Question for 16-50mm owners

tux08902 · 01-30-2008, 05:49 PM

I think the quality control issue with this lens is just magnified on these boards because the people with the defective copies are the only ones posting about this lens. The folks with good copies don't have any reason to bitch about.

Tbear · 01-30-2008, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by tux08902

I think the quality control issue with this lens is just magnified on these boards because the people with the defective copies are the only ones posting about this lens. The folks with good copies don't have any reason to bitch about.

I can tell you that I learned a lot and confirmed some of my fears in fairly extensive conversations with Pentax regarding the DA* 16-50 lens. One of the things I learned from Pentax customer service was that the failure rate of the DA* 16-50 is at least 5 times higher than their average lens' failure rate.

This would seem to support what Benjamin K. said on January 7th, 2008: "Just received my new generation Pentax 16-50 DA* Lens in return for my older first generation. The difference to my eyes is quite startling."

Ted

jibbonpoint · 01-30-2008, 06:34 PM

What is exactly the problem with this lens? It has ramifications on the second hand market later of course; I'll avoid it. There are probably heaps out there faulty but the owners may not recognise it.

I was just reading how "unimportant" a warranty is as lens hardly ever fail. Well!!! This is a wake up.

If I'd purchased this lens from the USA as I did recently with the 360 flash, I'd be in trouble sending it back & forth to the US.

Thanks for the rant.

egordon99 · 01-30-2008, 06:36 PM

Unfortunately, lenses DO fail!
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/19700-50-135mm...otor-dies.html

Luckily mine is still under warranty, so Pentax should be able to fix it.

Originally posted by jibbonpoint

What is exactly the problem with this lens? It has ramifications on the second hand market later of course; I'll avoid it. There are probably heaps out there faulty but the owners may not recognise it.

I was just reading how "unimportant" a warranty is as lens hardly ever fail. Well!!! This is a wake up.

If I'd purchased this lens from the USA as I did recently with the 360 flash, I'd be in trouble sending it back & forth to the US.

Thanks for the rant.

Rico · 01-30-2008, 06:42 PM

Tbear this does not surprise me.

A. If you didn't like the quality of the lens you should have sent it back to where you bought it. End of story.

B. Why would Pentax send you another "bad" copy. How was this replacement "bad". It failed the same newspaper on the wall test?

The only reason the DA*16-50 possibly has a five times higher return rate is people doing the same flawed newspaper on the wall test thinking they have a bad copy.

wlachan · 01-30-2008, 07:06 PM

QC issue is real, I have gone through it too with two DA16-45/4 (still not perfect, but usable). However, I agree that Ted should at least do some real photography with the lens instead of rely totally on the newspaper test. My FA43 does absolutely horrible on the newspaper test but fine for landscape.

little laker · 01-30-2008, 07:11 PM

The store I deal with tests every lens before they'll sell it.
Even the ones I buy knowing full well that I'm a local and don't mind testing them myself

Since they've started this practice they haven't had a single returned item.
As the owner says it's a pain at times, but worth the effort.

SpecialK · 01-30-2008, 07:22 PM

I'm surprised at the statement that Pentax says the return rate is 5X higher than other lenses. Return rates are highly-guarded numbers and any service rep giving out that type of information is in serious jeopardy of losing his job.

That said, it seems Pentax is handling your issue reasonably, though perhaps not as cheaply as desired.

ryan s · 01-30-2008, 09:26 PM

Interesting...thanks for the heads up since I'm looking for one of these. Maybe it would be better to wait out the next generation or the (what was it now?) 15-70* that's supposed to hit this summer...

andyhewitt3 · 01-30-2008, 10:21 PM

newbie here....still kinda new to photography as a whole. could someone explain what is supposedly wrong with this lens? I just got it and a K10D this week. I'd like to know if its something I should actually look for or if its something that will be painfully obvious. thanks in advance.

little laker · 01-30-2008, 11:53 PM

Well Andy,

From what I understand it has a focusing issue.

My local camera store spoke with a Sigma tech, and if Pentax has the same issues they have it's the lens either stopping past the focus point or not quite going far enough.

This is not usually the cameras fault. It's a problem with the lens.

Sigma can usually re-program them, but I don't know what Pentax does.

From what I understand anyone with a K20D will be able to program in the proper focus points of something like 20 lenses with this problem. So it won't be a big issue with those owners, unless they get a whole string of bad lenses.
But for anyone else using auto focus it makes the lens useless.

Edit, Welcome to the Pentax Forums.

You've got yourself a good camera there, and hopefully a good lens as well.

I hope to see some of your pictures with it soon.

You might want to take a few with that lens and post them. Asking some pixel peepers (people that like to examine every inch with a fine toothed comb) to take the time to examine them.
If theres a problem with the lens they'll let you know.

jgredline · 01-31-2008, 12:05 AM

My third copy of the lens turned out to be perfect...Problem, Is that while it was out back in forth for the better part of two months, I fell in love with my Tamron 18-250 and 28-75 F/2.8 and so I pretty much parked my DA*16-50...Good luck with yours ted..

Derridale · 01-31-2008, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Has anyone received a good copy of this lens? Your rant alone has convinced me to stay far, far away from it

Yup - first copy of this lens I got was spot on. Has behaved perfectly, and crisp edge to edge at all apertures with the exception of some very subtle softness at the edges when wide open at f/2.8 But that softness is evenly distributed around the edges - it is NOT the "out-of-whack-ness" at one edge that some people have complained about.

I am very happy with my lens.

For those who want to compare, my serial number is 90164xx

I have some lovely lenses, including the fabulous 31mm f/1.8 Limited, but by far my favourite lenses are the two DA* lenses, the 16-50 and the 50-135. Now just waiting for a longer lens in the DA* series, and with a nice fast aperture....

A DA* 100-300mm f/2.8 would do me nicely, if they were to do such a thing (wishful thinking mode off...)

Tbear · 01-31-2008, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by jibbonpoint

What is exactly the problem with this lens? It has ramifications on the second hand market later of course; I'll avoid it. There are probably heaps out there faulty but the owners may not recognise it.

I was just reading how "unimportant" a warranty is as lens hardly ever fail. Well!!! This is a wake up.

If I'd purchased this lens from the USA as I did recently with the 360 flash, I'd be in trouble sending it back & forth to the US.

Thanks for the rant.

The problem with the two DA* 16-50mm lenses that I have had experience with is that they both demonstrated very obvious centering defects, just like Klaus had over at Photozone, when he pulled the review on this lens in the interest of fairness to Pentax.

Tbear · 01-31-2008, 06:10 AM

Originally posted by Rico

Tbear this does not surprise me.

A. If you didn't like the quality of the lens you should have sent it back to where you bought it. End of story.

B. Why would Pentax send you another "bad" copy. How was this replacement "bad". It failed the same newspaper on the wall test?

The only reason the DA*16-50 possibly has a five times higher return rate is people doing the same flawed newspaper on the wall test thinking they have a bad copy.

A. I wanted Pentax to be aware that they had a problem with this lens. So I sent it directly to the source. Terrible of me to do that. I should be shot.

B. The same reason they have sent some people 3 or 4 bad copies of the lens: The QC on this lens stinks. The second lens they sent me did not perform as well as my kit lens, yes, tested on a newspaper. If it makes you feel better to keep on saying this was due to flawed testing, be my guest. All that I can say is, if you were with me for every step of the test right up to the point of comparing the images side by side on Lightroom, you would be left with no doubts that there were serious centering defects. Were you aware that Photozone tested one of these lenses and found centering defects that were so bad, they pulled the review in the interests of fairness to pentax? Oh, yeah, I guess Klaus must have used flawed testing also.

View Poll Results: Is this DA*16-50mm good or bad?
Keep it -- it's good.	23	88.46%
Return it or send it in for repair.	3	11.54%
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

01-30-2008, 06:01 PM	#317
Tbear Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 269	Originally posted by tux08902 I think the quality control issue with this lens is just magnified on these boards because the people with the defective copies are the only ones posting about this lens. The folks with good copies don't have any reason to bitch about. I can tell you that I learned a lot and confirmed some of my fears in fairly extensive conversations with Pentax regarding the DA* 16-50 lens. One of the things I learned from Pentax customer service was that the failure rate of the DA* 16-50 is at least 5 times higher than their average lens' failure rate. This would seem to support what Benjamin K. said on January 7th, 2008: "Just received my new generation Pentax 16-50 DA* Lens in return for my older first generation. The difference to my eyes is quite startling." Ted Last edited by Tbear; 01-30-2008 at 06:07 PM.

01-30-2008, 10:21 PM	#325
andyhewitt3 New Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 20	*question about DA 16-50 lens** newbie here....still kinda new to photography as a whole. could someone explain what is supposedly wrong with this lens? I just got it and a K10D this week. I'd like to know if its something I should actually look for or if its something that will be painfully obvious. thanks in advance. Last edited by andyhewitt3; 01-30-2008 at 11:11 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Question to K-5 Owners	kevinschoenmakers	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	3	10-19-2010 06:40 PM
Question for K-X owners.	dimebagdave	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	04-29-2010 05:17 AM
PZ-1P question(for owners)	LongLiveVelvia	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	3	10-09-2009 10:51 AM
A question for K7 owners	dafiryde	Pentax DSLR Discussion	26	09-05-2009 02:52 AM
Question for FA 28-70/4 owners	Ivan Glisin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	08-13-2007 01:08 PM

01-30-2008, 05:49 PM	#316
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	I think the quality control issue with this lens is just magnified on these boards because the people with the defective copies are the only ones posting about this lens. The folks with good copies don't have any reason to bitch about.

01-30-2008, 06:34 PM	#318
jibbonpoint Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 66	What is exactly the problem with this lens? It has ramifications on the second hand market later of course; I'll avoid it. There are probably heaps out there faulty but the owners may not recognise it. I was just reading how "unimportant" a warranty is as lens hardly ever fail. Well!!! This is a wake up. If I'd purchased this lens from the USA as I did recently with the 360 flash, I'd be in trouble sending it back & forth to the US. Thanks for the rant.

01-30-2008, 06:36 PM	#319
egordon99 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Outside of Philly Posts: 1,561	Unfortunately, lenses DO fail! https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/19700-50-135mm...otor-dies.html Luckily mine is still under warranty, so Pentax should be able to fix it. Originally posted by jibbonpoint What is exactly the problem with this lens? It has ramifications on the second hand market later of course; I'll avoid it. There are probably heaps out there faulty but the owners may not recognise it. I was just reading how "unimportant" a warranty is as lens hardly ever fail. Well!!! This is a wake up. If I'd purchased this lens from the USA as I did recently with the 360 flash, I'd be in trouble sending it back & forth to the US. Thanks for the rant.

01-30-2008, 06:42 PM	#320
Rico Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,204	Tbear this does not surprise me. A. If you didn't like the quality of the lens you should have sent it back to where you bought it. End of story. B. Why would Pentax send you another "bad" copy. How was this replacement "bad". It failed the same newspaper on the wall test? The only reason the DA*16-50 possibly has a five times higher return rate is people doing the same flawed newspaper on the wall test thinking they have a bad copy.

01-30-2008, 07:06 PM	#321
wlachan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 2,625	QC issue is real, I have gone through it too with two DA16-45/4 (still not perfect, but usable). However, I agree that Ted should at least do some real photography with the lens instead of rely totally on the newspaper test. My FA43 does absolutely horrible on the newspaper test but fine for landscape.

01-30-2008, 07:11 PM	#322
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	The store I deal with tests every lens before they'll sell it. Even the ones I buy knowing full well that I'm a local and don't mind testing them myself Since they've started this practice they haven't had a single returned item. As the owner says it's a pain at times, but worth the effort.

01-30-2008, 07:22 PM	#323
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	I'm surprised at the statement that Pentax says the return rate is 5X higher than other lenses. Return rates are highly-guarded numbers and any service rep giving out that type of information is in serious jeopardy of losing his job. That said, it seems Pentax is handling your issue reasonably, though perhaps not as cheaply as desired.

01-30-2008, 09:26 PM	#324
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	Interesting...thanks for the heads up since I'm looking for one of these. Maybe it would be better to wait out the next generation or the (what was it now?) 15-70* that's supposed to hit this summer...

01-30-2008, 11:53 PM	#326
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	Well Andy, From what I understand it has a focusing issue. My local camera store spoke with a Sigma tech, and if Pentax has the same issues they have it's the lens either stopping past the focus point or not quite going far enough. This is not usually the cameras fault. It's a problem with the lens. Sigma can usually re-program them, but I don't know what Pentax does. From what I understand anyone with a K20D will be able to program in the proper focus points of something like 20 lenses with this problem. So it won't be a big issue with those owners, unless they get a whole string of bad lenses. But for anyone else using auto focus it makes the lens useless. Edit, Welcome to the Pentax Forums. You've got yourself a good camera there, and hopefully a good lens as well. I hope to see some of your pictures with it soon. You might want to take a few with that lens and post them. Asking some pixel peepers (people that like to examine every inch with a fine toothed comb) to take the time to examine them. If theres a problem with the lens they'll let you know.

01-31-2008, 12:05 AM	#327
jgredline Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: LosAngeles, Ca. Photos: Albums Posts: 10,628	My third copy of the lens turned out to be perfect...Problem, Is that while it was out back in forth for the better part of two months, I fell in love with my Tamron 18-250 and 28-75 F/2.8 and so I pretty much parked my DA*16-50...Good luck with yours ted..

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-31-2008, 12:18 AM	#328
Derridale Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 412	Quote: Has anyone received a good copy of this lens? Your rant alone has convinced me to stay far, far away from it Yup - first copy of this lens I got was spot on. Has behaved perfectly, and crisp edge to edge at all apertures with the exception of some very subtle softness at the edges when wide open at f/2.8 But that softness is evenly distributed around the edges - it is NOT the "out-of-whack-ness" at one edge that some people have complained about. I am very happy with my lens. For those who want to compare, my serial number is 90164xx I have some lovely lenses, including the fabulous 31mm f/1.8 Limited, but by far my favourite lenses are the two DA* lenses, the 16-50 and the 50-135. Now just waiting for a longer lens in the DA* series, and with a nice fast aperture.... A DA* 100-300mm f/2.8 would do me nicely, if they were to do such a thing (wishful thinking mode off...)

01-31-2008, 06:01 AM	#329
Tbear Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 269	Originally posted by jibbonpoint What is exactly the problem with this lens? It has ramifications on the second hand market later of course; I'll avoid it. There are probably heaps out there faulty but the owners may not recognise it. I was just reading how "unimportant" a warranty is as lens hardly ever fail. Well!!! This is a wake up. If I'd purchased this lens from the USA as I did recently with the 360 flash, I'd be in trouble sending it back & forth to the US. Thanks for the rant. The problem with the two DA* 16-50mm lenses that I have had experience with is that they both demonstrated very obvious centering defects, just like Klaus had over at Photozone, when he pulled the review on this lens in the interest of fairness to Pentax.

01-31-2008, 06:10 AM	#330
Tbear Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 269	Originally posted by Rico Tbear this does not surprise me. A. If you didn't like the quality of the lens you should have sent it back to where you bought it. End of story. B. Why would Pentax send you another "bad" copy. How was this replacement "bad". It failed the same newspaper on the wall test? The only reason the DA*16-50 possibly has a five times higher return rate is people doing the same flawed newspaper on the wall test thinking they have a bad copy. A. I wanted Pentax to be aware that they had a problem with this lens. So I sent it directly to the source. Terrible of me to do that. I should be shot. B. The same reason they have sent some people 3 or 4 bad copies of the lens: The QC on this lens stinks. The second lens they sent me did not perform as well as my kit lens, yes, tested on a newspaper. If it makes you feel better to keep on saying this was due to flawed testing, be my guest. All that I can say is, if you were with me for every step of the test right up to the point of comparing the images side by side on Lightroom, you would be left with no doubts that there were serious centering defects. Were you aware that Photozone tested one of these lenses and found centering defects that were so bad, they pulled the review in the interests of fairness to pentax? Oh, yeah, I guess Klaus must have used flawed testing also.