Originally posted by flippedgazelle "if you have a "good" copy of the kit lens, $300 to too much for the extra 2mm and no real increase in speed, and only a slight bump in IQ."
are you suggesting that the 18-55 have some QC issues? because as far as the statistics goes, the general concession is pretty consistent that the 18-55 is a good lens but certainly not better or at par with the 16-45. regardless if there are copy variations. so how many of those good copies are there in 10 lenses? again, consistency in IQ, not QC issue nor luck of the draw copy variation.
although the 18-55 has quite a cult following from some members, it cannot be considered as a true basis for comparison since most of those members haven't really tried nor owned both lenses to see the difference. and as far as the discussions are concerned, if indeed the kitlens is really slightly at par with the 16-45, we would had seen a lot of disgruntled 16-45 owners selling their copy in favor of the kitlens. I wouldn't say they own the 16-45 exclusively due to the 2mm wide advantage, but also has to do with IQ advantage as well.
it would be interesting to see some samples of such slight difference in IQ of both lenses, if indeed it is slight or not. like shots taken at infinity. subjects or architectures of relative distance, checking the borders and corners, as well as the contrast and details.
as far as the pricing goes, I think Pentax and some of the stores are going back to their insane ways again. last January-February, the lenses cost at around $300, which is pretty acceptable to a step up lens. I'm glad some owners are selling their used copies for $200-$250 bucks. although I agree with you that a Tamron or Sigma would be a better investment if the price of the 16-45 comes close to $500.