Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-27-2015, 10:08 AM - 2 Likes   #886
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eureka, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,829
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Exactly same price and specs as the Nikon 16-85. Ok, $49 more. Why should it be any less?
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
Absence of VR in the Pentax lens perhaps?
The DA 16-85 is weather sealed and features nano coating technology.

Incidentally, the MSRP of the Canon 15-85 f3.5-5.6 is $799. So the Canon version of this lens is even more "expensive." Despite the slow aperture, these are not consumer grade lenses. They are mid-range/prosumer offerings. The Pentax lens will likely prove the best of the bunch.

QuoteOriginally posted by Dlanor Sekao Quote
Now if it were $400...Maybe I would love it for what it is.
If it were $400, it would be a consumer grade lens. It would be less contrasty, more flare prone, not as sharp edge to edge. Images from it would look flat compared to images from pro glass. It wouldn't be nano-coated, it wouldn't be dust resistant.

Just because a lens has a slow aperture doesn't mean it must be a consumer grade lens. This is a lens for those of us who don't need fast aperture but want prosumer quality. Images from this lens, including some high resolution samples, are beginning to leak on to the web. From what I've seen, I've been quite impressed. It looks like it's probably superior to the DA 17-70 (already a very nice lens). It's sharp and constrasty lens with a 5x range that doesn't weigh much more than a pound. If you don't need the fast aperture, what's not to like? (If you do need the fast aperture, there are many other options to choose from.)

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Then there the 17-70 f/2.8-4 of sigma. Much cheaper very equivalent range, still better apperture. It may lack WR but it is much cheaper.
3rd party glass is nearly always cheaper, often much cheaper, than OEM glass. You want Pentax glass, expect to pay Canikon prices. If you don't like those prices, buy the 3rd party stuff.

01-27-2015, 10:17 AM   #887
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,288
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
If it were $400, it would be a consumer grade lens. It would be less contrasty, more flare prone, not as sharp edge to edge. Images from it would look flat compared to images from pro glass. It wouldn't be nano-coated, it wouldn't be dust resistant. Just because a lens has a slow aperture doesn't mean it must be a consumer grade lens. This is a lens for those of us who don't need fast aperture but want prosumer quality. Images from this lens, including some high resolution samples, are beginning to leak on to the web. From what I've seen, I've been quite impressed. It looks like it's probably superior to the DA 17-70 (already a very nice lens). It's sharp and constrasty lens with a 5x range that doesn't weigh much more than a pound. If you don't need the fast aperture, what's not to like? (If you do need the fast aperture, there are many other options to choose from.)
+1 The DA 16-85 is the lens I have been waiting for. I am disappointed that it is variable aperture so I doubt I would use it in the studio but for outside the focal range is perfect. If the IQ is even close to the 16-50 I am selling the 16-50 and getting the 16-85. Had it been constant f/4 I would have pre-ordered. As it is I'll wait for the official reviews and tests. If those are positive the price is immaterial.
01-27-2015, 10:28 AM   #888
Loyal Site Supporter
TedH42's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Colorado
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 470
+1

With more results coming from the field, this lens is looking to be a very good performer at the prosumer level. The last review I saw on PF reviews shows it being better than the 18-135 within its range. I don't think that it is the most horrible and overpriced lens in the world, as seemingly suggested in this thread.

Lighten up until tests and more usage reports are in. This lens might be a big winner for the Pentax line. That would be good, eh?
01-27-2015, 11:33 AM   #889
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,549
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Pointing an exception to a rule to invalidate the said rule will do nothing but confirm the exception.

Anything else but Limiteds?
Ltd are half of the Pentax offering. Where I live the Da* zoom also increased in price...

So that would be that the rule apply only to entry level gear.

01-27-2015, 11:37 AM   #890
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,549
QuoteOriginally posted by TedH42 Quote
+1

With more results coming from the field, this lens is looking to be a very good performer at the prosumer level. The last review I saw on PF reviews shows it being better than the 18-135 within its range. I don't think that it is the most horrible and overpriced lens in the world, as seemingly suggested in this thread.

Lighten up until tests and more usage reports are in. This lens might be a big winner for the Pentax line. That would be good, eh?
I have a stupid and naive question... What lens doesn't perform well at the prosumer level?

To me it look the sigma like 17-50, 17-70 already do that or better. As the equivalent tamrons. As does the 17-70. You'll find some that'll say it from the 18-135 too or 16-45.

It is more and more difficult to find bad lense nowadays... To me you are not saying much with that.
01-27-2015, 11:47 AM   #891
Loyal Site Supporter
TedH42's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Colorado
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 470
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I have a stupid and naive question... What lens doesn't perform well at the prosumer level?

To me it look the sigma like 17-50, 17-70 already do that or better. As the equivalent tamrons. As does the 17-70. You'll find some that'll say it from the 18-135 too or 16-45.

It is more and more difficult to find bad lense nowadays... To me you are not saying much with that.
So what's all the overwrought uproar about? I gotta say that I'm a bit mystified with all the splitting of pixels that goes on here on PF. Time to actually use my gear. My FAs are calling. Gotta run.
01-27-2015, 11:49 AM   #892
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,457
I have several "Mediocre" Pentax lenses I shoot with all the time....and several are tack sharp ! So yes...."Mediocre" and "Sharp"... DO fit in the same sentence.
For landscapes and general outside use they are just fine. However...with this lens being a Zoom lens.........I simply expected a bit more in the speed department for the price.
I will just stick with the 18-135WR for now....It is also a decent performer but when I need a bit more....I spit on it too at times and break out something from Ebay I paid $50 bucks for... !
The new 16-85 is simply not worth the prices that its currently going for..... Its a $500 lens...Tops......There is no getting around that 5.6 !
My next lens will be a SMCP DA 16-50 F/2.8 if anything........Maybe this new 16-85 will be "The-One" for some people....but not for me unless the price gets real and there is some redeeming quality over the the 18-135WR....its pass for now.

""PENTAX GODS"".....PLEASE...Please.....Please.......Give us something "Sensational"....SOON !
And Im glad we all have opinions....who cares who will end up being "right" or "wrong" after the market is saturated with it and the reviews are set in stone.
Its just my .02 cents worth...and you know what they say about "Opinions".

Last edited by Dlanor Sekao; 01-27-2015 at 12:02 PM.
01-27-2015, 11:59 AM   #893
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoek van Holland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,245
QuoteOriginally posted by Dlanor Sekao Quote
I have several "Mediocre" Pentax lenses I shoot with all the time....and several are tack sharp ! So yes...."Mediocre" and "Sharp"... DO fit in the same sentence.
For landscapes and general outside use they are just fine. However...with this lens being a Zoom lens.........I simply expected a bit more in the speed department for the price.
I will just stick with the 18-135WR for now....It is also a decent performer but when I need a bit more....I spit on it too at times and break out something from Ebay I paid $50 bucks for... !
The new 16-85 is simply not worth the prices that its currently going for..... Its a $500 lens...Tops......There is no getting around that 5.6 !
My next lens will be a SMCP DA 16-50 F/2.8 if anything........Maybe this new 16-85 will be "The-One" for some people....but not for me unless the price gets real and there is some redeeming quality over the the 18-135WR
""PENTAX GODS"".....PLEASE...Please.....Please.......Give us something "Sensational"....SOON !
it this lens would have been priced $500, then there would have been complaints that is must be a bad lens because it is so cheap. The canikon lenses are better, because they are more expensive. But then again, some people will never be satisfied

01-27-2015, 12:05 PM   #894
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,457
QuoteOriginally posted by TedH42 Quote
So what's all the overwrought uproar about? I gotta say that I'm a bit mystified with all the splitting of pixels that goes on here on PF. Time to actually use my gear. My FAs are calling. Gotta run.
By Jolly....I DO believe you are on to Something ! !......................Im outa here too....lol
01-27-2015, 01:46 PM   #895
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 883
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
it this lens would have been priced $500, then there would have been complaints that is must be a bad lens because it is so cheap. The canikon lenses are better, because they are more expensive. But then again, some people will never be satisfied
I do not think so. For example, DA 50 1.8 is typically dirty cheap and sometimes can be bought for about $100 in sales. It is one of best Pentax lenses in term of sharpness. As a comparison, at the same aperture 1.8, It is much better than DA*55 at edge performance. No one complains it is a bad lens anyway.
01-27-2015, 02:01 PM   #896
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,954
QuoteOriginally posted by starjedi Quote
I do not think so. For example, DA 50 1.8 is typically dirty cheap and sometimes can be bought for about $100 in sales. It is one of best Pentax lenses in term of sharpness. As a comparison, at the same aperture 1.8, It is much better than DA*55 at edge performance. No one complains it is a bad lens anyway.
I haven't seen a comparison between those the DA *55 and DA 50 f1.8. Where are you seeing it?
01-27-2015, 02:32 PM   #897
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,161
QuoteOriginally posted by starjedi Quote
I do not think so. For example, DA 50 1.8 is typically dirty cheap and sometimes can be bought for about $100 in sales. It is one of best Pentax lenses in term of sharpness. As a comparison, at the same aperture 1.8, It is much better than DA*55 at edge performance. No one complains it is a bad lens anyway.
Lot of people will ditch it 'cos it is a cheap lens (it is indeed), not that I agree, it is sharper than the f/1.4 (bit nowhere near modern 50mm sharpness la Sigma if that one's taste).
01-27-2015, 05:55 PM   #898
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,549
QuoteOriginally posted by starjedi Quote
I do not think so. For example, DA 50 1.8 is typically dirty cheap and sometimes can be bought for about $100 in sales. It is one of best Pentax lenses in term of sharpness. As a comparison, at the same aperture 1.8, It is much better than DA*55 at edge performance. No one complains it is a bad lens anyway.

The DA50 is a good lense, in particular for the price. Would be stupid to dismiss because it is unexpensive. This is one of the best buy you can make price weighted inside together with the DA35 and the sigma/tamron f/2.8 zooms.

Still we continue to speak of sharpness all the time. This is one parameter. Some lenses not really sharper than the DA50 will bring more pleasing image, in the end anyway.

While it would be stupid to think the DA50 is bad, it far from being bad... There can be reasons to spend more for high-end gear.
01-28-2015, 10:09 AM - 1 Like   #899
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,587
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I haven't seen a comparison between those the DA *55 and DA 50 f1.8.
Our friends at DxOMark have tested the DA50 and DA*55 (plus the FA 50 f1.4). Here's the side-by-side results, when tested on a K-3. The DA 50 does fine.
01-28-2015, 11:01 AM   #900
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,048
When the DA 50 1.8 first came out it sold for over 250 dollars and people complained because the Canon 50 1.8 could be bought for 100.

So it's all deja vu all over again, every time Pentax releases a lens.

If you think it's expensive don't buy it. Wait a couple years and it will probably be selling for 599 by then. and 499 on the bi-anual sales.
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 01:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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