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

HGMonaro · 09-17-2014, 11:53 PM

Haven't read whole thread but I used/still have the 16-45/4 for my Pentax (K10D, now K7) and the one thing that used to drive me nuts was the 45mm end... just not long enough... but the 16mm side had me in it's grasp! So, when I bought a Nikon to bolt on the back of my newly acquired 2nd hand (from here!) 100-300/4 Sigma, I bought the 16-85 Nikkor. Perfect travel/general purpose lens for me. I don't need a wide aperture for this kind of use, increased ISO capabilty covers that. Actually thinking about this, my Nikkor isn't perfect as it's not WR... this Pentax is going to be... maybe it's my perfect travel lens!

gazonk · 09-18-2014, 12:27 AM

Originally posted by HGMonaro

Haven't read whole thread but I used/still have the 16-45/4 for my Pentax (K10D, now K7) and the one thing that used to drive me nuts was the 45mm end... just not long enough...

No, it's not quite long enough - on the other hand I think the short minimum focusing distance and the nice rendering at 45mm makes the lens very useful at that FL after all!

thibs · 09-18-2014, 02:01 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

No, it's not quite long enough - on the other hand I think the short minimum focusing distance and the nice rendering at 45mm makes the lens very useful at that FL after all!

I did not take formal tests but it seems to me my 16-45 has become soft but maybe that's the different sensors it has been used on: (ist-D, K10D, K-7, K-5).

starbase218 · 09-18-2014, 02:04 AM

I first had a 16-45, then a 17-70. I really liked the 16-45 in terms of weight, "feel" and colors, but the sharpness wasn't always there. I think my second 17-70 is much better. Although, to be honest, it could also be my general technique improving over time.

**Digitalis** · 09-18-2014, 02:05 AM

The K10D was already pushing the limits of the 16-45mm f/4 - my copy has the wobbly barrel and as a consequence: it has considerable de-centering.

bdery · 09-18-2014, 05:13 AM

Originally posted by stevebrot

To be fair, the current Sigma has not been tested against the DA 17-70. Its immediate predecessor was deemed essentially comparable in the review here at Pentax Forums with a slight node going to the Sigma. My comment was based on what I remembered of the photozone.de review of the DA 17-70 and the glowing review of the Sigma 17-70 (c) on this site. To quote the PF reviewer:

I'm the one who wrote that review

The Pentax is a very fine lens, in itself. Nothing wrong with it, your typical Pentax lens. The Sigma simply has more perks at a lower price in most markets. that doesn't make the Pentax mediocre.

rangercarp · 09-18-2014, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by VisualDarkness

Even if the lens don't have IS I would love a SR switch on the lens or in the body to make switching easier.

I miss the SR switch from the K10d. Better than scrolling through menus.

Joshua A · 09-18-2014, 08:02 AM

So, is it at all possible that this new lens features Internal Zoom, because it is about time that Pentax released a standard zoom which dorsnt change size in my opinion.

JinDesu · 09-18-2014, 08:09 AM

Originally posted by Joshua A

So, is it at all possible that this new lens features Internal Zoom, because it is about time that Pentax released a standard zoom which dorsnt change size in my opinion.

Looking at the lens and the competition (Canon/Nikon equivalents), I would highly doubt it is internal zoom. I wish it was though.

Joshua A · 09-18-2014, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by JinDesu

Looking at the lens and the competition (Canon/Nikon equivalents), I would highly doubt it is internal zoom. I wish it was though.

I already have a 16-50, but I really do wish I could buy a durable alternative with WR, but alas, it cannot be done at the moment.

LeeRunge · 09-18-2014, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by Joshua A

I already have a 16-50, but I really do wish I could buy a durable alternative with WR, but alas, it cannot be done at the moment.

I do as well. 16mm is perfect for wide angle, 18mm isn't quite enough. This would be a good alternative to the 18-55 kit lens for general use. Hopefully they put a decent motor in it and get more out of the AF while eliminating the screw noise. Hopefully it's good optically as well. Fuji's 18-55 kit lens is a few level's above everyone else and it would be nice to see this one perform the same.

D1N0 · 09-18-2014, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by LeeRunge

Fuji's 18-55 kit lens is a few level's above everyone else and it would be nice to see this one perform the same.

Well it costs €700,- so it better be better then de 18-55 wr i got for a €50 mark up.

IchabodCrane · 09-18-2014, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by D1N0

Well it costs €700,- so it better be better then de 18-55 wr i got for a €50 mark up.

In the USA, the price for the Fuji 18-55 when bought in the kit comes out to $400 over the body-only price.

thibs · 09-18-2014, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by LeeRunge

Fuji's 18-55 kit lens is a few level's above everyone else and it would be nice to see this one perform the same.

With or without software corrections applied (on both sides, I'm not really defending Pentax, just making sure the comparison is fair).

JinDesu · 09-18-2014, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by IchabodCrane

In the USA, the price for the Fuji 18-55 when bought in the kit comes out to $400 over the body-only price.

It'd be nice for the 16-85 to have a body discount, and I think Pentax did do nice discounts with lenses, like in the case of the 18-135 it was almost $150 off the lens with the body.

The Fuji 18-55 is $600 here at B&H by itself.

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

09-17-2014, 11:53 PM	#316
HGMonaro Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Melb. Aust Posts: 840	Haven't read whole thread but I used/still have the 16-45/4 for my Pentax (K10D, now K7) and the one thing that used to drive me nuts was the 45mm end... just not long enough... but the 16mm side had me in it's grasp! So, when I bought a Nikon to bolt on the back of my newly acquired 2nd hand (from here!) 100-300/4 Sigma, I bought the 16-85 Nikkor. Perfect travel/general purpose lens for me. I don't need a wide aperture for this kind of use, increased ISO capabilty covers that. Actually thinking about this, my Nikkor isn't perfect as it's not WR... this Pentax is going to be... maybe it's my perfect travel lens!

09-18-2014, 12:27 AM	#317
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by HGMonaro Haven't read whole thread but I used/still have the 16-45/4 for my Pentax (K10D, now K7) and the one thing that used to drive me nuts was the 45mm end... just not long enough... No, it's not quite long enough - on the other hand I think the short minimum focusing distance and the nice rendering at 45mm makes the lens very useful at that FL after all!

09-18-2014, 02:01 AM	#318
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by gazonk No, it's not quite long enough - on the other hand I think the short minimum focusing distance and the nice rendering at 45mm makes the lens very useful at that FL after all! I did not take formal tests but it seems to me my 16-45 has become soft but maybe that's the different sensors it has been used on: (ist-D, K10D, K-7, K-5).

09-18-2014, 02:04 AM	#319
starbase218 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe Posts: 1,119	I first had a 16-45, then a 17-70. I really liked the 16-45 in terms of weight, "feel" and colors, but the sharpness wasn't always there. I think my second 17-70 is much better. Although, to be honest, it could also be my general technique improving over time.

09-18-2014, 02:05 AM	#320
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	The K10D was already pushing the limits of the 16-45mm f/4 - my copy has the wobbly barrel and as a consequence: it has considerable de-centering.

09-18-2014, 05:13 AM	#321
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	Originally posted by stevebrot To be fair, the current Sigma has not been tested against the DA 17-70. Its immediate predecessor was deemed essentially comparable in the review here at Pentax Forums with a slight node going to the Sigma. My comment was based on what I remembered of the photozone.de review of the DA 17-70 and the glowing review of the Sigma 17-70 (c) on this site. To quote the PF reviewer: I'm the one who wrote that review The Pentax is a very fine lens, in itself. Nothing wrong with it, your typical Pentax lens. The Sigma simply has more perks at a lower price in most markets. that doesn't make the Pentax mediocre.

09-18-2014, 07:46 AM	#322
rangercarp Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Southern Michigan Posts: 437	Originally posted by VisualDarkness Even if the lens don't have IS I would love a SR switch on the lens or in the body to make switching easier. I miss the SR switch from the K10d. Better than scrolling through menus.

09-18-2014, 08:02 AM	#323
Joshua A Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 273	So, is it at all possible that this new lens features Internal Zoom, because it is about time that Pentax released a standard zoom which dorsnt change size in my opinion.

09-18-2014, 08:09 AM	#324
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Originally posted by Joshua A So, is it at all possible that this new lens features Internal Zoom, because it is about time that Pentax released a standard zoom which dorsnt change size in my opinion. Looking at the lens and the competition (Canon/Nikon equivalents), I would highly doubt it is internal zoom. I wish it was though.

09-18-2014, 08:22 AM	#325
Joshua A Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 273	Originally posted by JinDesu Looking at the lens and the competition (Canon/Nikon equivalents), I would highly doubt it is internal zoom. I wish it was though. I already have a 16-50, but I really do wish I could buy a durable alternative with WR, but alas, it cannot be done at the moment.

09-18-2014, 08:29 AM	#326
LeeRunge Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 993	Originally posted by Joshua A I already have a 16-50, but I really do wish I could buy a durable alternative with WR, but alas, it cannot be done at the moment. I do as well. 16mm is perfect for wide angle, 18mm isn't quite enough. This would be a good alternative to the 18-55 kit lens for general use. Hopefully they put a decent motor in it and get more out of the AF while eliminating the screw noise. Hopefully it's good optically as well. Fuji's 18-55 kit lens is a few level's above everyone else and it would be nice to see this one perform the same.

09-18-2014, 08:41 AM	#327
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	Originally posted by LeeRunge Fuji's 18-55 kit lens is a few level's above everyone else and it would be nice to see this one perform the same. Well it costs €700,- so it better be better then de 18-55 wr i got for a €50 mark up.

09-18-2014, 08:56 AM	#328
IchabodCrane Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,728	Originally posted by D1N0 Well it costs €700,- so it better be better then de 18-55 wr i got for a €50 mark up. In the USA, the price for the Fuji 18-55 when bought in the kit comes out to $400 over the body-only price.

09-18-2014, 08:59 AM	#329
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by LeeRunge Fuji's 18-55 kit lens is a few level's above everyone else and it would be nice to see this one perform the same. With or without software corrections applied (on both sides, I'm not really defending Pentax, just making sure the comparison is fair).

09-18-2014, 09:03 AM	#330
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Originally posted by IchabodCrane In the USA, the price for the Fuji 18-55 when bought in the kit comes out to $400 over the body-only price. It'd be nice for the 16-85 to have a body discount, and I think Pentax did do nice discounts with lenses, like in the case of the 18-135 it was almost $150 off the lens with the body. The Fuji 18-55 is $600 here at B&H by itself.