[creampuff]

Let's get this in perspective, it is after all a budget zoom that's assembled in Vietnam and a kit telezoom at that. Like any cheap budget zoom, there could be sample variations. Even the popular Sigma budget zooms have sample variations. Moral of the story is to test your sample before leaving the store.

This lens is quite good for the price but in all honesty you get what you pay for. Definitely better than the mediocre AF-J 70-300, a lens Pentax introduced during a period when their cameras weren't selling.

[OldSwede]

I think it's quite good. 200 mm f/5.6 1/1000 ISO 400

[Edvinas]

I think sample variation and quality control of Pentax isn't good nowadays.

I also had DA 50-200 and I was not satisfied with it's quality. Heavy vignetting, not really sharp... Colours and contrast were superb though. I am not pixel peeper but I was really not satisfied with the results DA 50-200 was producing, I always was feeling that those images are lacking something...

Later I had the chance to test my DA 50-200 against another DA 50-200. Well, that other lense produced results completely different from my DA 50-200. Of course, they were much better. that lense even was vignetting less than mine! Not saying thast it was much sharper. After that I immediately sold my DA 50-200 and got FA 80-320 instead.

So, I think that we all are right. some of us have good samples of DA 50-200 and are very happy with the results, some of us have not so good samples (seems photozone got one too) and are not so happy...

BTW, I have two DA 16-45 and one of them is noticeably sharper than another. Unfortunately that sharp DA 16-45 gives very noticeable backfocus in wide angle, while the soft DA 16-45 focuses much better.

My advice on Pentax lenses would be the same as for Sigma lenses: if possible buy where you can easily return or exchange lense. If it is not possible, do a serious testing of lens before you buy it, sample variation is very broad between lenses made in Vietnam.

[joele]

I also had DA 50-200 and I was not satisfied with it's quality. Heavy vignetting, not really sharp... Colours and contrast were superb though.

I don't know if its sample variation or user requirement variation?

But I agree spot on with your assesment, and I sold mine a few months after getting it..

[bjsmith]

After that I immediately sold my DA 50-200 and got FA 80-320 instead.

I would like more reach than my DA 50-200 and I have been tempted by the $200+ FA 80-320mm f/4.5-5.6 at times.
But most have stated that I would not like most of the shots (which would be quite soft) beyond 200mm.

I was hopeful the 55-300mm would see the light-of-day, although that won't be for another year.
I'm just afraid if I get into American football season, I might find the 306mm equivalent (of 200mm) not enough reach.

I have a manual focused Vivitar 400mm, which is sharp, but way too big to carry anywhere like a game.

[axl]

Hi guys,
how does DA 50-200 compare to Tamrons Di 28-200, and Di II 70-300?? Anybody compared them?

[jgredline]

I base my decisions on personal reviews or threads in forums like this one. I think that only people using the lens in the real world can judge it's usefullness and quality for their photography. Each photographer has a different style and preference for the final image from a camera or lens.

Agreed !!!!