Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Pentax Lens Review Database » Digital Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » DA Zoom Lenses
SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR Review RSS Feed

SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR

Sharpness 
 7.6
Aberrations 
 7.6
Bokeh 
 7.3
Autofocus 
 6.9
Handling 
 8.3
Value 
 8.9
Reviews Views Date of last review
35 221,351 Sat October 29, 2022
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
97% of reviewers $156.15 7.86
SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR

SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR
supersize
SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR
supersize

Description:
This is the weather-resistant version of the 50-200mm zoom lens. The filter diameter has been reduced to 49mm.

SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR
© www.pentaxforums.com, sharable with attribution
Image Format
APS-C
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
No
Diaphragm
Automatic, 6 blades
Optics
11 elements, 10 groups
Mount Variant
KAF
Check camera compatibility
Max. Aperture
F4-5.6
Min. Aperture
F22-32
Focusing
AF (screwdrive)
Quick-shift
Yes
Min. Focus
110 cm
Max. Magnification
0.24x
Filter Size
49 mm
Internal Focus
No
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 31.5-8.1 ° / 27-6.9 °
Hood
PH-RBD49
Case
S80-120
Lens Cap
O-LC49
Coating
SMC,SP
Weather Sealing
Yes
Other Features
Diam x Length
69 x 79.5 mm (2.7 x 3.1 in.)
Weight
285 g (10.1 oz.)
Production Years
2009 to present (in production)
Pricing
$196 USD current price
Engraved Name
smc PENTAX-DA 1:4-5.6 50-200mm ED WR
Product Code
21870
Reviews
User reviews
In-depth review
Unofficial Full-Frame Compatibility Tests by Pentax Forums
☆☆☆ No coverage at any setting
Show details
Notes
One ED element.

Features:
Screwdrive AutofocusQuick ShiftWeather SealedAutomatic ApertureAPS-C Digital Only
Purchase: Buy the SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR
In-Depth Review: Read our SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR in-depth review!
Sample Photos: View Sample Photos
Price History:



Add Review of SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR Buy the SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR
Author:
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 16-30 of 35
New Member

Registered: October, 2013
Location: Naples
Posts: 10

2 users found this helpful
Review Date: November 1, 2013 Recommended | Price: $120.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Light, compact, WR, usefull focal lenght, not so bad optical quality
Cons: inconstant and unpredictable immage quality, dark, slow AF
Sharpness: 6    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 6    Handling: 8    Value: 9    New or Used: New   

The perfect kit tele zoom...

Sharpness is not good on borders, but colour and contrast is quite good. Performs quite well between 70 and 150mm from f 5.6. Not good at 50mm and from 150 to 200 until f8.

Some times it can produce exceptional shoot, some time the worst. The great problem is that's its non predictable!

Anyway for its cost, it's quite good, very usefull and handly.
   
Veteran Member

Registered: October, 2013
Location: Ontario
Posts: 726

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: October 22, 2013 Recommended | Price: $100.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Compact, nice range, WR, Quick-Shift focus
Cons: A bit slow, a bit flimsy
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 8    Handling: 9    Value: 8    New or Used: Used    Camera Used: K5   

I didn't really want this lens, I placed a low bid on an auction and won it. I wanted a WR lens to match with my K5 for shooting in bad weather condition (sandy places, rainy/snowy days) I would have preferred the 18-135 but for the price, this one will do.

Sharpness isn't so bad, as long as you stop down, let's say between f/8-16. At any aperture the lens is noticeably sharper in the center and soft on the edges, especially toward the far end (135-200mm).

Aberrations is a bit of a problem with smaller aperture (f/11 and up) making the lens sweet spot very narrow... f/8-11.

Bokeh is decent, nothing to call home about but it is not awful either.

AF is screw driven and is just as fast (or slow) and noisy as most my other lenses, might hunt once in a while. Quick-Shift focus however is awesome, I wish all my lenses had that.

When fully extended there is a bit of a wobble which makes me doubt the weather sealing. Like others mentioned, it also kinds of look stupid fully extended with the hood on.

If you can get this lens for cheap, buy it. Otherwise get a better one or get the 18-135WR if shorter range is fine with you.
   
New Member

Registered: July, 2013
Posts: 2

2 users found this helpful
Review Date: July 23, 2013 Recommended | Price: $175.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Compact, water resistant, good hood, practical zoom range
Cons: Looks stupid extended, kinda slow
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 6    Autofocus: 6    Handling: 8    Value: 9    New or Used: New   

This is my utility lens - stays on one of my bodies until I need something else. It's decently sharp, and very compact for a 4x zoom range 200mm lens. The hood fits very securely. It's less than half the size, and about 40% of the weight of the A series 70-210 zoom that was my utility lens back in my film days.

Drawbacks? Construction is decent, but not to the level that I can see using this example two decades from now, as I do with the previously mentioned 70-210 A. It looks completely goofy when racked out to 200mm, but to be fair, the barrel seems to be free of play. At 5.6 on the top end, it's no speed demon. The lens hood is nearly as long as the lens itself, although it is well made, fits very securely, and has a removable slot on the bottom to gain access to mounted filters (e.g. polarizer).

Haven't verified the WR label yet (fortunately), but for an outdoor shooter, that is a significant feature.
   
New Member

Registered: July, 2011
Posts: 8

2 users found this helpful
Review Date: October 14, 2012 Recommended | Price: $60.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Sharpness, WR, weight
Cons: autofocus a tad slow, range
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 8    Autofocus: 7    Handling: 8    Value: 9    New or Used: Used    Camera Used: K-5   

I bought this lens second hand together with the 18-55 WR for 100 euros. I already owned lenses for these focal lengths, but I wanted WR lenses to match my WR camera. I have not used them a lot. In fact, I would find my Tamron 18-250 to do the job almost equally well as all round lens, and I have a 70-200 2.8 Sigma for longer focal lengths.
However, after some rainy shots in fall, I found out the image quality is not bad at all! Furthermore, it is light enough to carry around, so I'll probably take it more often.

The disadvantage is that I have to choose either the 18-55 or the 55-200 to mount on my camera in bad weather conditions, since I do not want to change lenses if it is raining cats and dogs. So a lens with a longer range (18-135) would be even better - and more expensive indeed (and I am not sure of the tele capabilities of that lens).
   
New Member

Registered: May, 2012
Location: Sydney, Oz ~ just past the phone box
Posts: 7

2 users found this helpful
Review Date: May 27, 2012 Recommended | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Weather resistant, solid, beautiful colour rendition, sharp
Cons: 49mm front end should be 55mm, and shorter focal length should be 28/30mm IMHO
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 3    Autofocus: 7    Handling: 8    Value: 10    New or Used: New    Camera Used: Pentax K5   

This is the lens that I bought when I purchased the K5 body because C.R. Kennedy (Pentax importer to Australia) told my retailer that the 18-135mm lens was no longer available. I now know that was an outright lie.
I'm happy with the 50-200mm, but I would be MUCH happier with an 18-135 because now I've had to get two 3rd party wide angle lenses to cover the lower focal lengths, when I should have only needed one 10-17mm + a teleconverter.
The Da 50-200 WER takes great photo's with rich colour saturation without the need to jiggle white balance, and better pics again with a circular polarising filter. Framing pics indoors can be a nuisance with 50mm being around the equivalent of 80mm in the old scale, but the camera itself allows for colour, light and shadow so well that framing pics indoors has been my only difficulty. I am yet to use the flash indoors, and I've had the K5 for 8 months and five birthdays now.
   
New Member

Registered: December, 2009
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 9

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: May 7, 2012 Recommended | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Compact size, WR
Cons: AF can be a bit slow
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 9    Autofocus: 5    Handling: 9    Value: 9    New or Used: New    Camera Used: K-7   

This lens on my K-7 is the reliable stand-by when the weather or sea cut up rough. I have kept on shooting with the camera and lens completely soaked in salt water and sold some of the results. The lens hood does help to keep spray/rain off the lens, or at least makes it easy to cup the end of it with a hand to keep the important bit dry until ready to shoot.

The 50mm wide end is useful in some situations - makes it more versatile than the Canon 70-200 lens I use a lot on my other kit. No hesitation in recommending it to outdoor photographers.
   
Veteran Member

Registered: May, 2010
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 373

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: May 3, 2012 Recommended | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: portability and price
Cons: average sharpness.
Sharpness: 6    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 9    Autofocus: 2    Handling: 5    Value: 8    New or Used: New    Camera Used: k-5   

Im in greece on a trip. Ive been using this togdther with fa 43 and 18-55wr because of the portability.

Ive gotten some keepers, but missed many shots Because inferior af. It hunts even in good light, probably Too long focus travel. The af is also very slow. Tried to shoot a passning Police car in sunlight, only got one shot... My old sigma 50-150 2,8 would have gotten me as many shots as i wanted. Because of hunting and long focus travel it gets very noisy, People you want to shoot discretly might hear the eeeeeeeeee *slap* eeeeeeeeee


Sharpness is good enough most times. But i dont think it gets much sharper stopped down, maybe a little. At small apertures its very poor. I dont go past f8 most times.

Bookeh is nice. Havent been annoyed by abberations really, in strong sunlight some objects gets halos. The hood is a must in strong light (ugly hood).

The barrel extends very far and with the ugly hood you look like the most touristy person on earth and cant be taken serious by anyone.

Id recomend to buy the 18-135 instead of carrying 18-55! Andra. 50-200, it doesnt differ that much between 135 and 200mm. I wish I did. But for the money its very good and its light.

Wrote this on my Phone just so you know.
   
Site Supporter

Registered: February, 2011
Location: Niagara
Posts: 3,905

8 users found this helpful
Review Date: April 24, 2012 Recommended | Price: $200.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Light, compact, bokeh
Cons: AF hunts a bit
New or Used: New   

This lens has great attributes, and I think in many ways it is unfairly maligned by inexperienced users as it is often received as a part of a kit (like mine) and quickly replaced with other glass. I've taken to using it as a walk around in combination with DA 21 Ltd. It is small enough to stuff in my coat pocket easily.

The bokeh can be smooth and creamy

@F8

Great White Egret by Matt T Prime, on Flickr

@F4.5

Theasle by Matt T Prime, on Flickr

It can also render some nice starbursts if so desired:

@F11

Canal at midnight by Matt T Prime, on Flickr

I feel it can be plenty sharp if patience is used for focusing - in my opinion the lens' real weakness.
Full size image posted for peeping - I selected this as the focus is on the eyes, but you can see in the focus plane, the sharpness of the hairs and lips along the edge and into the corner.
@F4.5

Untitled by Matt T Prime, on Flickr
   
Veteran Member

Registered: September, 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 2,653

4 users found this helpful
Review Date: September 25, 2011 Recommended | Price: $180.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Size, weight, WR, colour, lack of CA, focus speed
Cons: Can be soft at the long end
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 9    Bokeh: 10    Autofocus: 8    Handling: 9    Value: 10    New or Used: New    Camera Used: K-7   

I love this lens.

Once you get used to its few shortcomings, mainly image corner softness at some apertures and focal lengths, it can produce some great images. Bokeh, colour rendering and contrast are brilliant. My copy has very little CA or distortion above some 60mm. WR seals are handy to have.

It is a fair bit smaller and lighter than the DA 55-300mm and IQ-wise there is really very little difference - I have both and still prefer this one. Handling and bokeh are much better.

A couple of tips :

Use the lens hood, it does make a difference.
Don't put a UV filter on this lens, it degrades IQ noticeably.
And make sure shake reduction, if you are using it, locks in before you fire the shutter.

Some shots :





   
Veteran Member

Registered: July, 2009
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 471

3 users found this helpful
Review Date: April 25, 2011 Recommended | Price: $170.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Build quality, low price, Weather and dust sealing, Compact, lightweight, intuitive controls, Good image quality in daylight, Wide zoom range
Cons: Sharpness falls off at larger apertures, Slow autofocus, needs light, Focus ring is a little narrow
New or Used: Used   

I got this lens to do outdoors photos, especially when going places like the Zoo with my kids and when it is wet out. It is reasonably priced so that even with all the disasters that kids and weather can create, I never worry about taking it out and having it slinging around my neck on the strap while juggling things and kids.

I wrote one of the in-depth reviews for this site, so I won't go on about it more here, but point you to my review:

(Non working link deleted)

However, the reason I am posting is that I found a new use for it, Amateur astronomy

I used some tape to connect an IR filter from a 52mm lens to the UV filter for the 50-200WR and point it at the sun this weekend and the results were not all that bad. I was pretty surprised that such a cheap setup could get images of the Sun. So I thought this might be a nice sample image to add here.


IMGP1729-crop-color by j@ys0n, on Flickr
   
Senior Member

Registered: January, 2008
Location: Zug
Posts: 132

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: April 2, 2011 Recommended | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Weight, smooth zoom control, easy to alter focus, size
Cons: none that I know of yet

I usually have stuck to Primes. However, this is one really nice lens! Pictures will say the rest, I have not done anything except very minor adjustments, cropping and on some more or less exposure in Aperture. Definitely a great lens to have ready.

http://www.entourage-butterworth.net/other_galleries/birds/ostrich/index.html

The last three show their environment as it was this afternoon on a glorious April day (2.4.11)

Which one is best? I like 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 11.

My EXIf listing for Focus distance is empty in Aperture so cannot add that!
   
New Member

Registered: March, 2011
Location: Tuktoyaktuk, NWT
Posts: 6

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: March 26, 2011 Recommended | Price: $200.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: WR, good IQ, well built for the price
Cons: nothing major

A great companion to my K20D, I have used it at -20C with excellent results. It is a very good lens at this price point showing no serious bad qualities while producing sharp results in good light. It does not focus very close but checks most of the other boxes for a general purpose consumer lens. I am very pleased with the images I have shot with it so far, good contrast and sharpness throughout the zoom range but at f5.6 you need lots of light to shoot at the 200mm end.
   
Pentaxian

Registered: May, 2010
Location: now 1 hour north of PDX
Posts: 3,897

4 users found this helpful
Review Date: December 4, 2010 Recommended | Price: $200.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: WR, bokeh, size/weight, quick-shift
Cons: for the price: no negatives

My first WR lens, I swapped a PF member my DAL 55-300 for this. I am very happy and get more consistent imaging with this lens; I guess I was overshooting with the DAL and outrunning SR so stopping me at 200mm is a good thing!

It may not be as inherently sharp as the 55-300 but a minor bit of PP takes care of any difference. Bokeh is more consistently good with this lens than the 55-300, and its size matches well with my 16-45 zoom. These two will be my new 'dream team' for the K-7.
   
Forum Member

Registered: April, 2010
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 62

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: September 27, 2010 Recommended | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Weather-sealed, versatile, inexpensive, well-built, sharper than you'd expect from a kit lens
Cons: I wish this went to 300mm

I'm a fan of this lens. Once you take this with you into the elements and start shooting to your heart's desire, you realize what value this lens has. I think it's underrated, personally. I became an instant fan one day in the Florida Everglades when I got stuck in a torrential storm-- my K-7 and this lens didn't flinch. I admit that I haven't tried the DA* tele's, and I would like to get the 60-250 DA* or 300 DA* some day, but I'm having a really hard time justifying the purchase as long as I keep getting good shots with this. Some day I'm sure I'll get a "better" lens, but until then, this one will always go with me on hikes and just about anything outdoors. As far as Pentax goes, if you like WR and value, get this one. If you like value and don't care about WR, get the 55-300. If you demand the best and can make the investment, get the DA*.

Up to the time of writing this, virtually everything I posted here was taken with this lens, the SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR.
   
Site Supporter

Registered: February, 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,902

1 user found this helpful
Review Date: August 12, 2010 Recommended | Price: $223.32 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Small, tiny, super small 200mm lens, and weather sealed to boot
Cons: it could be sharper, and it's not very fast glass

I'd say this lens is on par with the 18-55 WR. It's quite solid, the weather sealing is a plus, and I have shot with it in the rain.

The most impressive thing about this lens is how small it is. I can fit it in my holster bag attached to the camera.

The IQ on it has been good enough for me, although it's no DA* 50-135, and it's slow at the long end, so you wont be using a teleconverter with this lens.

For the price, you can't beat it. You may end up hungry for faster glass later though.
Add Review of SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR Buy the SMC Pentax-DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:31 AM. | 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