[123K10D]

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.

Could you please post the name of the store you deal with?

And do they ship overseas?

About to order a DA*16-50 and the idea of getting a guaranteed good copy is very appealing.

Thanks very much.

[little laker]

Could you please post the name of the store you deal with?

And do they ship overseas?

About to order a DA*16-50 and the idea of getting a guaranteed good copy is very appealing.

Thanks very much.

That would be Contact Photo Arts

Bill is looking into shipping overseas. He hasn't done it yet, but doesn't think that it'll be a problem.

He might not be able to match the prices of some of the US stores, but in my opinion it's often worth the extra money.

[Alfisti]

[QUOTE=Tom Lusk;
So- even if the lens does perform properly right out of the box, the potential is there for early failure.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, that would be my concern. It's one thing to fail early but if out of warranty you'd be massively peeved. I am not going near either DA*, new or used for at least 2 years.

[Peter Zack]

TBear. I hope this works out for you soon.

I also had the same issue and for the new members that asked what is happening, I had the same problem. (Pics posted on the link below.)
In my case I knew it was an issue and thought I'd give it a try to see If I could get lucky. No dice. Mine showed severe backfocus problems. In other words If you focus on a spot and the lens actually focuses 2 inches behind the spot, you have backfocusing. Front focus problems are the same but the opposite effect.

It didn't matter whether the lens was focused on a close subject or one far away. The image looked soft, even when stopped down.

Having shot Pentax for more than 25 years and used a number of AF bodies, this was the first time I had seen this issue. But you could tell right away even without doing any testing. And I've owned more Pentax glass than I care to admit to...

Anyway the camera was set up on a tripod and at the measured 45 degree angle at about 16 inches from the test sheet. 2 sec MLU was used to eliminate jitter and the shutter speed was more than high enough.

You can see from the test shots that the lens had a serious focus issue.

So I sent it back the very next day for a full refund. Next lens will be the Tamron or Sigma Macro to cover this range or if they admit the issue as Tom said and come out with a DA* 16-50 f2.8 VII model. I wouldn't touch this on the used market with your money let alone spend my own. These will be relatively worthless on the used market IMO.

Test/sample pics:

http://pages.google.com/edit/Islandviewsphoto/pfposts?authtoken=bcd312cf9a0f...0faaa303f4238a

[alib99]

These kind of problems with the 16-50 is killing the second hand market of this lens.
Of course it is also affecting the brand new sales but I would prefer to pay 800$ new instead of a 400$ used item under this circumstances. At least in case of a problem, I can get a refund or replacement.

[Kaimarx]

The good news is as Peter pointed out, Sigma and Tamron are now coming to the table with similar offerings in range and speed. Now im definetly not rushing out for any of those new DA* lenses that are gonna come out. Such a shame that a single lens line with a large number of defective samples has marred Pentax's proud history of workmanship and quality. Hopefully with the new models out of the way they can slow down with the "big announcements" and start taking care of the basics, like not using shoddy parts in their premium lenses (or any other lens!). FA*'s have been around for how long? and their still going strong....

[Tbear]

TBear. I hope this works out for you soon.

I also had the same issue and for the new members that asked what is happening, I had the same problem. (Pics posted on the link below.)
In my case I knew it was an issue and thought I'd give it a try to see If I could get lucky. No dice. Mine showed severe backfocus problems. In other words If you focus on a spot and the lens actually focuses 2 inches behind the spot, you have backfocusing. Front focus problems are the same but the opposite effect.

It didn't matter whether the lens was focused on a close subject or one far away. The image looked soft, even when stopped down.

Having shot Pentax for more than 25 years and used a number of AF bodies, this was the first time I had seen this issue. But you could tell right away even without doing any testing. And I've owned more Pentax glass than I care to admit to...

Anyway the camera was set up on a tripod and at the measured 45 degree angle at about 16 inches from the test sheet. 2 sec MLU was used to eliminate jitter and the shutter speed was more than high enough.

You can see from the test shots that the lens had a serious focus issue.

So I sent it back the very next day for a full refund. Next lens will be the Tamron or Sigma Macro to cover this range or if they admit the issue as Tom said and come out with a DA* 16-50 f2.8 VII model. I wouldn't touch this on the used market with your money let alone spend my own. These will be relatively worthless on the used market IMO.

Test/sample pics:

http://pages.google.com/edit/Islandviewsphoto/pfposts?authtoken=bcd312cf9a0f...0faaa303f4238a

Thanks for coming forward with your story, Peter. It certainly does not make one popular to post negative threads about Pentax products. However, I believe we are ultimately doing Pentax and its customers a favor by bringing attention to real problems with their products in the hopes that Pentax will correct them.

Ted

[jslifoaw]

Although not a solution by any stretch, I am reluctant to buy zooms from anybody without hand-picking one in a store or buying online from local businesses. Any fast AF lenses I own are primes, and two mid-quality zooms that I made sure worked.

I had two 28-105s, both of which weren't great and both of which I resold. My kit lens was spot as it seems the case for you. As much as I hope you resolve the issues with Pentax, they were not very helpful when I had a similar issue with a lens costing about 1/3 as much.

[Tbear]

Although not a solution by any stretch, I am reluctant to buy zooms from anybody without hand-picking one in a store or buying online from local businesses. Any fast AF lenses I own are primes, and two mid-quality zooms that I made sure worked.

I had two 28-105s, both of which weren't great and both of which I resold. My kit lens was spot as it seems the case for you. As much as I hope you resolve the issues with Pentax, they were not very helpful when I had a similar issue with a lens costing about 1/3 as much.

Sorry to hear about your experience, Jeremy. They certainly should be capable of providing satisfactory customer support whether the lens cost $100 or $800.

[dparson]

Jgredine -- did you get your 16-50? Was it good? Still waiting to pull the trigger on my. Still interested in whose getting a good copy and from where?

[dparson]

wow -- just saw your 28-75 pictures (great) -- so I guess you got the Tamron instead.

[jgredline]

Jgredine -- did you get your 16-50? Was it good? Still waiting to pull the trigger on my. Still interested in whose getting a good copy and from where?

I did finally get my ''third'' replacement of the DA*16-50MM and it works OK, but by now, I am so disalusioned by it, that I parked it for now...

I have had my Tamron 28-75mm for about a year and it is one of my favorites...

Here are two more pics using the 28-75 F/2.8...If this 16-50 would only have done this...Sigh..

[dparson]

At half the price - it is a great alternative. Thanks for the photos - may have to stay with the 28-75, I'm tired of waiting for the 16-50-- I have the 28-75 and it is a great lens? I have the Pentax 50-135 and the Pentax 12-24 -- I was interested in having the 16-50 to completed the set -- but I'm more interested in having a good lens. Guess I'll just keep what I have.

[Canada_Rockies]

At half the price - it is a great alternative. Thanks for the photos - may have to stay with the 28-75, I'm tired of waiting for the 16-50-- I have the 28-75 and it is a great lens? I have the Pentax 50-135 and the Pentax 12-24 -- I was interested in having the 16-50 to completed the set -- but I'm more interested in having a good lens. Guess I'll just keep what I have.

My copy of the 16-50 DA* was good, from B&H. I guess I just got lucky.

[dparson]

So Canada_Rockies
How long ago did you order yours?