| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: April, 2008 Location: Westbrook, ME, USA Posts: 288 | | Review Date: May 14, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $330.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Outstanding color rendition and exposure on a DSLR, very reliable, good build quality, good value for money | | Cons: | Not ideally sharp, could be faster | | Handling: 8
Value: 9
New or Used: New
| |
I bought this lens recently just before a trip to Ireland and have been really satisfied with it. It is not ideally sharp but it has great color rendition, exposes very reliably, and gives good performance at every length. I almost never took it off the camera on my trip and it produced a large quantity of keepers. It is particularly nice now that it's less expensive, and I wish there was a longer zoom that had the same value for money.
UPDATE:
I wrote this review in 2008. It's now 2017 and this is still my primary lens. It's occasionally imperfect, especially on the wide end, but the color and contrast I get out of the lens is so reliable that I hardly ever use anything else.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2008 Location: italy Posts: 12 | | Review Date: April 29, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $410.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | light, fast, accuracy, cheap | | Cons: | short zoom | |
I'm thinking to buy the da* 16-50 and i tried both lens.
afer a rapid test i decided for the 16-45, for now is more affordable and don't have all the IQ problems.
i have a ist ds so no sdm, i'm waiting for a better 2.8 better lens.
i'm very happy with this lens the only weakness is that is a bit short but
for everyday photo or walkaround it's wonderful.
for portrait also.
it is the lens i need.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: March, 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Posts: 23,920 | | Review Date: April 28, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Versatile, good build, sharp, affordable | | Cons: | CA | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
As mentioned, a worthy upgrade from the kit lens - in fact it should be the kit lens.
Impressive IQ and wide angle reach with minimal distortions for a consumer zoom - I've found significant CA in some of my images taken with this lens in areas of high reflection. Otherwise a very trusty and quality lens for general landscape and well-lit indoor architecture shots.
May not be as good as a good copy of the DA* 16-50, but the MTF data published by Photozone.de suggests otherwise in focal lengths >16mm at all apertures.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: November, 2007 Location: Brisbane, CA Posts: 79 | | Review Date: January 14, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $270.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp | | Cons: | Sometimes too short and too slow | |
For about 6 months I used this as my walk around lens and found it to be great. Eventually though I just found myself constantly wanting more reach and needing to change lenses too much so I moved on. The only con I really heard about prior to buying this lens was the CA's at the wide end but I never experienced those. If you shoot mainly outdoors or use an external flash for your indoor shots (which you should) then this is a great lens for the job. I was never disappointed with this lens, but once I learned more about my shooting style I decided to replace it with something more fitting for me.
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Phoenix Posts: 1,056 | | Review Date: October 8, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $275.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Image quality, build quality, constant aperture | | Cons: | slow, zoom extends toward wide end | |
This is a great zoom lens, and a very solid step up from the kit 18-55. The image quality is outstanding for a zoom, and even rivals many of the prime lenses I have used. It's a little weird to "zoom out" when looking through the viewfinder (rather than the normal "zooming in"), but the only real downside is that the slow maximum aperture makes it a hard lens to use inside. Of course, that's why we have fast 50's, isn't it?  | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: September, 2007 Location: Belgium Posts: 18 | | Review Date: September 24, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Near perfect image quality. Solidly built. | | Cons: | No real cons. | |
The only reason I'm not giving this lens a 10,
is that the colours seem a tad nicer on my Pentax M 55mm f/1.4 lens (but this is maybe also due to the fact that I use the M lens more often when there is low light, which always gives a nicer atmosphere to the pictures when compared to pictures taken outside in the sunlight), and because the DA* 16-50 f/2.8 will probably be even better.
But in it's price-range, I think there are not much better deals out there !
I also dropped this lens once from a height of 1 m, on a tiled floor, and there was not a dent or a scratch on it and it still functions perfectly like before. That's definitely worth some points for me !
For the rest, I can only confirm what has been said above. The wide-angle distortion is minimal when compared to other lenses, and it gives razor-sharp images (and no, not when stopped down but also at f4).
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 614 | | Review Date: June 4, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $330.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Image quality, contrast, colour rendition, sharpness. | | Cons: | Large; extends at wide end of zoom range. | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
I give this lens 10/10 for being an excellent improvement over the 18-55mm kit lens.
My image quality and sharpness benefited greatly from this upgrade. And the results achieved for the price paid are very impressive.
On the downside, the lens is larger, and when shooting wide with flash, you must be careful not to catch the shadow of the lens in the picture.
This lens is on my K10D (now K20D) all the time: It's the one I take off when using another, specific lens.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: May, 2007 Location: Chicago Area Posts: 84 | | Review Date: June 4, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $449.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, color, contrast, range | | Cons: | Extends at wide angle | |
I really like this lens, stopped down a bit it's very sharp, color is very good and so is contrast. I don't like the fact that it extends when at 16mm but can't have everything.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: February, 2007 Location: Gloucester UK Posts: 441
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 2, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | A superb zoom lens, sharp with high IQ | | Cons: | Wacky zoom design, extends as you go wide | |
My standard "always on the camera" lens.
It has almost "prime" like quality and I've been really pleased with the results it delivers. I really have no complaints. It has a bit of CA, like a lot of other lenses, and a bit of barrel distortion at 16mm, but nothing than isn't easily corrected. A great workhorse, much better than the excellent little 18-55 kit lens, it's definitely worth upgrading to!
I do find 45mm (and 55mm) is just a bit too short, It would be great if it went to 70mm. Maybe if the planned DA 17-70 is indeed an f4 constant (as has been rumoured) and as good, I will replace it. Please Pentax, squeeze another 1mm at the wide end to 16mm!  | | | | | Senior Member Registered: September, 2006 Location: Tartu, Estonia Posts: 159 | | Review Date: March 12, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $480.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Image quality | | Cons: | Extension at wide angle (killing integrated flash ;-) | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
Nothing special to add to previous professional reviews made earlier :-) I only discovered the marvelous features of this one during my latest vacation trip to the peninsula of Sinai (Red Sea resorts)- a short conclusion ought be: a superb walk-around glass under almost all conditions (low light performance is superb due to K100D/K10D SR and in my high contrast photos I could not find a trace of CA/PF (maybe due to successful framing of objects). But anyway I personally will choose the new 16-50/2.8 over this gem... and the only excuse for me is that this extra 1 stop and little zoom can every time save the world IMO (in my case the only 3 ones in use were DA10-17, DA16-45 and DA50-200 with circ. polarizer)... Sorry for drifting off-topic for a while: get this glass as it is 1/2 of the new 16-50/2.8 and IMO not worse :-)
Best and happy shooting, JR
BTW have compared it to Sigma 17-70 (ought to be faster and "lighter" and Canon 17-40 L one on various bodies (OK, the highest Canon was 30D...) and still am in love with this one- best buy IMO  | | | | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2006 Location: Masachusetts Posts: 243 | | Review Date: March 4, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, constant aperture, low distortion | | Cons: | lens hood blocks camera's flash | |
This is a step up from the kit lens. A very large step up. It is impressive in it's lack of linear distortion and it's sharpness throughout the range.
It is clear and sharp enough for commercial use, and if you don't use the on-camera flash you won't have any problem. Great for studio use with strobes.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2007 Location: Paris, France Posts: 4,308 | | Review Date: February 14, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp even wide open | | Cons: | None that are worth mentioning | |
I have only been using this lens for about a week and did use it in a professional application recently. I was quite taken by the quality of this lens and did a comparison to my very fine 17-40 L Canon lens. Well this baby is as sharp or even sharper at 24-28 mm. Purchase without reservation and get a good multi-coated UV filter for it as well...
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187 | | Review Date: February 2, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, good colour, nice contrast, low linear distortion | | Cons: | CA, underexposure | |
Excellent all round lens for the money. Its most notable characteristic is a pretty low level of linear distortion at most focal lengths making it good for city tours and architecture right down to 16mm. In this respect its notably superior to the Sigma competition (18-50 F2.8 and 17-70).
Sharp all the way from 16 - 45, though softer wide open at 16 than at 45. Still good to very good throughout range, and stopped down to F6.3 or smaller its as good as most primes across its entire midrange. Bokeh is not bad either.
Two main weaknesses are a high level of green/magenta CA at 16mm, especially noticeable on the K10D, and the tendency to require +0.7 - +1 positive EV on wide-angle shots.
Another niggle is the rather extreme extension of the barrel at wideangle making the onboard fill flash useless much below 24mm.
No significant vignetting with normal 67mm filters.
Build quality is commensurate with price, eg. more than adequate.
Overall, a worthy upgrade from the standard kit lens, though likely to be superceded by the upcoming 17-70 and 16-50 F2.8.
Breakdown
Build Quality: 8 - good at the price
Usefullness: 9 - good all rounder though a bit short on tele
Distortion: 9 - good for its class
CA: 7.5 - one major weakness at 16mm with backlit scenes
Sharpness: 8.5 - good at 16mm edge to edge, excellent at longer lengths
Exposure: 7 - consistent tendency to underexpose at wider angles.
Colour/Contrast: 9 - Very good, up there with most primes bar the limiteds.
Summary: Cant really go wrong but watch the CA at wider angles with backlit scenes.
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 9 | | Review Date: January 11, 2007 | Recommended | Price: $399.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Great Focal Length range, sharp as a tack | | Cons: | Somewhat slow maximum aperature (f4.0) | |
A great step-up alternative to the kit lens. I have used mine on the DS for last twelve months, and it is as sharp, or slightly sharper than my FA 20-35 f4.0 AL, with better chromatic abberation performance. I am constantly amazed how sharp this lens is, even at f22! The only time I use this lense wide open is with a flash indoors, and it does shine here, not giving up much to a prime in sharpness. She's a tad bit heavy, but worth her girth! This is the one lens that is most often attached to my DS.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 593 | | Review Date: January 8, 2007 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Very good sharpness from a zoom | | Cons: | Front element extends when zoomed to 16mm | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
| |
This is a very, very good zoom. It is sharp even wide open and has excellent bokeh. Pentax really did their homework on this lens as far as image quality is concerned and kept it at a reasonable price point.
One drawback is that when it is zoomed to the 16mm wide end the lens extends a long way out and thus makes it rather a long lens.
| | |
