Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Is this DA*16-50mm good or bad?
Keep it -- it's good. 2388.46%
Return it or send it in for repair. 311.54%
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-04-2008, 11:06 AM   #886
Junior Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 36
My DA* 16-50mm is fast and sharp edge to edge on my K20D and K100 Super. Very happy with it!

Too many ppl expect it to be as good and fast as a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 on a D3.

NO! It ain't. You get what you pay for. But you can't beat Pentax for value,be it lens or camera.

09-04-2008, 11:50 AM   #887
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
QuoteOriginally posted by Snapshot12 Quote
My DA* 16-50mm is fast and sharp edge to edge on my K20D and K100 Super. Very happy with it!

Too many ppl expect it to be as good and fast as a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 on a D3.
You don't seem to get it. We don't expect it to be as "good as a Nikon." We expect the DA*16-50 that WE get, to be as good as the one YOU get! Do you understand? Its about the quality control, not how good the pictures look from the people that got a good one!
09-04-2008, 11:51 AM   #888
Senior Member
kmanlaker's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fort Wayne
Posts: 136
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Undoubtedly you had legitimately bad copies, so this probably doesn't apply to you, but I still
suspect that a certain percentage of 'bad' lenses out there are actually performing to spec.
This is based on my experience with my 2nd lens and my subsequent, more thorough testing
of my 3rd lens.

I think the OP makes an interesting and worthwhile point, but it certainly doesn't apply to every
or even the majority of 'bad' experiences. I think I saw somewhere else months ago, maybe on
dpreview, where a poster wondered if there wasn't a form of 'hysteria' (as he put it )
associated with this lens. After I read that, I began to wonder the same thing.

But if it doesn't apply to you, it doesn't apply to you, simple as that. There are a lot of bad
copies out there; I know, I ran into one.


.
I think that every camera brand has the same issues with "issues" like this
for some it may be a particular body( example - Canon 1DS mark 3 autofocus ), for others ( as in this case ) a lens.
In either case, there is some who say that their copy is good and some who have a bad one.
I think in all cases that there are some copies that are truely bad and need replaced / repaired.
But I also think there are some folks who read this stuff and start to freak out and look for issues that may or may not actually be affecting their copy of said equipment.
I know that I myself have had equipment in the past that seemed fine to me and then I go read some stuff on the forums,
and it is like -- whoa I better check to see if mine is ok, even though I have been using it for months without issue.
Bottom line is that the internet is a powerful force and it has a way of making issues seem much larger than they really are.
And for the record I just purchased this same lense 2 weeks ago, I personally have not had time to shoot any brick walls, but the photos of my kids seem fine.
Now I am off to find a brick wall with newspaper on it. Oh wait a minute - that involves pixel peeping, now what do I do??

please disregard the above statement -- if you do not agree with it

kman
09-04-2008, 11:52 AM   #889
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, San Diego, Seattle
Posts: 456
I've mentioned this in other threads, that because of what I had read on forums, I was too afraid of buying or trying the DA*16-50 lens.

So I had decided to buy the Tamron 17-50 and save a little $ at the same time.

But it was because I had gotten 3 truly awful copies of the Tamron 17-50 in a row and the store was out of a 4th copy for me, that I finally gave the Pentax a try.

Money not being an issue, but how useable and convenient it is for me to take with me on trips, while I'm out with my wife (she despises lens changing or my carrying a photo backpack with me when she wants to "just go for a walk"

So for a weather-sealed (I live 2 blocks from the beach, and travel all over as well) versatile walk-around zoom lens that covers this range. There's also several places I go where silent focus is a must as well. So, I find this lens very worth the money to me. Would I like it to be improved? Yes, I'd like a little less perspective distortion, I'd also like it to go past 50mm as that's a very used FL for me, and it is the weak end of both my zooms (50-135 and 16-50) so more overlap so I don't HAVE to change lenses when I get to xx focal length, and so that the 40-60mm range was still in the sweet spot of the lens. Also when I eventually take this lens out with the 60-250, then I wouldn't have that gap.

I really loved the Sigma EX DG 24-60 F2.8, that was a great lens, just needed wider range at the wide end, also needed better weather sealing and a touch quieter, otherwise I'd paired that lens up with the 12-24 and been very happy.

Until the new perfect lens gets released (it's not even on the roadmap yet, and we know how long it can take even once it is) I'm more than happy to take this lens out with me and get lots of use out of it while I'm waiting...

QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Does your 16-50mm underexpose? I took some sample photos in a shop using a K100DS and K20. I compared the 16-50mm with various primes and found that it underexposed on both cameras when compared to the prime lenses.
It does seem to me, to have a little less latitude in the shadows when I expose normally (as compared to the FA31) exposed to the same exposure value as it meters on the FA31, I wind up with a slightly underexposed (by comparison) photo with more of the image shifted into the shadow area. When I give it a little +ev comp, then the highlights seem to blow out quicker as well. So the way this lens meters while it's on my K20D seems to be the best. I just seem to lose a little to the shadows. (but only when I am trying to capture a widely dynamic scene that does have very bright highlights) Other wise I expose to the right and I am fine.

09-04-2008, 11:59 AM   #890
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, San Diego, Seattle
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by kmanlaker Quote
I think that every camera brand has the same issues with "issues" like this
for some it may be a particular body( example - Canon 1DS mark 3 autofocus ), for others ( as in this case ) a lens.
In either case, there is some who say that their copy is good and some who have a bad one.
I think in all cases that there are some copies that are truely bad and need replaced / repaired.
But I also think there are some folks who read this stuff and start to freak out and look for issues that may or may not actually be affecting their copy of said equipment.
I know that I myself have had equipment in the past that seemed fine to me and then I go read some stuff on the forums,
and it is like -- whoa I better check to see if mine is ok, even though I have been using it for months without issue.
Bottom line is that the internet is a powerful force and it has a way of making issues seem much larger than they really are.
And for the record I just purchased this same lense 2 weeks ago, I personally have not had time to shoot any brick walls, but the photos of my kids seem fine.
Now I am off to find a brick wall with newspaper on it. Oh wait a minute - that involves pixel peeping, now what do I do??

please disregard the above statement -- if you do not agree with it

kman
I agree! when I was with Canon, I went through two copies of the 40D, and then still wound up sending the body in to Canon for AF anyway. Along with the body I had also sent in with it my 3rd copy of the 24-105 "L" lens and my 2nd copy of the 70-200 f2.8 "L" IS lens, and my 1st copy of the 35mm f1.4 "L" lens (none of which focused correctly) I believe I had that package insured for over $6000, the insurance cost me 3x what the shipping fee was. I put $8000 into the system when I switched from Nikon, and I had to ship 6 grand of it back to them, so that was frustrating as well.
09-04-2008, 12:16 PM   #891
Senior Member
mk07138's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Frostburg Maryland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 151
As everyone is saying quality control issues come in all shapes and sizes with just about all brands. Its the nature of the beast with mass producing precision consumer goods. Sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you don't, I had to send my first k20d back because it stopped controlling the aperture on all of my lenses. I've also had two shimano deore xt rear derailers fail within a mile of putting them on my bike. As well as countless faulty computer parts from countless different manufacturers.


All in all my view is that yes its really frustrating, but there are worse things in the world than having to send a faulty piece of merchandise back. If it works out in the end then it worked out and I'm happy.

Those of you that ended up getting a different lens because of the frustration are hopefully very happy with what you ended up with. If thats the case then everything worked out in the end now didn't it?
09-04-2008, 12:31 PM   #892
Senior Member
kmanlaker's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fort Wayne
Posts: 136
QuoteOriginally posted by augustmoon Quote
I agree! when I was with Canon, I went through two copies of the 40D, and then still wound up sending the body in to Canon for AF anyway. Along with the body I had also sent in with it my 3rd copy of the 24-105 "L" lens and my 2nd copy of the 70-200 f2.8 "L" IS lens, and my 1st copy of the 35mm f1.4 "L" lens (none of which focused correctly) I believe I had that package insured for over $6000, the insurance cost me 3x what the shipping fee was. I put $8000 into the system when I switched from Nikon, and I had to ship 6 grand of it back to them, so that was frustrating as well.
wow -- that is a lot Canon stuff to have "repaired" and it just proves my point
that all of these camera companies have "issues".
When I used to own alot of Canon stuff myself and would read the Canon forums, it was like I am surprised
that anyone gets any photos that are actually in focus. Of course we all know
that some of the stuff has to work, or else we would not see all of those beautiful
images that that these companies put up on their web sites, you know the one's
that are just perfect and everyone says ---- I gotta get me one of them things.

come to think of it --- maybe I should pixel peep my new 16-50mm DA --- dag gone it, I sometimes hate these forums

kman
09-05-2008, 06:34 PM   #893
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Illinois, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 55
The first 3 bad DA* 16-50 lenses that I received from 2 different sources were all 9027xxx series serial numbers. When I recently saw that someone had received a 903xxxx S/N lens from Amazon.com that they thought was good, it was just too much for me - so I ordered a 4th copy from Amazon earlier this week. To my initial dismay when I opened the box, instead of a 903xxxx S/N lens, it actually had an earlier (lower) 9025xxx S/N. Not to be swayed, I put it through a battery of tests and the results - a keeper!

So, my guess/perception of the DA* 16-50 lens right now is that its quality is completely random. While the Serial Number database might be a handy reference to assure that one is not getting a recycled defective return, I really do not see any trend - getting better or getting worse.

09-05-2008, 07:56 PM   #894
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 503
QuoteOriginally posted by FDM Quote
A lot has been said, in this and other forums, about problems with the DA* 16-50. Softness, chromatic aberration, focusing issues, lemons... This lens just got a bad reputation, which is probably making some potential buyers look for alternatives.
I actually got a 16-50 for my K10d a few months ago and was initially a bit apprehensive about having made a bad choice. I have been using it as my walkaround lens (I also have a DA* 50-135, but I use it only in particular occasions). I now believe this is a good lens with a reasonable price tag. Ok, it isn't the sharpest lens ever and CA is definitely an issue, but it takes more than shapness tomake a good photo and CA is easily corrected by software. I think this is a versatile, fast and well built lens.
QC issues have been mentioned as the reason for some of the problems, but I'm wondering whether some of the complains have a psychological factor behind them, influenced by all the bad comments.
I'm posting a few shots from my August trip to some of the Azores islands, taken with this lens. All photos were RAW-processed in Silkypix in the following manner (I do this procedure with all the photos I keep, independently of the lens used):
- CA correction.
- Cropping/rotation for improving composition.
- Tone curve adjustment for exposure tuning.

There are no award winners here, just vacation photos. Any comments are welcome. I think it would be especially interesting to know the feelings of other DA* 16-50 owners on this lens.

--
I have found over time the majority opinion of the forum (and the other forum) is usually right, the nice thing about a big forum is you have people not afraid to go against any standard that is being set by a few. I really believe the 16-50mm has quality control issues. In fact when I was trying out my DA 55-300mm I also tried the DA* 16-50mm, I have taken pics many times in this shop and know what to expect. The pics from the DA* all where OOF, it had I believe a BF problem, maybe more than that. It was plain ugly, and I still have the pics to prove it from the shop. This was not a brick-wall or newspaper test. However I agree with everything you say, that a lot of people make a good lens bad, and I believe this happens a lot with this lens as you say due to a "psychological factor". But I also believe there are a lot of folks who know what they are doing and get bad DA*16-50mm more so than any other lens I know of in the Pentax line. My case in point stated above at my local camera shop.

Now that it seems the new DA 17-70mm is not going to be a Sigma killer I was hoping for, I would not mind selling my Sigma 17-70mm on eBay and paying a bit more for the DA* 16-50mm, all the pics posted are great and I love 24mm, its the perfect wide angle for me and its a fast lens and usable at f2.8 as one poster showed. Moreover in Michigans cold wet weather climate a sealed lens would be nice to go with a sealed body. But so much damage has been done I would never feel good even if I got a good copy becuase I have read of the barrel sticking or o-rings falling out. Its kinda a sad case, Pentax should not have allowed it (bad press, deserved or not) to go so far. But then again maybe I will give it a go
09-05-2008, 08:17 PM   #895
Veteran Member
TourDeForce's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 512
QuoteOriginally posted by augustmoon Quote
I agree! when I was with Canon, I went through two copies of the 40D, and then still wound up sending the body in to Canon for AF anyway. Along with the body I had also sent in with it my 3rd copy of the 24-105 "L" lens and my 2nd copy of the 70-200 f2.8 "L" IS lens, and my 1st copy of the 35mm f1.4 "L" lens (none of which focused correctly) I believe I had that package insured for over $6000, the insurance cost me 3x what the shipping fee was. I put $8000 into the system when I switched from Nikon, and I had to ship 6 grand of it back to them, so that was frustrating as well.
Frustrating does not begin to describe that experience. For 8 grand, during your wait, you should have been given a couple replacement cameras, a penthouse suite for a month, a flock of cute roadies, & a fully stocked bar.

The QC should be freakin' micro level anal at the prices they're charging for the equipment. This is modern high-tech manufacturing. There should be almost NOTHING leaving the plant that doesn't work PERFECTLY if you're spending that kind of coin.
09-05-2008, 08:43 PM   #896
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, San Diego, Seattle
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by TourDeForce Quote
Frustrating does not begin to describe that experience. For 8 grand, during your wait, you should have been given a couple replacement cameras, a penthouse suite for a month, a flock of cute roadies, & a fully stocked bar.

The QC should be freakin' micro level anal at the prices they're charging for the equipment. This is modern high-tech manufacturing. There should be almost NOTHING leaving the plant that doesn't work PERFECTLY if you're spending that kind of coin.
The rep from Canon said that the Q.C. process was not one of mounting lenses to cameras to see that they functioned correctly, as they and they said that no one else either could afford to do so. They said that the QC process consisted of a visual physical inspection of the lens to make sure that the glass was not damaged, that it appeared to be seated properly and that the focus and zoom (if equipped) rotated, if the end user feels like their equipment is not functioning properly, then Canon will test and repair.

Of course until this happened to me, I just assumed that lenses were put on bodies and tested to see if they focused properly and imaged properly, what do I know...

Anyway, Canon did (to their credit, at least) sent me an email the day they got it (which was the next day after I shipped it, fed-ex 1-day), they kept all my stuff less than 2 days, shipped it back to me fed-ex priority next day air, gave me certificates that each lens and the body had been adjusted, which helped a lot during their eventual sale. I sent them the package on Monday and got everything back on that Thursday, so not bad at all. And they did send me a Canon gift certificate to redeem at B&H (Canon Merchandise only) to cover the amount of my shipping charges.
09-05-2008, 08:58 PM   #897
Senior Member
kmanlaker's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fort Wayne
Posts: 136
QuoteOriginally posted by augustmoon Quote
The rep from Canon said that the Q.C. process was not one of mounting lenses to cameras to see that they functioned correctly, as they and they said that no one else either could afford to do so. They said that the QC process consisted of a visual physical inspection of the lens to make sure that the glass was not damaged, that it appeared to be seated properly and that the focus and zoom (if equipped) rotated, if the end user feels like their equipment is not functioning properly, then Canon will test and repair.

Of course until this happened to me, I just assumed that lenses were put on bodies and tested to see if they focused properly and imaged properly, what do I know...

Anyway, Canon did (to their credit, at least) sent me an email the day they got it (which was the next day after I shipped it, fed-ex 1-day), they kept all my stuff less than 2 days, shipped it back to me fed-ex priority next day air, gave me certificates that each lens and the body had been adjusted, which helped a lot during their eventual sale. I sent them the package on Monday and got everything back on that Thursday, so not bad at all. And they did send me a Canon gift certificate to redeem at B&H (Canon Merchandise only) to cover the amount of my shipping charges.
well, I might add that was very cool on Canon's part
I just hope that if any of us need Pentax repair they also step up to plate

kman
09-16-2008, 04:53 AM   #898
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 280
Which fast lens to buy, DA* 16-50mm or...

For my last indoor wedding I mainly used the 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC MACRO (AF Lens), and a 540 flash. I could really have used a stop or two more.

Looking through the shots that I took, I did take some at 17mm, but most of them where around 23-26mm (crowd/group shots), or 50-70mm (portraits/pairs).

I also took a couple of pictures with the 50mm f/1.4, but it's nearly impossible to take a crowd shot with it and changing lenses all the time is impractical (or I would probably look for a 20mm prime).

The primary contender is the Pentax 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF]. Pro: SDM, fast, fairly shap at 2.8. Con: QC issues, expensive, heavy

I already have the 50-135 and really like it. SDM is nice. But I fear for the build quality, and this is kind of coupled with the price. I can, easily, get somebody to buy me a copy from the US (I'm in denmark) and 700us$ is an okay price. European price is more than 1000us$ (a bit over my budget). But if I have to return it to the US for repair... that could turn out expensive and very time consuming. But I've read one comment that build quality is getting better...

Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR LD ASPHERICAL (IF) seems to be a nice alternative, and the one reviewed here even likes it at 2.8. Price in EU will probably be around 500us$ (or 420us$ from BH)

Sigma has a few options:
24-60mm F2.8 EX DG Not that short, but maybe I could live with that and it's rather cheap ($379 from BH). Can probably find used.
18-50mm f2.8 DC EX Sharp even at 2.8? 450us$ as BH
28-70mm F2.8 EX DG (AF Lens). 28mm is maybe a bit to narrow, but it might be okay. Cheap 380us$ from BH. Seen it used local at 280us$

Probably others...(?)

Maybe it could be an alternative to buy one of the not-so-wide lenses and get a, relatively, cheap wide (15mm?) fast lens as well.

Any input would be appreciated.

Last edited by tcdk; 09-16-2008 at 06:01 AM.
09-16-2008, 05:46 AM   #899
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Trois-Rivières, Québec, CA
Posts: 74
I do not own any of the lens you mentioned (except for the sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 that you already have), but from what I read on forums and reviews, you should consider the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. It seems popular for the type of shooting you mentioned.

If you go with the Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8, you should check on Ebay, some are available at 230 USD (new). It also seem to be an excellent lens.

David
09-16-2008, 06:49 AM   #900
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 429
I used to own both the Sigma 17-70mm and the Tamron 28-75mm.

While I liked the Sigma, I found the max aperture at 70mm to be 'too slow' for indoor shots. I found that I rarely used it for anything other than wide angle and macro shots (which it's good at, don't get me wrong). I didn't find it particularly sharp wide open, but it definitely wasn't garbage wide open either.

The Tamron I absolutely loved and kind of regret selling it. WAY sharp wide open, it's got a great range, although I found 28mm a little too long most of the time. If you can live with only 28mm at the wide end, this is an excellent, quality lens!

I recently purchased the DA* 16-50mm from a forum member here. I find the lens quite sharp wide open and extremely sharp at f/4.5 and up. It's very wide, great in small areas and 50mm is plenty long given the cropping ability of our mega MP sensors :-) My only gripe is that the darn zoom ring is way too narrow for me.

I vaguely recall some posts saying the Tamron 17-50mm was pretty good but have not heard any big raves about the Sigma 18-50mm...
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question to K-5 Owners kevinschoenmakers Pentax K-5 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 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:11 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