Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Pentax DA 16-45mm or Pentax DA 17-70mm
Pentax DA 16-45mm F4 1346.43%
Pentax DA 17-70mm F4 1553.57%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-27-2009, 05:03 AM   #1
Senior Member
IsaacSteiner's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Stouffville, ON, Canada
Posts: 181
Which lens to save for??

Hey,

I want to start saving for a lens, and I've been thinking the Pentax DA* 16-50mm, but have read reviews and people don't seem 100% happy with it, and I think I want something with-out the SDM system.

So, I've been thinking, either the Pentax DA 16-45mm F4 or the Pentax DA 17-70mm.

It would be replacing my 18-55mm. And I would keep my M 50mm F2 and M 28mm F2.8. But then after the purchase of the 16-45mm or the 17-70mm, I would start saving for the Pentax FA 50mm F1.4.

So, if you could give me your opinion on the 16-45mm and 17-70mm, that would be great.

Thanks,

-Isaac


Last edited by IsaacSteiner; 03-27-2009 at 03:53 PM.
03-27-2009, 05:23 AM   #2
Veteran Member
farfisa's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,274
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacSteiner Quote
...I think I want something with-out the SDM system...

DA 17-70 is SDM only, so I think you've made your decision
03-27-2009, 05:42 AM   #3
Senior Member
georgecape's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kenridge, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
Best bet

I don't think you should write-off the 16-50 so quickly.

I started again (with digital) and a K10D 12 mnths ago and although I've been made very happy with some of my 18-55 photos I regularly run into low light shots and then f4 is just not good enough because you sacrifice ISO and thus noise. And the IQ certainly lets me down from time to time.

I avidly read all the messages and I know that the 16-50 f2.8 is a superb lens and will make you very happy. I myself am saving for the Tammy 17-50 f2.8 as the 16-50 is out of my range for this yr.

I would love a 17-70 to cover my 55-300 (which is pure pleasure) but with f2.8 but alas it does not exist.

If you're able at least test the 16-50 against the 17-70 before deciding would be my advice.
03-27-2009, 05:54 AM   #4
Senior Member
IsaacSteiner's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Stouffville, ON, Canada
Posts: 181
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by farfisa Quote
DA 17-70 is SDM only, so I think you've made your decision
Ohh, my bad. I didn't realize that. I've heard bad things about the SDM system on the DA* series, but what about on the 17-70mm?

QuoteOriginally posted by georgecape Quote
I don't think you should write-off the 16-50 so quickly.

I started again (with digital) and a K10D 12 mnths ago and although I've been made very happy with some of my 18-55 photos I regularly run into low light shots and then f4 is just not good enough because you sacrifice ISO and thus noise. And the IQ certainly lets me down from time to time.

I avidly read all the messages and I know that the 16-50 f2.8 is a superb lens and will make you very happy. I myself am saving for the Tammy 17-50 f2.8 as the 16-50 is out of my range for this yr.

I would love a 17-70 to cover my 55-300 (which is pure pleasure) but with f2.8 but alas it does not exist.

If you're able at least test the 16-50 against the 17-70 before deciding would be my advice.
I don't really want the 16-50mm anymore. I know it's F2.8, but for what the price is, I don't really want to come across problems. The 16-45mm would be pretty perfect for me I think, or the 17-70mm (as long the SDM system is good on it).

For low light conditions, I've got my Pentax-M 50mm F2 and Pentax-M 28mm F2.8. So I think I'm good there.

-Isaac

03-27-2009, 05:57 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
A simple way to look at the problem: with the kit lens do you wish it were longer or shorter? Do you spend a lot of time >45mm in other words, and wish you had something longer than 55mm? Oth do you spend a lot of time at the wide end and wish you had more?

The 16-45 is a fine lens, and while f/4 may be a bit limiting, you do have the primes when you need the speed. Personally I wish it went longer, but then it wouldn't be the same lens. Perhaps had it been available I'd have gone for the 17-70 for the extra reach.
03-27-2009, 06:09 AM   #6
Veteran Member
farfisa's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,274
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacSteiner Quote
Ohh, my bad. I didn't realize that. I've heard bad things about the SDM system on the DA* series, but what about on the 17-70mm?



I don't really want the 16-50mm anymore. I know it's F2.8, but for what the price is, I don't really want to come across problems. The 16-45mm would be pretty perfect for me I think, or the 17-70mm (as long the SDM system is good on it).

For low light conditions, I've got my Pentax-M 50mm F2 and Pentax-M 28mm F2.8. So I think I'm good there.

-Isaac
I understand your reservations about the 16-50--I managed to get a really good copy here on the forums. Funny--it's the only lens I'd rather buy used than new!

If I could only have one zoom right now though out of all of them, the 17-70 seems like the most desirable lens.

What a great focal range, and for it to match the resolution of the 16-45 and be constant f/4 is very impressive!

I haven't seen any reports of SDM problems, but maybe that's because not too many people have them.

I briefly had a 16-45 and didn't like its build quality (mine wobbled quite a bit, but I know other people love them) and the 45mm was just a little too limiting. The extra 5mm on the 16-50 is good, but I sometimes miss the long end of the Tamron 28-75!
03-27-2009, 06:25 AM   #7
Senior Member
georgecape's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kenridge, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
Mmmmmmmmmm....I will be so glad if I can consider the 17-70 again even though its f4.

You've got me thinking.....a DA 40 is on my list or nearest available used equivalent FA 43 etc to justify the 17-70 f4. It means low light has its own solution.

I find 55mm to be too short too often and replacing it with the 55-300 is again a shclep too often. I still like to frame my shots and too old to change my style. And I still do a lot of cropping to remove anything inappropriate to the scene. But first prize is still a perfectly framed shot and the extra 15mm will do the trick and I still have the 17 which is ever so important.

Thks for that.....
03-27-2009, 08:50 AM   #8
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,009
I find the 18-55 kit lens (at least my copy) quite good and can see no reason to replace it for another zoom in that same size range other than with something faster (f 2.8). Just my opinion.

03-27-2009, 11:10 AM   #9
Senior Member
K100Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 111
The 16-45mm is a huge upgrade from the kit lens, even tho the reach is not quite there. The IQ of the 16-45mm is considerablely sharper and I would assume that would be the case with 17-70 as well.
03-27-2009, 11:30 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by IsaacSteiner Quote
Ohh, my bad. I didn't realize that. I've heard bad things about the SDM system on the DA* series, but what about on the 17-70mm?
-Isaac
No problems with mine after three months. My guess is that the SDM-only mechanism is simpler and therefore more reliable--there are fewer mechanical parts to fail.

Note also that (1) DA 17-70 is internally focusing while DA 16-45 (is a loud dentist drill that) doesn't focus internally:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bDPbc8mlMo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1ap2OjrfVQ

(2) DA 17-70 has FREE (http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/lens_terms.html) while DA 16-45 does not.

(3) DA 17-70 has a rubber seal around the mount.

(4) Oh and chromatic aberration is controlled better on the DA 17-70 than on DA 16-45:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/408-pentax_1770_4

Last edited by asdf; 03-28-2009 at 01:36 AM.
03-27-2009, 12:25 PM   #11
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by georgecape Quote
Mmmmmmmmmm....I will be so glad if I can consider the 17-70 again even though its f4.

You've got me thinking.....a DA 40 is on my list or nearest available used equivalent FA 43 etc to justify the 17-70 f4. It means low light has its own solution.

I find 55mm to be too short too often and replacing it with the 55-300 is again a shclep too often. I still like to frame my shots and too old to change my style. And I still do a lot of cropping to remove anything inappropriate to the scene. But first prize is still a perfectly framed shot and the extra 15mm will do the trick and I still have the 17 which is ever so important.

Thks for that.....
I like your thinking in this message. I don't have either of those zooms but have the Tamy 18-250. But i have the FA50 1.4 and now, the DA35 ltd macro.

I've used the FA 50 1.4 a lot but for general carrying around, the DA 35 is easily going to have the fav. place on my K10. My brother has the Kit 18-55 lens.

I think you should be buying to augment your existing lenses rather than starting over. Keep the kit lens and buy either the DA 35 or the DA 40 is my advice. The DA 35 would give you a great street lens as well as a close focusing macro capability, much flexibility added to your existing lenses. I think the color rendering qualities of either lens would give you an unmatched joy with your camera. I'm amazed at what the DA 35 provides. Can speak from exp. on the DA40 but many rave reviews on here.
03-27-2009, 12:59 PM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Cow Belt
Posts: 160
QuoteOriginally posted by farfisa Quote
I understand your reservations about the 16-50--I managed to get a really good copy here on the forums. Funny--it's the only lens I'd rather buy used than new!
I briefly had a 16-45 and didn't like its build quality (mine wobbled quite a bit, but I know other people love them) and the 45mm was just a little too limiting. The extra 5mm on the 16-50 is good, but I sometimes miss the long end of the Tamron 28-75!
I have never used the 16-50 but given the price and having got the impression from the post above that there are good and bad copies on a regular basis, it would not, in my opinion be a good idea to buy it used. As the lens has very good optical qualities, not many would try to get rid of it if it were giving good results.
03-27-2009, 03:49 PM   #13
Senior Member
IsaacSteiner's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Stouffville, ON, Canada
Posts: 181
Original Poster
Okay, so now I am thinking the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8.

What do you guys think about that? I've read some great reviews about it. Quite a bit cheaper than the DA* 16-50mm F2.8 and pretty much the same as the DA 17-70mm.

Updated options:

1. Pentax DA 16-45mm F4
2. Pentax DA 17-70mm F4
3. Tamron 17-50mm F2.8

-Isaac
03-27-2009, 04:53 PM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 220
I just got the 17-70/4 today. I initially had the da* zooms when I thought all I was going to have was zooms. But this year I got a couple fast primes and decided that the fast big zooms were a little overkill. I thought about the 16-45/4 but the extra range and the SDM pushed me toward the 17-70.
I voted for the 17-70/4
03-27-2009, 07:11 PM   #15
Veteran Member
heatherslightbox's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gainesville, FL
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,594
I've had the DA16-45, but I got rid of it because it wasn't quite long enough for me. While I don't have the DA17-70, I do have the less expensive Sigma version and the range works a lot better for me. If you don't mind a variable aperture (2.8-4.5), then the Sigma is most definitely worth taking a look at.

Heather
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!
16-45mm, 17-70mm, 50mm, da, k-mount, lens, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 16-45mm/4, Pentax F 28mm/2.8, Pentax, DA 70mm/2.4 Limited (Worldwide dgaies Sold Items 5 04-08-2010 06:16 AM
Sigma 17-70mm vs pentax 16-45mm or OTHER! clipsed Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 02-22-2010 07:50 AM
For Sale - Sold: PENTAX S90-140 Soft Lens Case (for DA 17-70mm & DA 16-45mm) Adrian Owerko Sold Items 2 03-17-2009 09:39 PM
General Purpose Lens: Pentax 16-45mm or Sigma 17-70mm SirGMT Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 02-01-2009 03:26 PM
sigma DC 17-70mm vs. Pentax DA 16-45mm Edvinas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 11-19-2006 10:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:13 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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