Question for 16-50mm owners

Peter Zack · 05-13-2008, 07:04 AM

O Rings? This is a new rumour? Never heard of it.

bymy141 · 05-13-2008, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by codiac2600

Who are these people that say this? I've abused my 16-50 and have had it since almost day one and it's never happened nor can I see this happening by the design. More people have the 50-135 AFAIK and this issue hasn't come up yet and it's the SAME o-ring design. This is more internet garbage as I can see and after selling our 18th 16-50 at the store yesterday we still haven't had a bad copy with IQ.

I'm going to go shoot some walls or wrinkled paper to test my lenses now.

Hum, yes, hum, I can't find the posts using the search function, ....
My lens is fine as well. Is this a product of my imagination?

- Bert

Bart · 05-13-2008, 09:09 AM

no imagination. See: Argh! My DA* 16-50 died [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

regken · 05-13-2008, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by codiac2600

Who are these people that say this? I've abused my 16-50 and have had it since almost day one and it's never happened nor can I see this happening by the design. More people have the 50-135 AFAIK and this issue hasn't come up yet and it's the SAME o-ring design. This is more internet garbage as I can see and after selling our 18th 16-50 at the store yesterday we still haven't had a bad copy with IQ.

I'm going to go shoot some walls or wrinkled paper to test my lenses now.

Chris,
Erric for one had O rings pop on him. See https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/25561-16-50-te...tml#post225251
It's not internet garbage. There are problems with this lens, like it or not.

Ken

bymy141 · 05-13-2008, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by Bart

no imagination. See: Argh! My DA* 16-50 died [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Thanks Bart,

- Bert

martin s · 05-20-2008, 01:11 PM

Could someone direct me to the post with those serial numbers???

Thanks.

Martin

miniman82 · 05-20-2008, 02:19 PM

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/22297-da-16-50...-database.html

PentaxPoke · 05-30-2008, 07:11 PM

I noticed that several of my shots were "soft" on the right, so I took a picture of a wall:

Flickr Photo Download: IMGP2087a

Cr@p, I think it is!

qksilver · 05-31-2008, 04:12 AM

looks like it to me

Tom S. · 05-31-2008, 04:36 AM

It looks like it might be except, are you sure you were standing perpendicular to the wall? If not, the right side may be fuzzy because it is slightly further away and thus out of focus.

cputeq · 05-31-2008, 04:51 AM

Man, all these reports of bad 16-50's are really discouraging

Especially since PentaxPoke says this is a new one.

Hrm, Sigma and Tamron offerings I'll probably now start considering

And yes the right is soft.

Zewrak · 05-31-2008, 06:10 AM

Originally posted by cputeq

Man, all these reports of bad 16-50's are really discouraging

Especially since PentaxPoke says this is a new one.

Hrm, Sigma and Tamron offerings I'll probably now start considering

And yes the right is soft.

You will get as many lemons from Sigma and Tamron as you will get from any other lowprice brand, especially at the pricelevel of massproduced consumer cameras/lenses. And for the love of god, don't trust all the alarms on internetforums. 99% of the people that are posting "OH NO MY LENS IS DEAD!" threads, would not know a bad from a good lense if they were born with one in their behind.

I can't judge from that image if it's something wrong with it. Noone can, you need to make sure that the camera is 100% straight and parallel to whatever you shoot. Thats a handheld shot that I am not even sure if it is focused in a straight line from the wall.

You need a tripod, you need to focus it properly and you need a more even subject. Try for example a paiting or a carpet, which is straight and have no shadows or shining fields.

lbam · 05-31-2008, 07:06 AM

Tell us you were perpendicular to the wall, and it was just the sun coming from one side please

.

qksilver · 05-31-2008, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by Tom S.

It looks like it might be except, are you sure you were standing perpendicular to the wall? If not, the right side may be fuzzy because it is slightly further away and thus out of focus.

If he were not perpendicular, Both sides would be fuzzy because neither of them would be the same distance as the center of the image. you know he is perpendicular because the center and the left side are both in focus. Assuming the wall is flat, the lens seems to be soft on the right side.

lbam · 05-31-2008, 07:26 AM

Indeed. Thanks.

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

05-30-2008, 07:11 PM	#698
PentaxPoke Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 1,411	*My new DA 16-50 is decentered** I noticed that several of my shots were "soft" on the right, so I took a picture of a wall: Flickr Photo Download: IMGP2087a Cr@p, I think it is! Last edited by PentaxPoke; 05-30-2008 at 08:25 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

05-13-2008, 07:04 AM	#691
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	O Rings? This is a new rumour? Never heard of it.

05-13-2008, 08:15 AM	#692
bymy141 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,563	Originally posted by codiac2600 Who are these people that say this? I've abused my 16-50 and have had it since almost day one and it's never happened nor can I see this happening by the design. More people have the 50-135 AFAIK and this issue hasn't come up yet and it's the SAME o-ring design. This is more internet garbage as I can see and after selling our 18th 16-50 at the store yesterday we still haven't had a bad copy with IQ. I'm going to go shoot some walls or wrinkled paper to test my lenses now. Hum, yes, hum, I can't find the posts using the search function, .... My lens is fine as well. Is this a product of my imagination? - Bert

05-13-2008, 09:09 AM	#693
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	no imagination. See: Argh! My DA* 16-50 died [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

05-13-2008, 09:38 AM	#694
regken Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bangor, Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,377	Originally posted by codiac2600 Who are these people that say this? I've abused my 16-50 and have had it since almost day one and it's never happened nor can I see this happening by the design. More people have the 50-135 AFAIK and this issue hasn't come up yet and it's the SAME o-ring design. This is more internet garbage as I can see and after selling our 18th 16-50 at the store yesterday we still haven't had a bad copy with IQ. I'm going to go shoot some walls or wrinkled paper to test my lenses now. Chris, Erric for one had O rings pop on him. See https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/25561-16-50-te...tml#post225251 It's not internet garbage. There are problems with this lens, like it or not. Ken

05-13-2008, 09:56 AM	#695
bymy141 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,563	Originally posted by Bart no imagination. See: Argh! My DA* 16-50 died [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Thanks Bart, - Bert

05-20-2008, 01:11 PM	#696
martin s Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 20	Could someone direct me to the post with those serial numbers??? Thanks. Martin

05-20-2008, 02:19 PM	#697
miniman82 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Waukegan, IL Photos: Gallery Posts: 83	https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/22297-da-16-50...-database.html

05-31-2008, 04:12 AM	#699
qksilver Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Northern Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 131	looks like it to me

05-31-2008, 04:36 AM	#700
Tom S. Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 4,317	It looks like it might be except, are you sure you were standing perpendicular to the wall? If not, the right side may be fuzzy because it is slightly further away and thus out of focus.

05-31-2008, 04:51 AM	#701
cputeq Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 464	Man, all these reports of bad 16-50's are really discouraging Especially since PentaxPoke says this is a new one. Hrm, Sigma and Tamron offerings I'll probably now start considering And yes the right is soft.

05-31-2008, 06:10 AM	#702
Zewrak Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Nowhere, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 654	Originally posted by cputeq Man, all these reports of bad 16-50's are really discouraging Especially since PentaxPoke says this is a new one. Hrm, Sigma and Tamron offerings I'll probably now start considering And yes the right is soft. You will get as many lemons from Sigma and Tamron as you will get from any other lowprice brand, especially at the pricelevel of massproduced consumer cameras/lenses. And for the love of god, don't trust all the alarms on internetforums. 99% of the people that are posting "OH NO MY LENS IS DEAD!" threads, would not know a bad from a good lense if they were born with one in their behind. I can't judge from that image if it's something wrong with it. Noone can, you need to make sure that the camera is 100% straight and parallel to whatever you shoot. Thats a handheld shot that I am not even sure if it is focused in a straight line from the wall. You need a tripod, you need to focus it properly and you need a more even subject. Try for example a paiting or a carpet, which is straight and have no shadows or shining fields.

05-31-2008, 07:06 AM	#703
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	Tell us you were perpendicular to the wall, and it was just the sun coming from one side please .

05-31-2008, 07:16 AM	#704
qksilver Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Northern Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 131	Originally posted by Tom S. It looks like it might be except, are you sure you were standing perpendicular to the wall? If not, the right side may be fuzzy because it is slightly further away and thus out of focus. If he were not perpendicular, Both sides would be fuzzy because neither of them would be the same distance as the center of the image. you know he is perpendicular because the center and the left side are both in focus. Assuming the wall is flat, the lens seems to be soft on the right side.

05-31-2008, 07:26 AM	#705
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	Indeed. Thanks.