Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-10-2022, 06:32 PM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,081
DA 20-40 Limited vs DA 16-50 PLM Image Comparison

Hello-

Has anyone found or made a comparison between these two lenses? The PLM range and focus speed is compelling, but the size of the 20-40 is also compelling.

Thank you.

11-10-2022, 08:58 PM   #2
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
If you look at the published MTF curves for the 16-50, they're great, the 20-40 won't be able to match them, I wouldn't have thought, especially because the 20-40 is only f2.8 at the wide end.

I have the 20-40, BTW, and there's nothing wrong with it, I even use it on the K-1 in the 24-35mm range.

Product Overview | HD PENTAX-DA?16-50mmF2.8ED PLM AW | PENTAX STAR LENS | RICOH IMAGING

Last edited by clackers; 11-10-2022 at 10:03 PM.
11-10-2022, 09:07 PM   #3
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,161
I have to agree with Clackers. 20-40 is nice but in typical limited lens fashion it has some quirks that make it less than perfect but don’t take away its ability to make great images. The DA* line is typically edge to edge excellent for its time and the 16-50 is reportedly in that mold. Wider, faster focusing, longer, faster optically in the long end, and heavier and more expensive… the two lenses are quite different. I like my 20-40 more than my 16-50 SDM.
11-10-2022, 09:40 PM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,081
Original Poster
Thank you both. I'm thinking of ways to simplify and the 16-50 PLM would go well with the 11-18, and I don't think I need two zooms in the 16-50 range, but the 20-40 is so nice and compact (and looks so good on the KP) it would be hard not to keep it.

11-10-2022, 10:05 PM   #5
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by Biff Quote
but the 20-40 is so nice and compact (and looks so good on the KP) it would be hard not to keep it.
Yeah, your thread title stressed the image quality, but it's true the 20-40 is about the size of the FA31, the 16-50 is a traditional professional f2.8 lens, full of big beautiful corrective glass the 20-40 doesn't match.
11-10-2022, 10:34 PM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,081
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
thread title stressed the image quality
yes, that's what will drive the decision. if i get the 16-50 i'll likely sell the 20-40. Appreciate you confirming the quality and providing the Ricoh overview.
11-11-2022, 03:31 AM - 1 Like   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,601
I own the PLM and not the 20-40, so take that under advisement. I would say that the 16-50 is much bigger (you mentioned that) and covers a wider range of focal lengths. It is also f2.8 throughout the range, so it has a wider aperture in the 40mm range. It is quite sharp throughout the range (much better than the old 16-50). I would think it would be a significantly better performer with regard to image quality compared to the 20-40. It does flare some, so that might be one area where the 20-40 might be better.


Last edited by Rondec; 11-13-2022 at 03:31 PM.
11-11-2022, 05:15 AM - 1 Like   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,161
QuoteOriginally posted by Biff Quote
Thank you both. I'm thinking of ways to simplify and the 16-50 PLM would go well with the 11-18, and I don't think I need two zooms in the 16-50 range, but the 20-40 is so nice and compact (and looks so good on the KP) it would be hard not to keep it.
It really depends how you want to use it. I own the 11-18, 20-40, 50-135 (and 16-50 sdm). I carry the trio listed with the 20-40 more than with the 16-50 sdm due to weight and size and iq. The PLM version will be better, but how noticeable in real images isn’t clear.

Ultimately there’s more than sharpness and image quality involved. How well does it fit your photography, how does it make you feel using it, how happy are you with the results - these probably matter more than absolute image quality alone. In your case it sounds like image quality will make enjoyment higher, and that suggests you need to get the 16-50 PLM. It’s good to have choices that fit different preferences.
11-11-2022, 06:18 AM - 1 Like   #9
Pentaxian
simon_199's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 606
I have recently acquired the 20-40 but have never tried the 16-50PLM. First of all the range is different 4mm at the wide end are a lot. Furthermore the classic 16-50 range with wide aperture allows for more versatility as 50 2.8 is a decent option for portraits whereas 40mm f4 is not as compelling. Although the quality (not so much for the "quantity") of the bokeh provided by the 20-40 is very good. With a fast 24-70 eq. lens you can certainly "do more" and image quality will be certainly better at the price of size, weight and cost. Maybe the typical usage you envisage for the lens can help choosing the better compromise...

If you don't mind the wider angle (maybe because you are covered by the 11-18) and are not going to do a lot of portraiture, the 20-40 is a nice option. I have not tested it thoroughly but first impression is that early reviews perhaps had bad copies as I am quite pleased by the results, within limits.
11-12-2022, 06:20 AM - 1 Like   #10
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 65
QuoteOriginally posted by Biff Quote

The PLM range and focus speed is compelling, but the size of the 20-40 is also compelling.
You are perfectly right. I have both lenses. The DA*16-50mm PLM shows excellent sharpness from edge to edge and focussing is no problem. The DA20-40mm Ltd is a nice lens, but you have to pay attention to what subject you focus on. A well focussed picture will be sharp from edge to edge.

When the weather is fine my favourite lens is the DA17-70mm, which has a nice range. The DA*16-50mm PLM is a heavy lens, especially if you walk with it around your neck for some 3 hours. The DA20-40mm Ltd is light weight and has a very nice colour rendition.

What lens is best? It depends on the situation you are in. I use my DA20-40mm on a KP when I want to travel light. The DA*16-50mm is used when the weather may be a bit changeable: rain-sunshine. The DA17-70mm is not WR or AW and I use it when the weather is OK. It is some 230 grammes lighter than the DA*16-50mm and has a useful range.
11-13-2022, 11:27 AM - 1 Like   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 4,508
QuoteOriginally posted by Biff Quote
Thank you both. I'm thinking of ways to simplify and the 16-50 PLM would go well with the 11-18, and I don't think I need two zooms in the 16-50 range, but the 20-40 is so nice and compact (and looks so good on the KP) it would be hard not to keep it.
I've had my DA 20-40 Ltd for quite some time, got a great deal on a new one. Got it in silver by choice BEFORE the KP came by around a year, thinking "someday Pentax will come forth with a great compact body available in silver like some of the old 35mm AF bodies they used to make". I must have had some kind of premonition. I initially used it on my compact K-S2 with great results. Then about 2 years later, after the price settled down, I got my first silver KP, then some time later, got a 2nd one- that is how much I like it.

I later acquired a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM lens. Its DC is not as fast as PLM, but is quick enough for me and very accurate on my KP, and the lens delivers very fine imaging. But these f/2.8 constant aperture lenses have to be bulky and heavy. So I use this lens when need what only it can do. It makes a great match with my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, an amazingly compact lens, but so does my DA 20-40mm Ltd when I do not need f/2.8 all the way through. Most of the time, I carry the DA 20-40mm Ltd on my KP and get very fine imaging. It seems to fit like a custom-made glove. This makes for an extremely capable compact outfit. I would not want to be without it. To get a real-world actual view of what it can do, go to the Imaging Resource test. Go to the bottom of the test which displays a still life test image and click on this to get a blowup. Then you can select wide open or stopped down at the wide, mid, and the 40mm end. Click on any part of the image, including close to the edge where the circular numerical scale and brush are or down near the bottom, etc. There are many spots to check sharpness, like the Roman figure on a bottle, or another figure on another bottle, etc. I think it shows very impressive performance compared to other lenses.

Bottom line- both of these lens types have their uses in practical terms, and in terms of what a wider aperture can do. With me it is not a case of either/or.
11-15-2022, 12:57 PM - 2 Likes   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: MT
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,349
For years I let the published MTF figures sway me away from the 20-40...Broke down and bought a minty copy in silver last month and I wish I had done it sooner! Mostly using it for photojournalism stuff and have sold perhaps half a dozen images from it already. Sure, pedestrian journalism stuff--not fine art--but editors...even paid-blog editors...are famously picky about images and the 20-40 has done a fine job both for people subjects and boring product shots too. It sure looks nice on the silver K3 and K5 bodies...
11-15-2022, 01:52 PM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,081
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ron Boggs Quote
For years I let the published MTF figures sway me away from the 20-40...Broke down and bought a minty copy in silver last month and I wish I had done it sooner! Mostly using it for photojournalism stuff and have sold perhaps half a dozen images from it already. Sure, pedestrian journalism stuff--not fine art--but editors...even paid-blog editors...are famously picky about images and the 20-40 has done a fine job both for people subjects and boring product shots too. It sure looks nice on the silver K3 and K5 bodies...
Thanks. It is good. And looks great on the KP as well, as others have mentioned.
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!
comparison, da, da 16-50 plm, k-mount, pentax lens, plm, slr lens, vs da
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HD Pentax-D FA 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ED PLM WR SR & HD Pentax-DA★ 50-135mm f/2.8 ED PLM D1N0 Pentax News and Rumors 227 11-10-2022 05:44 PM
IQ Comparison: 16-85 HD VS 20-40 Limited Blacknight659 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 07-05-2017 08:35 PM
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
Lens opinion: 18-35 vs 12-24 vs 20-40 vs 16-50 Greinerstudio Pentax DSLR Discussion 38 06-25-2016 11:05 PM
DA 20-40 comparison with Fa 20-35? VladM Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 12-31-2013 09:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:28 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