Pentax 16-45 vs Tamron 17-50/2.8

lesmore49 · 03-11-2009, 10:18 PM

I've had a 16-45 mm Pentax for over a year . I use with my K10D and take lot's of landscapes, buildings and especially vintage cars. I'm very happy with it, haven't ever noticed any purple fringing you're talking about.

A great lens IMO and I've had all sorts of cameras/lenses including SLR's medium format TLR's , 35 mm Rangefinders...etc. over the past 40 years +.

Les

Jewelltrail · 03-11-2009, 11:06 PM

Quote:

lesmore49: I've had a 16-45 mm Pentax for over a year . I use with my K10D and take lot's of landscapes, buildings and especially vintage cars. I'm very happy with it, haven't ever noticed any purple fringing you're talking about.

I did not see any mention of purple fringing concerning the 16-45 in this thread, or any thread for that matter. I must have missed something? Please help me out here--thanks.

Venturi · 03-11-2009, 11:38 PM

As far as image quality produced I don't think you'll see much, if any, difference between the two unless you're trying. They both are great lenses. There's 6mm difference in range which is negligible. They both take 67mm filters so the expense there if you buy filters is the same. So the major differences are really:

a) 1 stop faster on the Tamron.
b) 6 year warranty verses 1 year on the Pentax.
c) $125ish less for the Pentax.

I own the Tamron, because I like f/2.8 lenses and it was $300 less than the DA*16-50 when I bought mine.

zenkinsw · 03-12-2009, 03:57 AM

hi guys,

I am also interest in Tarmon 17-50, currently owned the Pentax 16-45.

I'm wondering, how's the focus accuracy and speed on Tarmon lens compare to Pentax?

I am really happy with the 16-45 pictures quality, but really want a fast zoom lens for indoor or events shooting.

ustacood · 03-12-2009, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by Jewelltrail

Both of these lenses are excellent lenses and they are graciously priced as well. For landscape, either one will make you happy. Neither the Tammy, nor the Pentax do Macro, but the Tammy's MFD is .27m & the Penny is .28m.

For Portrait, the extra reach of the Tamron is a plus, but not real significant. For lowlight though, the larger (f 2.8) aperture of the Tammy is a big plus and one of the main reasons why the lens is more money than the Penny.

I think, if lowlight is your thing in this purchase, and these are the two lenses from which you will select, the Tamron is the better choice. I bought the Tamron for my K20d back in April of 2008 and am very happy. Here is a shot with the Tammy at close, but not closest focus. Best of luck.
ISO 100---f 4.5--/180th--50mm

Jewelltrail,

That is a very captivating shot. Roll on!

Brent

emalvick · 03-12-2009, 07:59 AM

I upgraded last year from the kit 18-55 mm (I) to the Tamron 17-50. For those two the Tamron obviously takes the cake. I wanted the 2.8 Aperture so the 16-45 didn't enter the equation and the price difference with the 16-50 made me go the Tamron route.

It isn't the perfect lens, but it is damn close. I don't find it too great for the close focus, but for portrait and landscape shots it is fantastic. It's focus speed isn't spectacular though better than my Tamron 70-300. It doesn't have the purple fringing I had issues with the 70-300 and I find it's wide open performance to be more than sufficient for my needs.

The only thing missing, and I'm not sure you'd get it with the Pentax 16-45, is the quick shift focus. I'm finding this great on my new 55-300, which replaced the Tamron 7-300. The focus on the 17-50 is quite accurate for me, and the fact it didn't have a lot of problems with other people led me that way, although I never considered the 16-45... The 16-50 did have issues.

Jewelltrail · 03-12-2009, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Jewelltrail,

That is a very captivating shot. Roll on!

Thank you Brent!

Quote:

zenkinsw hi guys,

I am also interest in Tarmon 17-50, currently owned the Pentax 16-45.

I'm wondering, how's the focus accuracy and speed on Tarmon lens compare to Pentax?

I am really happy with the 16-45 pictures quality, but really want a fast zoom lens for indoor or events shooting.

I am pleased with the Tamron's autofocus perfromance, but autofocus, to be fair, is not a big demand on my part. I shoot most of my work with manual focus, using a split-prism, so autofocus is always like a treat for me--those rare times I indugle.

**Miguel** · 03-12-2009, 12:24 PM

AF on this lens has been an issue out there, perhaps more so for other platforms. I would do a Google search, as I have read complaints from Canon and Nikon users.
I had very mediocre AF performance on this lens (it would not lock and would keep trying for too long) until I adjusted the AF in the K20D. Now the AF is quite good, but not quite as good as with most of my other Pentax AF lenses (the FA 50mm also needed some adjustment, but not as severe as the Tamron).

Like others, AF is not all that important to me; unfortunately the lack of a QuickShift function means that it has become more important. A trick is to press in the lens release button and you can "quickshift" the focus when needed. Not perfect but functional.

M

Originally posted by zenkinsw

hi guys,

I am also interest in Tarmon 17-50, currently owned the Pentax 16-45.

I'm wondering, how's the focus accuracy and speed on Tarmon lens compare to Pentax?

I am really happy with the 16-45 pictures quality, but really want a fast zoom lens for indoor or events shooting.

cousinsane · 03-12-2009, 01:24 PM

I've owned both lenses. Just want to add that the 1mm difference at the wide is actually quite significant. Also the 16-45 seems to focus closer.

Jewelltrail · 03-13-2009, 12:18 AM

Quote:

cousinsane I've owned both lenses. Just want to add that the 1mm difference at the wide is actually quite significant. Also the 16-45 seems to focus closer.

I do not own both lenses, but the posted specs in lens' reviews says the Tammy's minimum focus distance (over the entire zoom range) is .27m and the Penny's is ( I cannot find confirmation whether this holds over the entire zoom range) .28m.

03-12-2009, 04:18 AM	#20
ustacood Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 51	Nice photo Originally posted by Jewelltrail Both of these lenses are excellent lenses and they are graciously priced as well. For landscape, either one will make you happy. Neither the Tammy, nor the Pentax do Macro, but the Tammy's MFD is .27m & the Penny is .28m. For Portrait, the extra reach of the Tamron is a plus, but not real significant. For lowlight though, the larger (f 2.8) aperture of the Tammy is a big plus and one of the main reasons why the lens is more money than the Penny. I think, if lowlight is your thing in this purchase, and these are the two lenses from which you will select, the Tamron is the better choice. I bought the Tamron for my K20d back in April of 2008 and am very happy. Here is a shot with the Tammy at close, but not closest focus. Best of luck. ISO 100---f 4.5--/180th--50mm Jewelltrail, That is a very captivating shot. Roll on! Brent

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 90mm, Tamron 18-250mm, Pentax AF-540 Flash	jumbuc	Sold Items	5	04-21-2010 12:49 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K100d + 18-55mm + Tamron 70-300mm; Tamron 90mm Macro	jake123	Sold Items	4	11-09-2009 12:51 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron SP 70-210mm f/3.5, Tamron SP 28-135mm f/4.0-4.5 28A, Tamron pk/a adapta	hinman	Sold Items	14	05-08-2009 05:35 PM
Tamron Di II 18-200mm vs. Tamron or Pentax 18-250mm vs. ???	PaddyB	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	08-23-2008 09:33 AM

03-11-2009, 10:18 PM	#16
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,349	I've had a 16-45 mm Pentax for over a year . I use with my K10D and take lot's of landscapes, buildings and especially vintage cars. I'm very happy with it, haven't ever noticed any purple fringing you're talking about. A great lens IMO and I've had all sorts of cameras/lenses including SLR's medium format TLR's , 35 mm Rangefinders...etc. over the past 40 years +. Les

03-11-2009, 11:06 PM	#17
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: lesmore49: I've had a 16-45 mm Pentax for over a year . I use with my K10D and take lot's of landscapes, buildings and especially vintage cars. I'm very happy with it, haven't ever noticed any purple fringing you're talking about. I did not see any mention of purple fringing concerning the 16-45 in this thread, or any thread for that matter. I must have missed something? Please help me out here--thanks.

03-11-2009, 11:38 PM	#18
Venturi Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Tulsa, OK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,636	As far as image quality produced I don't think you'll see much, if any, difference between the two unless you're trying. They both are great lenses. There's 6mm difference in range which is negligible. They both take 67mm filters so the expense there if you buy filters is the same. So the major differences are really: a) 1 stop faster on the Tamron. b) 6 year warranty verses 1 year on the Pentax. c) $125ish less for the Pentax. I own the Tamron, because I like f/2.8 lenses and it was $300 less than the DA*16-50 when I bought mine.

03-12-2009, 03:57 AM	#19
zenkinsw New Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 14	hi guys, I am also interest in Tarmon 17-50, currently owned the Pentax 16-45. I'm wondering, how's the focus accuracy and speed on Tarmon lens compare to Pentax? I am really happy with the 16-45 pictures quality, but really want a fast zoom lens for indoor or events shooting.

03-12-2009, 07:59 AM	#21
emalvick Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Davis, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,642	I upgraded last year from the kit 18-55 mm (I) to the Tamron 17-50. For those two the Tamron obviously takes the cake. I wanted the 2.8 Aperture so the 16-45 didn't enter the equation and the price difference with the 16-50 made me go the Tamron route. It isn't the perfect lens, but it is damn close. I don't find it too great for the close focus, but for portrait and landscape shots it is fantastic. It's focus speed isn't spectacular though better than my Tamron 70-300. It doesn't have the purple fringing I had issues with the 70-300 and I find it's wide open performance to be more than sufficient for my needs. The only thing missing, and I'm not sure you'd get it with the Pentax 16-45, is the quick shift focus. I'm finding this great on my new 55-300, which replaced the Tamron 7-300. The focus on the 17-50 is quite accurate for me, and the fact it didn't have a lot of problems with other people led me that way, although I never considered the 16-45... The 16-50 did have issues.

03-12-2009, 08:11 AM	#22
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: Jewelltrail, That is a very captivating shot. Roll on! Thank you Brent! Quote: zenkinsw hi guys, I am also interest in Tarmon 17-50, currently owned the Pentax 16-45. I'm wondering, how's the focus accuracy and speed on Tarmon lens compare to Pentax? I am really happy with the 16-45 pictures quality, but really want a fast zoom lens for indoor or events shooting. I am pleased with the Tamron's autofocus perfromance, but autofocus, to be fair, is not a big demand on my part. I shoot most of my work with manual focus, using a split-prism, so autofocus is always like a treat for me--those rare times I indugle.

03-12-2009, 12:24 PM	#23
Miguel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Near Seattle Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,743	AF on this lens has been an issue out there, perhaps more so for other platforms. I would do a Google search, as I have read complaints from Canon and Nikon users. I had very mediocre AF performance on this lens (it would not lock and would keep trying for too long) until I adjusted the AF in the K20D. Now the AF is quite good, but not quite as good as with most of my other Pentax AF lenses (the FA 50mm also needed some adjustment, but not as severe as the Tamron). Like others, AF is not all that important to me; unfortunately the lack of a QuickShift function means that it has become more important. A trick is to press in the lens release button and you can "quickshift" the focus when needed. Not perfect but functional. M Originally posted by zenkinsw hi guys, I am also interest in Tarmon 17-50, currently owned the Pentax 16-45. I'm wondering, how's the focus accuracy and speed on Tarmon lens compare to Pentax? I am really happy with the 16-45 pictures quality, but really want a fast zoom lens for indoor or events shooting.

03-12-2009, 01:24 PM	#24
cousinsane Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: madison Posts: 239	I've owned both lenses. Just want to add that the 1mm difference at the wide is actually quite significant. Also the 16-45 seems to focus closer.

03-13-2009, 12:18 AM	#25
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: cousinsane I've owned both lenses. Just want to add that the 1mm difference at the wide is actually quite significant. Also the 16-45 seems to focus closer. I do not own both lenses, but the posted specs in lens' reviews says the Tammy's minimum focus distance (over the entire zoom range) is .27m and the Penny's is ( I cannot find confirmation whether this holds over the entire zoom range) .28m.