Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-01-2023, 10:55 PM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,081
Great lens. It and K200D was my first digital combo. Wish I still had it, may buy one again. K200D too.

12-01-2023, 11:45 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: N. Calif
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,640
QuoteOriginally posted by RICHARD L. Quote
But modern digital bodies, starting with the K5, have provisions for Color Aberration Correction. Problem solved (almost) !





Fantastic colors. Love the last one especially- looks like adjusted for tilt.
12-06-2023, 08:32 AM   #18
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,885
Mine has taken so many great pictures through the years, no matter what body I used with it.

With my copy the "droop" became too big and was affecting the pictures quite a lot, so I found a good deal on the SMC DA*16-50 2.8 and got that as a replacement. Later I found out that if I hold up the front of the lens at 16mm (to keep it from drooping) I get the same sharpness and contrast (yes contrast is affected as well, I was surprised) that I used to get. And I was amazed again at the pictures I could get... So I can't really get myself to get rid of mine even though I now have the 16-50 and the HD DA 18-50 RE, another very good and underrated lens. But the 16-45 still has something special about it even when compared with the more expensive 16-50, they're both great in their own ways... the bold colors and contrast of the 16-45 can really make a statement. The SMC 16-50 has incredible microcontrast and more "delicate" rendering, I guess is what I'd call it. Both have fantastic skin tones but the 16-50 wins out on that front even if slightly, so it ended up becoming our travel zoom... unless I want to go light which is when the 18-50 comes in... ah to be spoiled for choice
12-06-2023, 08:51 PM   #19
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,885
I think something that is often overlooked about the 16-45 is how close it focuses... the specs say 0.26 but it's much closer than that. I've done a comparison with a couple lenses that are .25x and the 16-45 focuses much closer. It's at least .30x, maybe .35x.

This picture is a small pepper flower on my window. I didn't see that there was an ant inside until I reviewed the picture... it's a tiny ant. Also, the "square" patterns on the leave are the mosquito net on my window. These squares can't be seen with the naked eye, which only sees sun on the leaves. And please forgive my misfocus...



12-06-2023, 11:22 PM   #20
dbs
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Clare Valley S A
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,547
My first zoom I bought and has been used on all my cameras.
On my K100D Super

12-07-2023, 03:50 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2020
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 91
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
I think something that is often overlooked about the 16-45 is how close it focuses... the specs say 0.26 but it's much closer than that. I've done a comparison with a couple lenses that are .25x and the 16-45 focuses much closer. It's at least .30x, maybe .35x.
My impression is that the 18-55 despite it's 55mm and 0.25 MFD certainly seems worse.
I initially thought it was just because the 16-45 front element was closer and then I wasn't sure if this surpassed it's spec or the 18-55 didn't meet it's spec. Whichever way round there is gulf between relative performance of these two lenses at close range.
12-07-2023, 04:02 AM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ehrwien's Avatar

Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,766
QuoteOriginally posted by p706 Quote
My impression is that the 18-55 despite it's 55mm and 0.25 MFD certainly seems worse.
I initially thought it was just because the 16-45 front element was closer and then I wasn't sure if this surpassed it's spec or the 18-55 didn't meet it's spec. Whichever way round there is gulf between relative performance of these two lenses at close range.
Perhaps it could have to do with focus breathing as well?

12-07-2023, 04:52 AM   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2020
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 91
QuoteOriginally posted by ehrwien Quote
Perhaps it could have to do with focus breathing as well?
I sold my last 18-55 a couple of weeks ago so cannot check now but you could be onto something
12-07-2023, 07:24 AM   #24
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,885
QuoteOriginally posted by p706 Quote
My impression is that the 18-55 despite it's 55mm and 0.25 MFD certainly seems worse.
I initially thought it was just because the 16-45 front element was closer and then I wasn't sure if this surpassed it's spec or the 18-55 didn't meet it's spec. Whichever way round there is gulf between relative performance of these two lenses at close range.
Agreed on all fronts... the 16-45 focuses quite a bit closer than the 18-55, I remember making that comparison when I had an 18-55. Also, closeups with the 18-55 at 55mm are an absolute mess. Unusable. If you back it off to 45mm you actually get good closeups. It's amazing how a small adjustment like that produced so much difference.

With the 16-45... this is one of our Christmas tree ornaments...



And this is MFD on a tiny part of it... I know it's not .5x because when I had my SMC-M 50mm f4 macro it focuses noticeably closer but it's somewhere between .25x and .5x...

12-07-2023, 08:14 AM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Quebec City, Quebec
Posts: 6,459
Close-up of melting snow on fir branches with the DA 16-45 mm f/4

12-07-2023, 09:39 AM - 1 Like   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
mgvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,027
Some experiments I did with DA 16-45 on K-x. This was my first serious camera and lens.
2010 National Christmas Tree in D.C. (with the shoot while zooming trick)
Corinth Greece
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-x  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-x  Photo 
12-07-2023, 09:47 AM - 1 Like   #27
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
EssJayEff's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: near Saxapahaw, NC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 951
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mgvh Quote
2010 National Christmas Tree in D.C. (with the shoot while zooming trick)
I really enjoy the national tree shot!
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!
*ist, 16-45mm, 20th birthday, f3.5-5.6, k-mount, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, pentax-fa, september, slr lens, smc, smc pentax-da 16-45mm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Still Life Happy New Year I wishes you all Elvy Annika Nykvist Post Your Photos! 4 01-01-2022 04:02 AM
Night Birthday Milky Way with birthday camera Tsuken Post Your Photos! 8 07-01-2018 05:11 PM
Bachmann wishes Elvis Presley a happy birthday on the anniversary of his death jogiba General Talk 24 08-18-2011 09:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:55 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