking at lenses with CA values .7 or less for consistency across my lenses.

However you don't get visible CA in every image, you can't sneeze at ƒ4, and the lens looks good at 16mm. Most of what has kept it on my radar is the number of people who really like the lens. After all, my own determination was based on test charts. Which highlights the problem with test sites. CA is normally a sign of a misaligned lens. There is no way to tell if the lens tested was representative of all 16-45s or one misaligned lens.

Optical limits rates the lens at 3.5, and my DA 18-135 at 1.5, and I love my 18-135. So these days I wouldn't give that much weight. I was dumber then. The same site also rates the DA 16-85 at 3.5.

I should contact my friend and see if she still wants to part with it.

[Hythloday]

Most of what has kept it on my radar is the number of people who really like the lens. After all, my own determination was based on test charts. Which highlights the problem with test sites. CA is normally a sign of a misaligned lens.

A lot depends on the camera used. According to Ephotozine:

Chromatic aberrations are well controlled with levels staying well below noticeable levels until 45mm. Here fringing increases at maximum aperture to around 0.9 pixel widths towards the edges, which may become noticeable in large prints with high contrast edges towards the edge of the frame.

Pentax 16-45mm f/4 SMC DA ED AL Interchangeable Lens Review | ePHOTOzine

An excellent all-round performer.

Pentax 16-45mm f/4 SMC DA ED AL: Pros
Good sharpness throughout the zoom range
Low distortion
Low CA
Excellent value
Good build quality

Pentax 16-45mm f/4 SMC DA ED AL: Cons
Uneven distortion pattern may be difficult to correct if necessary
CA increase at 45mm and f/4

Pentax 16-45mm f/4 SMC DA ED AL Interchangeable Lens Review | ePHOTOzine

The DA 16-45mm scores higher on a 24MP camera than on a 10MP camera, see:

Pentax smc PENTAX DA 16-45mm F4 ED AL on Pentax K-3 vs Pentax smc PENTAX DA 16-45mm F4 ED AL on Pentax K200D vs Pentax smc PENTAX DA 16-45mm F4 ED AL on Pentax K10D