Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-06-2008, 01:00 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 418
Sweet mother of god, i got my 16-50!!!

Ah, shes here at last (i have to keep reminding myself that i dont want to be one of those guys who refers to his lenses as "her"s)

Anyway, a few months back i joined some guys at the university for their project in africa looking at the ways termites build and how their nests work (its actually fascinating, but you dont have time for that), I was taking macro photos (about 1:8, using reversed lenses etc.). Anyway, today as kind of further payment and to help out next year when they want some more promotional shots he gave me a 16-50

I've only tried it on the way home, so mostly low light, but from an LCD screen test it looks sharp until the border (thats close focussed), and i havent noticed any CA yet. Its noticeably soft at 2.8 across the range but at f/4 ish the sharpness hurts.

What shocked me which none of you seem to mention all that much is the build quality of this thing. Its infinitely better than the kit lens or the 55-300. An absolute work of art. Its heavy too which gives a surprising amount of extra image stabilisation.

The focus is silent apart from a few clicks if you stick your ear on it, but its not amazingly fast (until you consider the size of glass its moving).

Anyway, i'm yet another happy 16-50 owner, if i check tomorrow and its a bit decentered or there is lots of CA i wont care in the slightest, because i've already tried it out in real world shooting and its perfect.

12-06-2008, 01:23 PM   #2
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
This zoom is performing not too badly with CA on k20d. In fact, a very good zoom if there is no decentering problems.

This lens has plenty of colour. Not crisp but very rich and contrasty.
12-06-2008, 01:33 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 418
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by roentarre Quote
This lens has plenty of colour. Not crisp but very rich and contrasty.
Yeah i noticed that, i guess its hard to measure the colour a lens has, but the colours are definitely truer, and the blacks are actually true (they reach the bottom of the histogram), which i have never seen before.
12-07-2008, 12:31 AM   #4
Veteran Member
nulla's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 1,560
QuoteQuote:
This lens has plenty of colour. Not crisp but very rich and contrasty.

I agree.. this is my most used lens and so reliable for all conditions.

If I was only allowed 2 lenses it would be this and the DA 135.

I love my primes and just adore these 2 zooms


Neil

12-07-2008, 01:00 AM   #5
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacEastgate Quote
Ah, shes here at last (i have to keep reminding myself that i dont want to be one of those guys who refers to his lenses as "her"s)

Anyway, a few months back i joined some guys at the university for their project in africa looking at the ways termites build and how their nests work (its actually fascinating, but you dont have time for that), I was taking macro photos (about 1:8, using reversed lenses etc.). Anyway, today as kind of further payment and to help out next year when they want some more promotional shots he gave me a 16-50

I've only tried it on the way home, so mostly low light, but from an LCD screen test it looks sharp until the border (thats close focussed), and i havent noticed any CA yet. Its noticeably soft at 2.8 across the range but at f/4 ish the sharpness hurts.

What shocked me which none of you seem to mention all that much is the build quality of this thing. Its infinitely better than the kit lens or the 55-300. An absolute work of art. Its heavy too which gives a surprising amount of extra image stabilisation.

The focus is silent apart from a few clicks if you stick your ear on it, but its not amazingly fast (until you consider the size of glass its moving).

Anyway, i'm yet another happy 16-50 owner, if i check tomorrow and its a bit decentered or there is lots of CA i wont care in the slightest, because i've already tried it out in real world shooting and its perfect.
Congrats! 16-50 is an awesome lens. Weirdly i've got photos at f/2.8 that seem sharper than anything the kit lens has done (maybe I got a bad kit lens).

Dont forget to add some info to the big 16-50 thread at the top of the forum so we can track quality control and see if things are getting better (which it seems they are).
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!
build, dont, guys, k-mount, lenses, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
a discussion on god... god i was bored.. Gooshin General Talk 9 02-11-2010 01:01 PM
YES!!! There is a god! ve2vfd General Talk 1 02-24-2009 10:07 PM
God is good! bonovox Post Your Photos! 41 01-23-2009 05:14 PM
In God we U.S.A. WT Igilligan Post Your Photos! 6 11-07-2008 08:36 PM
Oh My God Christian Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 05-07-2007 03:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:45 PM. | 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