Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-05-2014, 03:56 PM   #361
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,771
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr Spocko Quote
I'd wager the optics will stomp the 18-135mm though with ease
Let's hope so, otherwise I still don't see the point. Unless it is priced significantly less than the 18-135................

10-07-2014, 01:54 PM   #362
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 436
theres going three/four choices to cover the 20-40mm range with WR

18-135mm wr - presumably get phased out though?
18-55mm wr - might get phased out?
20-40mm DA
16-50mm DA*
new 16-85mm wr
10-07-2014, 02:01 PM   #363
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,120
QuoteOriginally posted by Conqueror Quote
theres going three/four choices to cover the 20-40mm range with WR

18-135mm wr - presumably get phased out though?
18-55mm wr - might get phased out?
20-40mm DA
16-50mm DA*
new 16-85mm wr
I don't see those being phased out. Especially not the 18-55.
10-07-2014, 02:21 PM   #364
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Let's hope so, otherwise I still don't see the point. Unless it is priced significantly less than the 18-135................
I'm not expecting it to be priced less than the DA 18-135... maybe even a little higher. If you don't have value for a walk-around lens with 16 mm capability then, yes, you likely don't have an interest. Depending on how it's shown to perform, I'm interested in buying it as I don't often use my 18-135 deep into the long end. Price will matter, obviously.

10-07-2014, 03:12 PM   #365
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,771
QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
I'm not expecting it to be priced less than the DA 18-135... maybe even a little higher. If you don't have value for a walk-around lens with 16 mm capability then, yes, you likely don't have an interest. Depending on how it's shown to perform, I'm interested in buying it as I don't often use my 18-135 deep into the long end. Price will matter, obviously.
Not sure I would give up 2mm on wide end for loss of 50mm on long end, assuming IQ is the same. Same IQ I buy the 18-135. Much better IQ and I buy the 16-85. If I need wider than 20mm I use the 12-24 so 16mm is not an issue for me.

Still disappointed it is not constant f/4 but I would still look seriously at it if the results are close to DA* level. I don't need f/2.8 but I do need best possible IQ.
10-07-2014, 04:54 PM   #366
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Not sure I would give up 2mm on wide end for loss of 50mm on long end, assuming IQ is the same. Same IQ I buy the 18-135. Much better IQ and I buy the 16-85. If I need wider than 20mm I use the 12-24 so 16mm is not an issue for me.

Still disappointed it is not constant f/4 but I would still look seriously at it if the results are close to DA* level. I don't need f/2.8 but I do need best possible IQ.
I know what you mean. For me, I think it comes down to whether a walk-around travel lens is more wanting on the long end or the wide end. I don't really want to carry around my Sigma 10-20 (4-5.6) just to grab some shots wider than 18mm. OTOH, I might rather carry around the DA 55-300 for more reach than 135mm, especially since the DA 18-135 can be a bit soft on the long end (disclaimer -- I haven't tested mine to confirm but several people have claimed as much). Obviously, there's no perfect walk-around travel lens so I think it may come down to the question of which "extra" lens I want with me which likely determines which lens best pairs with it.
10-07-2014, 10:28 PM   #367
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 341
I need a short to mid-range zoom, and if the performance of this is comparable to the 55-300, I'm sold. Otherwise I'll go for the ageing but still respectable Tamron 28-75.
10-07-2014, 10:58 PM   #368
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Not sure I would give up 2mm on wide end for loss of 50mm on long end, assuming IQ is the same. Same IQ I buy the 18-135. Much better IQ and I buy the 16-85. If I need wider than 20mm I use the 12-24 so 16mm is not an issue for me.

Still disappointed it is not constant f/4 but I would still look seriously at it if the results are close to DA* level. I don't need f/2.8 but I do need best possible IQ.
It's a 11.1% gain at the wide end and a 37% loss at the long end so yeah for tele shooters (and portraitist) it's probably not the way to go, but for people interested in landscapes, architecture and interiors it should be a better choice.

10-07-2014, 10:58 PM   #369
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 341
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
Wrt IBIS or ILIS: IBIS will allow features like horizon correction, AA filter simulation, astro tracer etc. ILIS providing conventional stabilisation may be more useful for long lenses because, in addition to the sensor, the AF array and the viewfinder will also see a stabilised image.
With these kinds of distinctions in mind, it's not impossible that IBIS and ILIS could be designed to work together in a suitably refined system. This is not to dispute the point that having two competing systems attempting the primary task of image stabilisation is never likely to be a worthwhile solution.
10-08-2014, 07:20 AM   #370
Senior Member
mbukal's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: zagreb
Posts: 173
I have since before (one of the first lens) DA17-70 / 4 and I tried DA 18-135 as a replacement, no-no, DA 17-70 / 4 is optically better in every respect, DA 17-70 /4 + DA 55- 300 / 3.5-5.8 is optically better combination of DA18-135 + DA 55-300, waiting for a report on the optical quality of the DA 16-85, if it is better than the DA 17-70 then be considered as a replacement, regardless of not constant blemd
10-14-2014, 11:21 AM   #371
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by asw66 Quote
I need a short to mid-range zoom, and if the performance of this is comparable to the 55-300, I'm sold. Otherwise I'll go for the ageing but still respectable Tamron 28-75.
The tamron is a less than 3X zoom with f/2.8 (with also better optical quality very likely) while the 16-85 is a bit more than 5X range zoom with slow apperture. While they both cover roughtly the same focal lenses at the long end (where f/2.8 might mater more than 10 more mm), they differ totaly on the short end.

Tamron 28-75 would limit you badly in a city or for many landscape if you don't have alternative for wide shoots.
10-15-2014, 05:56 AM   #372
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 341
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
The tamron is a less than 3X zoom with f/2.8 (with also better optical quality very likely) while the 16-85 is a bit more than 5X range zoom with slow apperture. While they both cover roughtly the same focal lenses at the long end (where f/2.8 might mater more than 10 more mm), they differ totaly on the short end.

Tamron 28-75 would limit you badly in a city or for many landscape if you don't have alternative for wide shoots.
Cheers Nicolas. I was thinking in terms of a quality zoom that would mainly be used for shooting people indoors, singly or in groups. My thinking was that I could give up the speed of the Tamron if the Pentax has comparable IQ and a measure of pixie dust. But if, as you say, the Pentax has lower optical quality, I'm back to the Tamron.

For cities etc I'd reach for either my DA15 or Sigma 10-20.
10-15-2014, 06:05 AM - 1 Like   #373
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteOriginally posted by pghwarrior23 Quote
I know they tend to want to keep sizes smaller...and that makes sense for having those kinds of lenses in the lineup as well for those concerned with size and weight...but some of us want lenses that PERFORM as well and don't care as much about the weight vs having a useable aperture and professional level gear.

Is your goal to go on all day about how you don't like this lens... we get it. Is your goal to tell us how much you don't like Pentax? Lot's of people don't like Pentax.. 95% of the camera market don't like Pentax, nothing about not liking Pentax makes you special in any way. This is a site for those who do. Try and have a bit of respect for those of us who find Pentax the best alternative for what we do. Nothing wrong with voicing your opinion...but try not to make three posts in a row saying the same thing.

My guess is that less than 5% of the members on this site are interested in acquiring professional gear. Not every lens that Canon makes is professional, not every lens that Nikon makes is professional. Pentax execs, said right up front, this is designed for people who want a little bit more than the kit lens. There is absolutely no excuse for complaining because they see that as a place in their line up where they can sell some glass. Pentax covers 16-135 in 2.8 glass and 60-300 in ƒ4 glass. As well it has A 50, a 55, a 31, and the 77 in sub ƒ2 glass. If you need glass in those Apertures, it's there.

I suspect this is a case of Canikon fanboy trying to make a case for Pentax users to switch brands... why else would you have three posts saying you don't like this lens and saying Pentax has to get better? All that says is you weren't smart enough to buy what you wanted. And now you're unhappy because Pentax releases a consumer lens when you wanted a pro lens. Really, no one wants to hear that, we felt sorry for you after your first post. You can only milk it so much. Now it's just irritating.

It would be kind of like saying Kia should stop making light weight small 4x4s and start making heavy trucks. How would that help those of us who like small Kia 4x4's ?

Last edited by normhead; 10-15-2014 at 06:40 AM.
10-15-2014, 06:16 AM - 3 Likes   #374
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
Norm, only 5% of the camera market don't like Pentax - the other 90% don't know what a Pentax is
10-15-2014, 08:29 AM   #375
Site Supporter
Biro's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,182
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Norm, only 5% of the camera market don't like Pentax - the other 90% don't know what a Pentax is
True, dat.
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!
16-85mm f3.5-5.6ed dc, a.k.a, aps-c, button, camera, competition, dc, drive, ff, focus, glass, hd, hd pentax-da 16-85mm, image, length, lens, lenses, mount, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentax-da, release, sigma, sr, tamron, tele, w/a, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 ED AL (IF) DC WR sholtzma Sold Items 2 02-05-2014 01:11 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR - reduced price tjwaung Sold Items 8 12-21-2013 05:56 AM
new smc PENTAX-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] WR DC KeesdH Pentax News and Rumors 227 06-22-2011 03:57 AM
PENTAX-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] WR D Fl_Gulfer Pentax News and Rumors 20 11-26-2010 05:13 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:03 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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