Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-06-2009, 08:45 AM   #1
Veteran Member
causey's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,758
Pentax 18-250mm VS Pentax 16-45mm (sharpness & bokeh)

How do they compare? I just got my wife's approval to buy another lens
I have the 18-250mm, which I really like, and was considering the 16-45mm, but I wonder whether it is worth the money for me. My 18-250mm seems pretty sharp. The bokeh isn't one of its better qualities; still, for the focal range, I find it quite amazing. Is the 16-45mm significantly sharper? Does it have a much better bokeh? The 16-18mm would be nice (although not absolutely necessary), especially since the 18-250mm suffers a bit (or maybe a bit more than just a bit) between 18mm and about 28mm. Thank you for your comments!

05-06-2009, 10:25 AM   #2
New Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 15
QuoteOriginally posted by causey Quote
I have the 18-250mm, which I really like, [...] Is the 16-45mm significantly sharper?
I have both and honestly speaking I see little or no difference in sharpness in everyday photography. The advantage of the DA18-250mm is its wide range and it is pretty sharp, giving nice contrast. Its disadvantage is the vignetting it gives. Every picture has to be corrected. I prefer using the DA16-45mm (and now also the DA17-70mm) simply because I like WA photography better than telephotography. Some 40% of the pictures I shoot, is in the range 16(17)-21mm. I also have the DA12-24mm which I use less frequently nowadays. The DA16-45mm is a nice general WA lens which offers too little tele somtimes, but it is not significantly sharper than the DA18-25mm.

The first picture is taken with the DA16-45mm at 16mm, the second with the DA18-250mm at 29mm.



05-06-2009, 10:38 AM   #3
Veteran Member
causey's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,758
Original Poster
Hythloday, thanks for your comparative evaluation. I guess I'll stick to the 18-250, even if, as you said, the vignetting is bothersome. I haven't noticed any bad vignetting until I took some pictures in a rather harsh light last week. It might have been accentuated by the UV filter--I'll have to see.

The first picture (16-45) seems nicer than the other, but maybe the quality of the second suffered with the upload. I don't know why, the pictures I've uploaded on this forum never looked good. Something happens to them in the process...

Last edited by causey; 05-06-2009 at 11:07 AM.
05-06-2009, 10:56 AM   #4
New Member




Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 15
QuoteOriginally posted by causey Quote
The first picture (16-45) seems nicer than the other, but maybe the quality of the second suffered with the upload. I don't know why, the pictures I've uploaded on this forum never look good. Something happens to them in the process...
Both were taken with a K100D. The light was wonderfully good in the first picture. I just wanted to show that sharpness is about the same. The pictures were processed in the same way.

05-07-2009, 10:20 AM   #5
Veteran Member
res3567's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston Tx.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,876
QuoteOriginally posted by causey Quote
Hythloday, thanks for your comparative evaluation. I guess I'll stick to the 18-250, even if, as you said, the vignetting is bothersome. I haven't noticed any bad vignetting until I took some pictures in a rather harsh light last week. It might have been accentuated by the UV filter--I'll have to see.

The first picture (16-45) seems nicer than the other, but maybe the quality of the second suffered with the upload. I don't know why, the pictures I've uploaded on this forum never looked good. Something happens to them in the process...
From what I have read when you upload on this forum, it compresses the picture.

Others have also said the same thing about their uploaded pics.

I own the 16-45 and I think it is great in terms of sharpness.
05-07-2009, 10:35 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,134
If you are using a K10 or K20, DxO Standard can correct the lens flaws for the 18-250 automatically. It is slow. It is glacially slow. It is magic.
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, bit, bokeh, k-mount, 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: K10d & D-BG2 battery grip ; FA 77mm f1.8 Ltd (silver); 16-45mm f4.0; DA 18-250 swoosh21 Sold Items 34 04-24-2011 09:29 PM
For Sale - Sold: K-X 18-55mm kit, 16-45mm & 18-250mm (US) Olypentax Sold Items 3 06-07-2010 02:38 PM
For Sale - Sold: Three Pentax Zoom Lenses (50-200mm, 18-250mm, 16-45mm) dgaies Sold Items 13 12-09-2009 03:56 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K200D Body & SMC DA 16-45mm Lens and AF540FGZ Flash & Canon 40D All Br walay Sold Items 11 07-29-2008 10:57 AM
Pentax 16-45mm or Pentax 18-250mm Mr Hyde Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 10-30-2007 05:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:06 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