If not the DA*16-50mm, then what???

Russell-Evans · 03-01-2010, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by Ben_Edict

In terms of sharpness and contrast, the Sigma can easily hold its own, compared with the DA.

Several other users here in this forum use this lens and are very satisfied.

The Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 macro, as far as build and IQ, is really good. The issue is that f2.8 I never get to see the lens at its best as I'm probably also using a higher ISO as well.

I've never used the 16-50mm, so I don't know how the two compare. I would however rate the build on the Sigma better than the 50-135mm I do own. I would still love to have a WR lens in this range so there is some temptation about owning the 16-50mm.

Thank you
Russell

Karellen · 03-01-2010, 06:35 AM

FA31 sits just in between on 16 and 50... :) Zoom by legs, f/1.8, and The FA31 Magic is here too. Just kidding, but you know there is a part of joke in every joke.

emr · 03-01-2010, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Karellen

...but you know there is a part of joke in every joke.

Well, I certainly hope so for humor's sake. Or did you perhaps mean a little truth in every joke?

Jewelltrail · 03-01-2010, 11:22 AM

Quote:

jeffrey r

Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Outstanding lens, and a very viable candidate instead of the DA* 16-50. No weather sealing with the Tamron of course, but also no risk of SDM failure.

I agree. I am one of those people who chose the Tamron 17-50 over the Da 16-50. I like the Tammy, a lot. It focuses fast, faster than my needs and it delivers nice images. I mostly use it for landscapes while hiking, so, granted, I'm not shooting sports with it--but it delivers whatever I need and more.

I would not replce the Tamron with the Da, to be honest, but would consider the Sigma 18-50 2.8, about which I hear so many good things.

rkt · 03-10-2010, 01:51 PM

I was in the same spot some time back, and then settled for the Tamron 17-50, which has seen some rough use, and is still alive. Feels overall solid as well... (except a few times, when while cleaning the front element with a lens pen, i could feel the element turn under pressure, loosening the part the hood attaches to a little... but reversed the direction of cleaning and it tightened back. Wonder if anyone else has experienced this?)

It is very sharp, and overall excellent value for money...

braver · 03-10-2010, 08:06 PM

The extended warranty which Prodigital2000 sells is just a regular 7 years Mack warranty for an under $1000 lens, selling for $40 on Amazon -- the only condition is you add it within 30 day of the original purchase date. So get yourself a new DA* 16-50mm, the Mack warranty, and be happy! It's an outstanding lens. Oh, by the way, the B+W UVA filter for 77mm is $88 on Amazon. I won't even say how much the circular their polarizer is.

SpecialK · 03-10-2010, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by Ben_Edict

I still have the old (pre-macro, pre-HSM) Sigma 18-50/2.8 and will keep it. Not only because my own DA 16-50 also fell apart a while ago and I want a backup at hand, but also, because it is much smaller and has less distortion. In terms of sharpness and contrast, the Sigma can easily hold its own, compared with the DA.

Several other users here in this forum use this lens and are very satisfied.

Ben

Me, too. Except I never had a 16-50.

pop4 · 03-11-2010, 05:13 AM

Sigma recently announced the 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM, which might be something that's worth a look when it comes out.

It's only 1mm less wide than the DA*16-50mm
It's F2.8 constant as well
Has HSM, which is quiet, and fast (at least the HSM on my Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 is)
No WR.

**Rondec** · 03-11-2010, 05:36 AM

I wouldn't hesitate to get the 16-50, just make certain you get an extended warranty on it. I wouldn't hesitate to get used lenses, but this is one place where I would avoid them. Just too much uncertainty about which lenses will have motor failures and when.

paulelescoces · 03-11-2010, 06:55 AM

I would just get the DA*16-50 and if you are nervous get an extended warranty.... wonderful lens

Nubi · 03-11-2010, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by Karellen

FA31 sits just in between on 16 and 50...

Zoom by legs, f/1.8, and The FA31 Magic is here too. Just kidding, but you know there is a part of joke in every joke.

I was going to say the same thing. I had 16-50 and sold it. It was a fine lens, but I could do without because I have 15, 21, 31,35, 40, and 50. 50-135 on the other hand, I cannot do without. This lens comes close to primes, except the onion ring bokeh. I hate when that happens. :ugh:

Jewelltrail · 03-11-2010, 10:00 PM

Since warranty keeps coming up as a solution for the Achilles' Heel of the 16-50, it is worth noting the Tamron 17-50 comes with a 6 year warranty, in box.

In terms of real world IQ, both lenses are excellent, though the Tamron is better wide open (Ca in Da!). At the wide end, the Tamron has less distortion. Also, the Tamron close focuses better.

What the 16-50 does have is weather sealing, and the 1mm advantage. I take the Tamron up and down the Mts of the East coast, in all 4 seasons, without problems.

If you opt for the Da 16-50, be sure to add the warranty in there, you are going to pay $300 more for it. If weather sealing and 1mm are worth it to you, go for it.

**EsBee** · 03-12-2010, 12:28 AM

I had a 16-45, then upgraded to 16-50 and when it was getting its SDM replaced under warranty, bought another 16-45 just in case. I have so far retained the 16-45 even though I now have a fully functional 16-50.

In my case, a very small percentage of the shots I've taken with the 16-50 were actually taken at f2.8, majority of which were just test shots to see how sharp the lens was wide open.

In my opinion, the 16-45 at one stop slower than the DA* is an absolute gem and a great alternative; it gives you more than 90% of what the 16-50 does for less than half the price, without SDM issues or the bulkiness.

tokyoso · 03-12-2010, 01:52 AM

I would buy the SDM* if its priced the same as the tamron alternative...

**germar** · 03-12-2010, 05:53 AM

As the original poster for this thread, I want to report back that I bought a Tamron 17-50 2.8 used off this forum and have run it through some test shots. I am very impressed. While it doesn't have the exact color rendering as the Pentax glass (what does?) the images are very nice, very sharp in low light and most importantly, the lens never hunted autofocus under low light conditions. This lens is actually GREAT in lower light situations, which is what I need this lens to do most often.

Financial realities may make me sell the DA*16-50, but wave a magic wand and I would keep both - the Tamron would be my Party-candid lens, and the Pentax would be my outside-daylight-landscape lens.

But my initial thoughts are the Tamron 17-50 2.8 is a very worthy alternative to the DA* 16-50.

Regards,

germar

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: Pentax FA-50mm 1.7 or F-50mm 1.7, Sigma 50mm EX 1.4	vtqanh	Sold Items	1	11-03-2010 04:24 PM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4 / Pentax-A 50mm 1.7 / Pentax-M 50mm 1.4 (US)	JP_Seattle	Sold Items	3	09-02-2010 06:17 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax *ist DL, FA 50mm f/1.4, DFA 100mm f/2.8 macro, DA 18-55mm, A 50mm f/2.0	chemxaj	Sold Items	14	05-31-2010 09:34 AM
For Sale - Sold: F 24-50mm 4, A 24-50mm 4, M 35mm 2, M 50mm 1.4, A 35-105mm 3.5, A 70-210mm 4	raybird	Sold Items	7	08-29-2008 01:06 PM

03-01-2010, 05:37 AM	#16
Russell-Evans Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,553	Originally posted by Ben_Edict In terms of sharpness and contrast, the Sigma can easily hold its own, compared with the DA. Several other users here in this forum use this lens and are very satisfied. The Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 macro, as far as build and IQ, is really good. The issue is that f2.8 I never get to see the lens at its best as I'm probably also using a higher ISO as well. I've never used the 16-50mm, so I don't know how the two compare. I would however rate the build on the Sigma better than the 50-135mm I do own. I would still love to have a WR lens in this range so there is some temptation about owning the 16-50mm. Thank you Russell

03-01-2010, 06:35 AM	#17
Karellen Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: China, Shenzhen Posts: 33	FA31 sits just in between on 16 and 50... :) Zoom by legs, f/1.8, and The FA31 Magic is here too. Just kidding, but you know there is a part of joke in every joke.

03-01-2010, 10:59 AM	#18
emr Guest	Originally posted by Karellen ...but you know there is a part of joke in every joke. Well, I certainly hope so for humor's sake. Or did you perhaps mean a little truth in every joke?

03-01-2010, 11:22 AM	#19
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: jeffrey r Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Outstanding lens, and a very viable candidate instead of the DA* 16-50. No weather sealing with the Tamron of course, but also no risk of SDM failure. I agree. I am one of those people who chose the Tamron 17-50 over the Da 16-50. I like the Tammy, a lot. It focuses fast, faster than my needs and it delivers nice images. I mostly use it for landscapes while hiking, so, granted, I'm not shooting sports with it--but it delivers whatever I need and more. I would not replce the Tamron with the Da, to be honest, but would consider the Sigma 18-50 2.8, about which I hear so many good things.

03-10-2010, 01:51 PM	#20
rkt Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Germany Posts: 154	I was in the same spot some time back, and then settled for the Tamron 17-50, which has seen some rough use, and is still alive. Feels overall solid as well... (except a few times, when while cleaning the front element with a lens pen, i could feel the element turn under pressure, loosening the part the hood attaches to a little... but reversed the direction of cleaning and it tightened back. Wonder if anyone else has experienced this?) It is very sharp, and overall excellent value for money...

03-10-2010, 08:06 PM	#21
braver Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Hanover, NH Posts: 157	The extended warranty which Prodigital2000 sells is just a regular 7 years Mack warranty for an under $1000 lens, selling for $40 on Amazon -- the only condition is you add it within 30 day of the original purchase date. So get yourself a new DA* 16-50mm, the Mack warranty, and be happy! It's an outstanding lens. Oh, by the way, the B+W UVA filter for 77mm is $88 on Amazon. I won't even say how much the circular their polarizer is.

03-10-2010, 09:53 PM	#22
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Originally posted by Ben_Edict I still have the old (pre-macro, pre-HSM) Sigma 18-50/2.8 and will keep it. Not only because my own DA 16-50 also fell apart a while ago and I want a backup at hand, but also, because it is much smaller and has less distortion. In terms of sharpness and contrast, the Sigma can easily hold its own, compared with the DA. Several other users here in this forum use this lens and are very satisfied. Ben Me, too. Except I never had a 16-50.

03-11-2010, 05:13 AM	#23
pop4 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: YMML Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,879	Sigma recently announced the 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM, which might be something that's worth a look when it comes out. It's only 1mm less wide than the DA*16-50mm It's F2.8 constant as well Has HSM, which is quiet, and fast (at least the HSM on my Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 is) No WR.

03-11-2010, 05:36 AM	#24
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	I wouldn't hesitate to get the 16-50, just make certain you get an extended warranty on it. I wouldn't hesitate to get used lenses, but this is one place where I would avoid them. Just too much uncertainty about which lenses will have motor failures and when.

03-11-2010, 06:55 AM	#25
paulelescoces Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 252	I would just get the DA*16-50 and if you are nervous get an extended warranty.... wonderful lens

03-11-2010, 07:01 AM	#26
Nubi Guest	Originally posted by Karellen FA31 sits just in between on 16 and 50... Zoom by legs, f/1.8, and The FA31 Magic is here too. Just kidding, but you know there is a part of joke in every joke. I was going to say the same thing. I had 16-50 and sold it. It was a fine lens, but I could do without because I have 15, 21, 31,35, 40, and 50. 50-135 on the other hand, I cannot do without. This lens comes close to primes, except the onion ring bokeh. I hate when that happens. :ugh:

03-11-2010, 10:00 PM	#27
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Since warranty keeps coming up as a solution for the Achilles' Heel of the 16-50, it is worth noting the Tamron 17-50 comes with a 6 year warranty, in box. In terms of real world IQ, both lenses are excellent, though the Tamron is better wide open (Ca in Da!). At the wide end, the Tamron has less distortion. Also, the Tamron close focuses better. What the 16-50 does have is weather sealing, and the 1mm advantage. I take the Tamron up and down the Mts of the East coast, in all 4 seasons, without problems. If you opt for the Da 16-50, be sure to add the warranty in there, you are going to pay $300 more for it. If weather sealing and 1mm are worth it to you, go for it.

03-12-2010, 12:28 AM	#28
EsBee Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: National Capital Region Posts: 739	I had a 16-45, then upgraded to 16-50 and when it was getting its SDM replaced under warranty, bought another 16-45 just in case. I have so far retained the 16-45 even though I now have a fully functional 16-50. In my case, a very small percentage of the shots I've taken with the 16-50 were actually taken at f2.8, majority of which were just test shots to see how sharp the lens was wide open. In my opinion, the 16-45 at one stop slower than the DA* is an absolute gem and a great alternative; it gives you more than 90% of what the 16-50 does for less than half the price, without SDM issues or the bulkiness.

03-12-2010, 01:52 AM	#29
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	I would buy the SDM* if its priced the same as the tamron alternative...

03-12-2010, 05:53 AM	#30
germar Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: North Palm Beach, Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 728 Original Poster	As the original poster for this thread, I want to report back that I bought a Tamron 17-50 2.8 used off this forum and have run it through some test shots. I am very impressed. While it doesn't have the exact color rendering as the Pentax glass (what does?) the images are very nice, very sharp in low light and most importantly, the lens never hunted autofocus under low light conditions. This lens is actually GREAT in lower light situations, which is what I need this lens to do most often. Financial realities may make me sell the DA16-50, but wave a magic wand and I would keep both - the Tamron would be my Party-candid lens, and the Pentax would be my outside-daylight-landscape lens. But my initial thoughts are the Tamron 17-50 2.8 is a very worthy alternative to the DA 16-50. Regards, germar