HD PENTAX-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6ED DC WR

JinDesu · 09-15-2014, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

I don't see why anyone would buy this over the 18-135?
Makes no sense as anything but a replacement kit lens. If true that is nice, it sounds like an excellent kit lens but definitely not what I was hoping for.
16-85 f/4 and I would pre-order. 16-85 f/3.5-5.6? Not for me. Once again we see that enthusiasts and semi-pros are not Ricoh target market.

Hopefully there is more to come, but I have to say my confidence is really diminished.

One would hope that size and cost would be the benefit of this lens over the 18-135. I'm hopeful about the size, but not hopeful about the cost.

D1N0 · 09-15-2014, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

With some pretty nasty surprises hiding the in the Bokeh, didn't you read my review?

Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 ART @ f/1.8 1/640th 23mm ISO 80

Great now the thread has a pic that's got absolutely nothing to do with this lens....

IchabodCrane · 09-15-2014, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

I don't see why anyone would buy this over the 18-135?
Makes no sense as anything but a replacement kit lens. If true that is nice, it sounds like an excellent kit lens but definitely not what I was hoping for.
16-85 f/4 and I would pre-order. 16-85 f/3.5-5.6? Not for me. Once again we see that enthusiasts and semi-pros are not Ricoh target market.

Hopefully there is more to come, but I have to say my confidence is really diminished.

It's useful for those who would want to trade the 85 to 135 end to get the 16 to 18 end. Also, it being a 5.3x zoom compared to a 7.5x zoom *might* provide slightly better IQ. Way too soon to know about that.

starbase218 · 09-15-2014, 08:54 AM

I was hoping for this lens to be a bit faster. As it is though, I can't see a compelling reason to get it over the 17-70/4. 70 vs 85mm isn't that big a difference, and it's slower.

edit: But let's not write this lens of completely. Many mention the 18-135, but from what I've seen in e.g. the PF review, that lens is not so great anymore at 70mm or longer, esp. in the corners (yes I have been using my 17-70 to do landscapes at 70mm and f/8 and appreciate sharp corners). It is weather sealed, and if it's sharp, it may still be a good proposition.

Last edited by starbase218; 09-15-2014 at 09:08 AM.

Gray · 09-15-2014, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

some pretty nasty surprises hiding the in the Bokeh

ouch! those doughnuts are nasty.

cxdoo · 09-15-2014, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by IchabodCrane

It's useful for those who would want to trade the 85 to 135 end to get the 16 to 18 end. Also, it being a 5.3x zoom compared to a 7.5x zoom *might* provide slightly better IQ. Way too soon to know about that.

+1
For my touristy stuff I more often feel lacking on wide end (17) than on narrow (50) and I rarely pull out long zoom. Given the choice between this and 18-135, everything else being equal, I'd rather have 16-18 than 85-135.

**boriscleto** · 09-15-2014, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by JinDesu

One would hope that size and cost would be the benefit of this lens over the 18-135. I'm hopeful about the size, but not hopeful about the cost.

I would think the introductory MSRP will be around $425. This is not a replacement for the kit lens, it is an upgrade. Like getting a 50/1.4 instead of a 50/2...

RonHendriks1966 · 09-15-2014, 09:14 AM

A good lens to replace the 18-55 I think.

cali92rs · 09-15-2014, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by cxdoo

Um, you are aware this lens will be probably be sold for less than 1/3 of that Sigma price? They are not only not in the same league, they are different sport.....

I would be very surprised if this went for less than 1/3rd the price of Sigma.
Currently, the 18-135mm goes for about ~450 and the sigma is about ~800. I would expect this lens to be similarly priced to the 18-135mm which would make it over half the price of the sigma.

Andi Lo · 09-15-2014, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by DSims

When Pentax originally put this lens on the roadmap, they teased us that it would be a * lens:

http://www.us.ricoh-imaging.com/files/pdf/lens_roadmap.pdf

Even though they removed the * on later roadmaps, this lens is at the other extreme! It's quite reasonable for people to be disappointed - one would naturally expect a mid-range lens, of course. How can you announce you're going to make a Lamborghini, and then end up delivering a Nissan Sentra?

I believe * designation has been dropped from the lineup (and rightfully so, * is a wildcard for google), HD might have replaced it.

D1N0 · 09-15-2014, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by Andi Lo

I believe * designation has been dropped from the lineup (and rightfully so, * is a wildcard for google), HD might have replaced it.

Nope the 70-200 (probably) is designated as a * Telezoom. HD is the name of the new coating instead of SMC.

Kunzite · 09-15-2014, 09:45 AM

Or perhaps they decided to put most of their effort into FF, and that no crop lens would ever be a *. <ducks>

Andi Lo · 09-15-2014, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by D1N0

Nope the 70-200 (probably) is designated as a * Telezoom. HD is the name of the new coating instead of SMC.

You're right, I just checked the roadmap online and it lists the telezoom as a * (not asterisk, but actual star).

Baffling to me why the DA 560 doesnt get the star then... I guess the spirit of not making sense runs deep in their genes.

cxdoo · 09-15-2014, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by cali92rs

I would be very surprised if this went for less than 1/3rd the price of Sigma.
Currently, the 18-135mm goes for about ~450 and the sigma is about ~800. I would expect this lens to be similarly priced to the 18-135mm which would make it over half the price of the sigma.

I stand corrected. I see in Europe Sigma is ~750 and Pentax ~400.

aurele · 09-15-2014, 10:15 AM - **1 Like**

Hell ! Many people bash this lens even though nobody have seen it, tried it, or got any clue on the price !

Maybe it's to replace the 18-55 which would be great ! It have DC (for how long have we been whining about the lack of this DC motor into entry level lens ? ), it have WR (obviously to be paired with a WR body - K50/K3), ED glass (no more fringing ?).

If it's priced around the same as the current 18-55 non WR, then what's to whine about ?

I understand many where hoping a 16-85 f2.8 or f4 (inc. me for example), but isn't that a small step in the right direction ?

09-15-2014, 09:48 AM	#58
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Originally posted by D1N0 Nope the 70-200 (probably) is designated as a * Telezoom. HD is the name of the new coating instead of SMC. You're right, I just checked the roadmap online and it lists the telezoom as a * (not asterisk, but actual star). Baffling to me why the DA 560 doesnt get the star then... I guess the spirit of not making sense runs deep in their genes. Last edited by Andi Lo; 09-15-2014 at 09:54 AM.

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

09-15-2014, 08:51 AM	#46
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Originally posted by jatrax I don't see why anyone would buy this over the 18-135? Makes no sense as anything but a replacement kit lens. If true that is nice, it sounds like an excellent kit lens but definitely not what I was hoping for. 16-85 f/4 and I would pre-order. 16-85 f/3.5-5.6? Not for me. Once again we see that enthusiasts and semi-pros are not Ricoh target market. Hopefully there is more to come, but I have to say my confidence is really diminished. One would hope that size and cost would be the benefit of this lens over the 18-135. I'm hopeful about the size, but not hopeful about the cost.

09-15-2014, 08:51 AM	#47
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	Originally posted by Digitalis With some pretty nasty surprises hiding the in the Bokeh, didn't you read my review? Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 ART @ f/1.8 1/640th 23mm ISO 80 Great now the thread has a pic that's got absolutely nothing to do with this lens....

09-15-2014, 08:54 AM	#48
IchabodCrane Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,728	Originally posted by jatrax I don't see why anyone would buy this over the 18-135? Makes no sense as anything but a replacement kit lens. If true that is nice, it sounds like an excellent kit lens but definitely not what I was hoping for. 16-85 f/4 and I would pre-order. 16-85 f/3.5-5.6? Not for me. Once again we see that enthusiasts and semi-pros are not Ricoh target market. Hopefully there is more to come, but I have to say my confidence is really diminished. It's useful for those who would want to trade the 85 to 135 end to get the 16 to 18 end. Also, it being a 5.3x zoom compared to a 7.5x zoom might provide slightly better IQ. Way too soon to know about that.

09-15-2014, 08:54 AM	#49
starbase218 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe Posts: 1,119	I was hoping for this lens to be a bit faster. As it is though, I can't see a compelling reason to get it over the 17-70/4. 70 vs 85mm isn't that big a difference, and it's slower. edit: But let's not write this lens of completely. Many mention the 18-135, but from what I've seen in e.g. the PF review, that lens is not so great anymore at 70mm or longer, esp. in the corners (yes I have been using my 17-70 to do landscapes at 70mm and f/8 and appreciate sharp corners). It is weather sealed, and if it's sharp, it may still be a good proposition. Last edited by starbase218; 09-15-2014 at 09:08 AM.

09-15-2014, 08:57 AM	#50
Gray Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Cape Town Photos: Gallery Posts: 536	Originally posted by Digitalis some pretty nasty surprises hiding the in the Bokeh ouch! those doughnuts are nasty.

09-15-2014, 09:10 AM	#51
cxdoo Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Limassol, Cyprus Posts: 1,150	Originally posted by IchabodCrane It's useful for those who would want to trade the 85 to 135 end to get the 16 to 18 end. Also, it being a 5.3x zoom compared to a 7.5x zoom might provide slightly better IQ. Way too soon to know about that. +1 For my touristy stuff I more often feel lacking on wide end (17) than on narrow (50) and I rarely pull out long zoom. Given the choice between this and 18-135, everything else being equal, I'd rather have 16-18 than 85-135.

09-15-2014, 09:11 AM	#52
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by JinDesu One would hope that size and cost would be the benefit of this lens over the 18-135. I'm hopeful about the size, but not hopeful about the cost. I would think the introductory MSRP will be around $425. This is not a replacement for the kit lens, it is an upgrade. Like getting a 50/1.4 instead of a 50/2...

09-15-2014, 09:14 AM	#53
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	A good lens to replace the 18-55 I think.

09-15-2014, 09:19 AM	#54
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by cxdoo Um, you are aware this lens will be probably be sold for less than 1/3 of that Sigma price? They are not only not in the same league, they are different sport..... I would be very surprised if this went for less than 1/3rd the price of Sigma. Currently, the 18-135mm goes for about ~450 and the sigma is about ~800. I would expect this lens to be similarly priced to the 18-135mm which would make it over half the price of the sigma.

09-15-2014, 09:38 AM	#55
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Originally posted by DSims When Pentax originally put this lens on the roadmap, they teased us that it would be a * lens: http://www.us.ricoh-imaging.com/files/pdf/lens_roadmap.pdf Even though they removed the * on later roadmaps, this lens is at the other extreme! It's quite reasonable for people to be disappointed - one would naturally expect a mid-range lens, of course. How can you announce you're going to make a Lamborghini, and then end up delivering a Nissan Sentra? I believe * designation has been dropped from the lineup (and rightfully so, * is a wildcard for google), HD might have replaced it.

09-15-2014, 09:44 AM	#56
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	Originally posted by Andi Lo I believe * designation has been dropped from the lineup (and rightfully so, * is a wildcard for google), HD might have replaced it. Nope the 70-200 (probably) is designated as a * Telezoom. HD is the name of the new coating instead of SMC.

09-15-2014, 09:45 AM	#57
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Or perhaps they decided to put most of their effort into FF, and that no crop lens would ever be a *. <ducks>

09-15-2014, 09:48 AM	#59
cxdoo Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Limassol, Cyprus Posts: 1,150	Originally posted by cali92rs I would be very surprised if this went for less than 1/3rd the price of Sigma. Currently, the 18-135mm goes for about ~450 and the sigma is about ~800. I would expect this lens to be similarly priced to the 18-135mm which would make it over half the price of the sigma. I stand corrected. I see in Europe Sigma is ~750 and Pentax ~400.

09-15-2014, 10:15 AM - 1 Like	#60
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	Hell ! Many people bash this lens even though nobody have seen it, tried it, or got any clue on the price ! Maybe it's to replace the 18-55 which would be great ! It have DC (for how long have we been whining about the lack of this DC motor into entry level lens ? ), it have WR (obviously to be paired with a WR body - K50/K3), ED glass (no more fringing ?). If it's priced around the same as the current 18-55 non WR, then what's to whine about ? I understand many where hoping a 16-85 f2.8 or f4 (inc. me for example), but isn't that a small step in the right direction ?