Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-20-2009, 10:55 PM   #16
Veteran Member
res3567's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston Tx.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,876
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
I think any lens at 16mm has distortion. I found that DxO Pro very nicely took all the distortion away, so I added that to my arsenal. It also does the same for the Pentax DA 12-24, 50-135 and 50 macro. They may have added other lenses, but I don't have them.
What about the 16-45? What you have heard or read?

04-21-2009, 01:28 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
Why are you considering a new lens ?
Is it just LBA or are you unhappy with the ones you have?

Kind regards
.lars
04-21-2009, 08:51 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,449
QuoteOriginally posted by res3567 Quote
What about the 16-45? What you have heard or read?
Everything I have heard about the 16-45 is that it is an excellent lens. The 16-50 is a lot more money - about twice as much. The extra money buys weather sealing, SDM focus motor in the lens, and 5 more mm of reach at the long end. These advantages were worth it to me, so I bought the 16-50 rather than the 16-45. Check out the lens reviews for the two lenses here on the forums.
04-21-2009, 04:07 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
Everything I have heard about the 16-45 is that it is an excellent lens. The 16-50 is a lot more money - about twice as much. The extra money buys weather sealing, SDM focus motor in the lens, and 5 more mm of reach at the long end.
And a whole stop of speed (f/2.8 versus f/4) - that's what *really* accounts for the difference price.

04-21-2009, 04:58 PM   #20
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,691
I'd agree with most here.
'Upgrading' the quality of your lenses would be the only reason to replace your kit lens, which is already a good performer, and I think you could stick with your 55-300, unless you simply want something faster - then you're looking at big bucks.

On the other hand, as said - if you find yourself using your kit lens for lots of wide angle shots, the 16-45 or even 16-50 are very good choices - depends on your budget.

Others have mentioned the 12-24 for even more wide angle, and the 10-17 for fun - these are also very, very good quality lenses.

Really depends on what you really want...
04-21-2009, 05:01 PM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,449
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
And a whole stop of speed (f/2.8 versus f/4) - that's what *really* accounts for the difference price.
Oops! left that out! Thanks, Marc.
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!
da, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:55 AM. | 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