DA 16-45 f/4: thoughts and examples

silverelantra · 10-22-2009, 05:33 PM

It's definetely not a low-light lens but it's a great replacement of DA 18-55. It's sharp, the colors are great and wide enough to take landscape shots

campdog · 10-24-2009, 07:36 PM

I just sold my 16-45. I got a Sigma 17-70 before a to Samoa and never put it back on. I just love the 17-70 so much. I sold the pentax 16-45 and waiting on a Sigma 10-20. Now I wish I had kept the pentax as well.
John

jsherman999 · 10-24-2009, 10:06 PM

.

Silver, nice shots!

Some from today:

**Ash** · 10-24-2009, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Arjay Bee

I bought the 16-45 to replace the sigma 'kit' that came with the Australian sourced *ist DL2.

It is used as my walkabout and wide angle lens for the PJ work that I do for my employers.
On the K20 it focusses speedily and accurately and gets me the shot without fuss.
It is no slouch at Macros either:
Won't be letting this one go.

That first shot looked like Seisia wharf.
And you mean those 'macro' shots came from the 16-45?!?
Good stuff!

**Ash** · 10-24-2009, 10:29 PM

Brilliant images from you both Jay and Silverlantra.
Exemplary work!

Peter Zack · 10-25-2009, 04:52 AM

Originally posted by Ash

Brilliant images from you both Jay and Silverlantra.
Exemplary work!

I gotta agree. These really show how excellent this lens is. Really for around $300 (used) you can't beat this lens from anyone.

Originally posted by campdog

I just sold my 16-45. I got a Sigma 17-70 before a to Samoa and never put it back on. I just love the 17-70 so much. I sold the pentax 16-45 and waiting on a Sigma 10-20. Now I wish I had kept the pentax as well.
John

I don't understand this post. You bought the Sigma and then later sold the Pentax because you never used the Pentax any more. Now you want the Pentax back?????

Pentaxor · 10-25-2009, 08:39 PM

if it were only compact just like the 20-35, I won't have second thoughts on getting one ! I think I saw some people selling it a lil over 200 bucks. pretty tempting to use from 16-28. but I need to settle for a tad down WR kit lens. it's the monsoon season here at the West Coast, so a WR lens should really come in handy.

flippedgazelle · 10-25-2009, 09:53 PM

Damn you all... I'm trying to be satisfied with my kit lens, and here you are posting these wonderful photos with the 16-45...

... or maybe it's just that y'all are good photographers.

Pentaxor · 10-25-2009, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by flippedgazelle

Damn you all... I'm trying to be satisfied with my kit lens, and here you are posting these wonderful photos with the 16-45...

... or maybe it's just that y'all are good photographers.

it's not just about being a good photographer. if you are keen enough to look on your results, you would see some obvious differences and weaknesses of the other. honestly speaking, I'm having a hard time fighting my LBA since I don't want to sell my WR kit lens either (due to weather use and lightness). btw, check your borders and extreme borders, those things are nasty weak at 18mm. thank GOD I don't have to use it that much now at that focal length. the kit lens is good, but does not meet what I'm looking for in terms of IQ. make the IQ a tad higher and I would be happy as a bird.

woof · 10-25-2009, 10:25 PM

Some great photos here. Here are a few of mine.

flippedgazelle · 10-25-2009, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

it's not just about being a good photographer. if you are keen enough to look on your results, you would see some obvious differences and weaknesses of the other. honestly speaking, I'm having a hard time fighting my LBA since I don't want to sell my WR kit lens either (due to weather use and lightness). btw, check your borders and extreme borders, those things are nasty weak at 18mm. thank GOD I don't have to use it that much now at that focal length. the kit lens is good, but does not meet what I'm looking for in terms of IQ. make the IQ a tad higher and I would be happy as a bird.

Oh, of course, I understand that much of the credit to the lovely images in this thread belong to the lens, not just because the nut behind the VF is good... but attractive photos stoke the LBA moreso than pics of resolution tests - at least for me, they do!

BTW, my 18-55 seems to be pretty fair in edge sharpness, particularly when stopped down a bit, which is what I've been shooting mostly with it.

Pentaxor · 10-26-2009, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by flippedgazelle

Oh, of course, I understand that much of the credit to the lovely images in this thread belong to the lens, not just because the nut behind the VF is good... but attractive photos stoke the LBA moreso than pics of resolution tests - at least for me, they do!

BTW, my 18-55 seems to be pretty fair in edge sharpness, particularly when stopped down a bit, which is what I've been shooting mostly with it.

I understand. it's true that the 18-55 has fair edge sharpness, but fair alone doesn't quite add up to my lacking, especially if I'm shooting an entire scenery. i'm looking for a very good border sharpness. I wouldn't mind shooting center subjects though, coz that's where the 18-55 really shines. a bit a close-focusing macro for portraiture photos work as well. I'll probably close my door for the 16-45 for now, and reserve my greens for an 85mm instead.

jmc7104 · 10-26-2009, 06:32 AM

First is an accidental shot. I got an infared remote and was trying it out for the first time,with camera on kitchen table. Second one is at 45mm third one is at 16, same area. Mississippi river at Davenport Iowa. jim

Fl_Gulfer · 10-26-2009, 08:59 AM

Anyone having any problems with Front or Rear foucs? I'm looking for something to replace my Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 and don't want to spent 800$ for a Pentax *16-50.

**pacerr** · 10-26-2009, 09:18 AM

One of the nice things about this lens is that it's always ready for a little CU action.

But some of my cotton-pickin' 'flower' pictures with it look really fuzzy.

H2

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Some D700 thoughts and examples	jsherman999	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	103	04-17-2010 07:36 PM
Misc DA 15mm Examples	Sailor	Post Your Photos!	18	12-13-2009 07:31 AM
More DA 18-250 Examples	Sailor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	01-03-2008 08:04 PM
Pentax-A 50 f2 Examples	Tyler	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	08-04-2007 11:38 AM
f 135mm f2.8 examples	attack11	Post Your Photos!	1	06-04-2007 12:57 PM

10-22-2009, 05:33 PM	#16
silverelantra Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Jakarta Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 104	It's definetely not a low-light lens but it's a great replacement of DA 18-55. It's sharp, the colors are great and wide enough to take landscape shots

10-24-2009, 07:36 PM	#17
campdog Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Bonny Hills, NSW, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 202	I just sold my 16-45. I got a Sigma 17-70 before a to Samoa and never put it back on. I just love the 17-70 so much. I sold the pentax 16-45 and waiting on a Sigma 10-20. Now I wish I had kept the pentax as well. John

10-24-2009, 10:06 PM	#18
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237 Original Poster	. Silver, nice shots! Some from today:

10-24-2009, 10:23 PM	#19
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by Arjay Bee I bought the 16-45 to replace the sigma 'kit' that came with the Australian sourced *ist DL2. It is used as my walkabout and wide angle lens for the PJ work that I do for my employers. On the K20 it focusses speedily and accurately and gets me the shot without fuss. It is no slouch at Macros either: Won't be letting this one go. That first shot looked like Seisia wharf. And you mean those 'macro' shots came from the 16-45?!? Good stuff!

10-24-2009, 10:29 PM	#20
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Brilliant images from you both Jay and Silverlantra. Exemplary work!

10-25-2009, 04:52 AM	#21
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Originally posted by Ash Brilliant images from you both Jay and Silverlantra. Exemplary work! I gotta agree. These really show how excellent this lens is. Really for around $300 (used) you can't beat this lens from anyone. Originally posted by campdog I just sold my 16-45. I got a Sigma 17-70 before a to Samoa and never put it back on. I just love the 17-70 so much. I sold the pentax 16-45 and waiting on a Sigma 10-20. Now I wish I had kept the pentax as well. John I don't understand this post. You bought the Sigma and then later sold the Pentax because you never used the Pentax any more. Now you want the Pentax back?????

10-25-2009, 08:39 PM	#22
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	if it were only compact just like the 20-35, I won't have second thoughts on getting one ! I think I saw some people selling it a lil over 200 bucks. pretty tempting to use from 16-28. but I need to settle for a tad down WR kit lens. it's the monsoon season here at the West Coast, so a WR lens should really come in handy.

10-25-2009, 09:53 PM	#23
flippedgazelle Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: NJ, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,270	Damn you all... I'm trying to be satisfied with my kit lens, and here you are posting these wonderful photos with the 16-45... ... or maybe it's just that y'all are good photographers.

10-25-2009, 10:14 PM	#24
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by flippedgazelle Damn you all... I'm trying to be satisfied with my kit lens, and here you are posting these wonderful photos with the 16-45... ... or maybe it's just that y'all are good photographers. it's not just about being a good photographer. if you are keen enough to look on your results, you would see some obvious differences and weaknesses of the other. honestly speaking, I'm having a hard time fighting my LBA since I don't want to sell my WR kit lens either (due to weather use and lightness). btw, check your borders and extreme borders, those things are nasty weak at 18mm. thank GOD I don't have to use it that much now at that focal length. the kit lens is good, but does not meet what I'm looking for in terms of IQ. make the IQ a tad higher and I would be happy as a bird.

10-25-2009, 10:25 PM	#25
woof Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: In the present Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,870	Some great photos here. Here are a few of mine.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-25-2009, 11:12 PM	#26
flippedgazelle Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: NJ, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,270	Originally posted by Pentaxor it's not just about being a good photographer. if you are keen enough to look on your results, you would see some obvious differences and weaknesses of the other. honestly speaking, I'm having a hard time fighting my LBA since I don't want to sell my WR kit lens either (due to weather use and lightness). btw, check your borders and extreme borders, those things are nasty weak at 18mm. thank GOD I don't have to use it that much now at that focal length. the kit lens is good, but does not meet what I'm looking for in terms of IQ. make the IQ a tad higher and I would be happy as a bird. Oh, of course, I understand that much of the credit to the lovely images in this thread belong to the lens, not just because the nut behind the VF is good... but attractive photos stoke the LBA moreso than pics of resolution tests - at least for me, they do! BTW, my 18-55 seems to be pretty fair in edge sharpness, particularly when stopped down a bit, which is what I've been shooting mostly with it.

10-26-2009, 12:14 AM	#27
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by flippedgazelle Oh, of course, I understand that much of the credit to the lovely images in this thread belong to the lens, not just because the nut behind the VF is good... but attractive photos stoke the LBA moreso than pics of resolution tests - at least for me, they do! BTW, my 18-55 seems to be pretty fair in edge sharpness, particularly when stopped down a bit, which is what I've been shooting mostly with it. I understand. it's true that the 18-55 has fair edge sharpness, but fair alone doesn't quite add up to my lacking, especially if I'm shooting an entire scenery. i'm looking for a very good border sharpness. I wouldn't mind shooting center subjects though, coz that's where the 18-55 really shines. a bit a close-focusing macro for portraiture photos work as well. I'll probably close my door for the 16-45 for now, and reserve my greens for an 85mm instead.

10-26-2009, 08:59 AM	#29
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	Anyone having any problems with Front or Rear foucs? I'm looking for something to replace my Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 and don't want to spent 800$ for a Pentax *16-50.