Question for 16-50mm owners

NeverSatisfied · 02-14-2008, 05:13 PM

Hey Buddha wasn't there a retail store (listed in another thread, anybody recall the name?) that tested each lens for FF/BF before they shipped it? Might try that route.

drivel · 02-15-2008, 02:17 PM

So I retested using newspaper.

I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story

100 crop top left corner.

jgredline · 02-15-2008, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by drivel

So I retested using newspaper.

I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story

100 crop top left corner.

Yours is every bit as awefull as my first two copies where...So sad...So sad...

song_hm · 02-15-2008, 05:43 PM

[QUOTE=drivel;177979]So I retested using newspaper.

I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story

100 crop top left corner.[QUOTE]

That is pretty bad. Mine slightly better. Pretty disappointing. I had it returned.

drivel · 02-15-2008, 06:18 PM

Yeah, I shipped it back to B&H today. I'm going to try to exchange it. If the next one's bad then I guess I'll wait for the Tamron 17-50mm or maybe the Pentax 17-70mm.

Tbear · 02-16-2008, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by drivel

So I retested using newspaper.

I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story

100 crop top left corner.

Looks similar to the two losers I have received thus far. Awaiting my 3rd. I am looking forward to testing it and posting formal reviews of it (good or bad) on every single photography web site, retailer, and blog.

Ted

hudsong · 02-16-2008, 10:02 AM

I really want this lens, but at the same time I really don't..... what a conundrum!

rvannatta · 02-16-2008, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by hudsong

I really want this lens, but at the same time I really don't..... what a conundrum!

I spent half the day comparing photos of mine with other lenses that I have.
I supsect mine isn't the best one ever made, but the results are interesting.

I compared the 15mm SMC-A manual focus, and and FA* 24 F/2 lenses
at 15mm and at 24mm.

Notably, my results were not very consistent particularly when I used a newspaper at 15mm. My eyesight isn't good enough to accuratly focus
the manual focus lens, and the auto focus wasn't much better photographing a newspaper from 3 feet or less away. I rarely got a photo where I could actually read the newspaper, but occasionally I did. What I did notice was that the 16*50 consistently what I think you folks call a chromic abberation.--any way, anywhere there was a sharp contrast between white and a dark line
a blue fuzzy line blurred the line.

the blue fuzz was quite characteristic of the *16-50---at close range and not at all visible with the SCM-A 15mm bubblenose.

Next however , I switched subjects and focused on a a hedge row with a white satellite dish embedded in it that was 50 feet away. Then at 15/16mm, it was the other way around. The bubble nose showed the blue fuzz on the sharp transistion from white to dark, but the DA* 16-50 didn't. I rated the overall sharpness as the same, but on balance gave it to the 16-50---set at 16mm (and with wide aperatures), becuase it didn't have the blue fuzz.

Next I switched dto 24mm and compared to the FA* 24 f/2

Once again at the hedge row.----the color chroma haze was quite obnoxious
at 24mm and blue on the DA*, and very minor but visible with the FA*24, but with it, the fuzz wasn't blue, it was red.

I had been using the 'auto exposure' throughout my sequences
I set an exposure compensation to increase the exposure with the DA*
and this did improve the results, but still not asa good asa th FA*24.

I"m sort of thinking that there is not a clear winner here--just some work better under some conditions than others, and the sort of consistent habit of the DA* 16-50 underexposing things doesn'thelp it do better.

Adrian Owerko · 02-16-2008, 08:13 PM

Hi there my wife has just be handed my K100D (Valentines Gift

). Since I just got a k10D. I had the 16-45 on the k100D, so am after a standard zoom for the K10D. Sould I keep the 16-45 for the K10D and get my wife the 18-55 mk2 when it is out. Then I would have some extra cash for another lens instead of buying a DA* 16-50 for the K10D? I am lusting over a DA*

current lens lineup

da 10-17
da 16-45
da 50-200
da 14
da 40 ltd
da 70 ltd

cheers

Adrian

SpecialK · 02-16-2008, 08:23 PM

At this point I would only get a 16-50 if you can test it ahead of time at a store. Many people are not happy with the early version. If speed is not the issue with the 16-45, why not keep it?

Cameta Camera still has the original Sigma 18-50 f2.8 for about $270. That's only $70 more for the extra speed over the new Pentax 18-55.

tux08902 · 02-16-2008, 08:25 PM

If you can test the lens ahead of time, then go for it. That's the only way you'll know if you get a satisfactory copy. Or, if you can find a store that tests each lens before selling it, then buy it from there. I know some do. A lot don't.

rvannatta · 02-16-2008, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by tux08902

If you can test the lens ahead of time, then go for it. That's the only way you'll know if you get a satisfactory copy. Or, if you can find a store that tests each lens before selling it, then buy it from there. I know some do. A lot don't.

It looks to me like your assortment of lenses has too many short lenses
already compared to long ones. To branch yourself out a little, a macro
or a long prime look to me like what you need next.

Alternatively the DA* 30mm SDM on the road map would fit delightfully
in the set of lenses you already have. You already have the 14 and with a 30 the rest doesn't matter.

little laker · 02-16-2008, 10:51 PM

Just a thought.

I'm not that fond of the quality control I've seen with the DA* 16-50mm, however most people won't be using it to photograph newspapers and whatnot.

What's the image quality like on an everyday photograph?

My Vivitar 28mm f2.8 series 1 lens would probably fail the newspaper test, however when it comes to landscapes it's my best lens by far.
This is the only thing that I use this lens with so it's fine by me.

drivel · 02-16-2008, 11:14 PM

I'll post some everyday stuff tomorrow for you. The corners were bugging me stopped down too, an issue with landscape work.

little laker · 02-16-2008, 11:37 PM

Then I would send it back drivel,

I'm really not surprised with that one lens, but I thought that it was something to look at

On another post it sounded like they're using plastic gears in them. Which might have something to do with it.
Plastic might not be bad in a lens, but the wrong plastic would be.

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

02-16-2008, 08:13 PM	#414
Adrian Owerko Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: South Australia Posts: 435	*Should I get the DA 16-50mm** Hi there my wife has just be handed my K100D (Valentines Gift). Since I just got a k10D. I had the 16-45 on the k100D, so am after a standard zoom for the K10D. Sould I keep the 16-45 for the K10D and get my wife the 18-55 mk2 when it is out. Then I would have some extra cash for another lens instead of buying a DA* 16-50 for the K10D? I am lusting over a DA* current lens lineup da 10-17 da 16-45 da 50-200 da 14 da 40 ltd da 70 ltd cheers Adrian

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

02-14-2008, 05:13 PM	#406
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	Hey Buddha wasn't there a retail store (listed in another thread, anybody recall the name?) that tested each lens for FF/BF before they shipped it? Might try that route.

02-15-2008, 02:17 PM	#407
drivel Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 65	So I retested using newspaper. I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story 100 crop top left corner.

02-15-2008, 05:34 PM	#408
jgredline Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: LosAngeles, Ca. Photos: Albums Posts: 10,628	Originally posted by drivel So I retested using newspaper. I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story 100 crop top left corner. Yours is every bit as awefull as my first two copies where...So sad...So sad...

02-15-2008, 05:43 PM	#409
song_hm Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Pennsylvania, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 797	[QUOTE=drivel;177979]So I retested using newspaper. I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story 100 crop top left corner.[QUOTE] That is pretty bad. Mine slightly better. Pretty disappointing. I had it returned.

02-15-2008, 06:18 PM	#410
drivel Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 65	Yeah, I shipped it back to B&H today. I'm going to try to exchange it. If the next one's bad then I guess I'll wait for the Tamron 17-50mm or maybe the Pentax 17-70mm.

02-16-2008, 06:16 AM	#411
Tbear Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 269	Originally posted by drivel So I retested using newspaper. I'm not going to bother posting a bunch of pics. I think this one tells the story 100 crop top left corner. Looks similar to the two losers I have received thus far. Awaiting my 3rd. I am looking forward to testing it and posting formal reviews of it (good or bad) on every single photography web site, retailer, and blog. Ted

02-16-2008, 10:02 AM	#412
hudsong Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 59	I really want this lens, but at the same time I really don't..... what a conundrum!

02-16-2008, 06:42 PM	#413
rvannatta Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Apiary, Oregon Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,181	Originally posted by hudsong I really want this lens, but at the same time I really don't..... what a conundrum! I spent half the day comparing photos of mine with other lenses that I have. I supsect mine isn't the best one ever made, but the results are interesting. I compared the 15mm SMC-A manual focus, and and FA* 24 F/2 lenses at 15mm and at 24mm. Notably, my results were not very consistent particularly when I used a newspaper at 15mm. My eyesight isn't good enough to accuratly focus the manual focus lens, and the auto focus wasn't much better photographing a newspaper from 3 feet or less away. I rarely got a photo where I could actually read the newspaper, but occasionally I did. What I did notice was that the 1650 consistently what I think you folks call a chromic abberation.--any way, anywhere there was a sharp contrast between white and a dark line a blue fuzzy line blurred the line. the blue fuzz was quite characteristic of the 16-50---at close range and not at all visible with the SCM-A 15mm bubblenose. Next however , I switched subjects and focused on a a hedge row with a white satellite dish embedded in it that was 50 feet away. Then at 15/16mm, it was the other way around. The bubble nose showed the blue fuzz on the sharp transistion from white to dark, but the DA* 16-50 didn't. I rated the overall sharpness as the same, but on balance gave it to the 16-50---set at 16mm (and with wide aperatures), becuase it didn't have the blue fuzz. Next I switched dto 24mm and compared to the FA* 24 f/2 Once again at the hedge row.----the color chroma haze was quite obnoxious at 24mm and blue on the DA, and very minor but visible with the FA24, but with it, the fuzz wasn't blue, it was red. I had been using the 'auto exposure' throughout my sequences I set an exposure compensation to increase the exposure with the DA* and this did improve the results, but still not asa good asa th FA24. I"m sort of thinking that there is not a clear winner here--just some work better under some conditions than others, and the sort of consistent habit of the DA 16-50 underexposing things doesn'thelp it do better.

02-16-2008, 08:23 PM	#415
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	At this point I would only get a 16-50 if you can test it ahead of time at a store. Many people are not happy with the early version. If speed is not the issue with the 16-45, why not keep it? Cameta Camera still has the original Sigma 18-50 f2.8 for about $270. That's only $70 more for the extra speed over the new Pentax 18-55.

02-16-2008, 08:25 PM	#416
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	If you can test the lens ahead of time, then go for it. That's the only way you'll know if you get a satisfactory copy. Or, if you can find a store that tests each lens before selling it, then buy it from there. I know some do. A lot don't.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-16-2008, 08:51 PM	#417
rvannatta Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Apiary, Oregon Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,181	Originally posted by tux08902 If you can test the lens ahead of time, then go for it. That's the only way you'll know if you get a satisfactory copy. Or, if you can find a store that tests each lens before selling it, then buy it from there. I know some do. A lot don't. It looks to me like your assortment of lenses has too many short lenses already compared to long ones. To branch yourself out a little, a macro or a long prime look to me like what you need next. Alternatively the DA* 30mm SDM on the road map would fit delightfully in the set of lenses you already have. You already have the 14 and with a 30 the rest doesn't matter.

02-16-2008, 10:51 PM	#418
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	Just a thought. I'm not that fond of the quality control I've seen with the DA* 16-50mm, however most people won't be using it to photograph newspapers and whatnot. What's the image quality like on an everyday photograph? My Vivitar 28mm f2.8 series 1 lens would probably fail the newspaper test, however when it comes to landscapes it's my best lens by far. This is the only thing that I use this lens with so it's fine by me.

02-16-2008, 11:14 PM	#419
drivel Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 65	I'll post some everyday stuff tomorrow for you. The corners were bugging me stopped down too, an issue with landscape work.

02-16-2008, 11:37 PM	#420
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	Then I would send it back drivel, I'm really not surprised with that one lens, but I thought that it was something to look at On another post it sounded like they're using plastic gears in them. Which might have something to do with it. Plastic might not be bad in a lens, but the wrong plastic would be.