Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Southern England Posts: 623 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: August 10, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $170.00
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | Compact, light, WR, quality feel, 200mm sharpness, value. | Cons: | Fairly soft at wider end. | | A very nice lens to have on your camera - it's compact and light in weight, and has a quality look and feel.
I was surprised at the centre sharpness wide open at 200mm; my copy extends this sharp area towards the bottom right of the frame, the top of the frame being somewhat softer. At f11, most of the frame is reasonably sharp.
At the wide end, at 50mm, my copy is somewhat disappointing regarding sharpness (at all apertures). By 100mm, this improves a little. The lens is still quite usable at these focal lengths, though.
I was also surprised at the colour rendition: nowadays, I expect Pentax lenses to have warm, vibrant colour, but my copy seems rather cool (a bit similar to my M-series lenses). Not a big deal though.
No doubt the DA 55-300mm is a better lens (I haven't tried it), but it's bigger, heavier and about 3x the price (in the UK).
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Fresno, Ca Posts: 13 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: March 12, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $200.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | weather resistent, compact, light, accurate, image quality | Cons: | only f/4-5.6, 49mm filter | | I tested the lens and was sharp through-out. I was really impressed at 200mm the sharpness at 5.6. I didn't notice any light fall-off through out which was fabulous. I like the fact that it's weather resistant with rubber seals, not just a channel. Rubberized grips makes it good to hold too. Nice carry around or back-up lens.
| | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2010 Location: Bærum, Norway Posts: 101 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: March 8, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | WR, lightweight, good IQ | Cons: | | | I find the IQ of the 18-55mm WR to be a little better.
The 50-200mm WR is reasonably sharp throughout the range.
Excellent value for money.
Nice focal range for most outdoor shooting.
Taking price into consideration I would give this lens 9.5.
Edit: After 15 months use, I find this lens to be quite sharp towards the long end, where it matters the most to me. Upgraded rating from 7 to 8 based on this.
| | | | Site Supporter Registered: March, 2009 Location: Virginia Beach Posts: 2,950 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: January 19, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $230.00
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | Tight feel, value, WR | Cons: | Requires f8-f9.5 for good IQ 100mm-200mm | | I bought this from Adorama in December and have shot a pile of test shots trying to decide if I would keep it. The answer was yes, but barely. I compared it to my DA55-300 and found although similar below 90mm, the DA50-200 requires AT LEAST a full aperture stop, often two, more than the DA55-300 above 90mm to get similar sharpness up to 200mm. I bought it for a beach walk-around lens so light at small apertures will not be an issue for me. However as a general purpose lens this may be a dissapointment to those hoping for good IQ at larger apertures. I am also concerned how a zoom can inexpensively be WR considering the cylinder of air that is sucked in and out of the tube. Time will tell on that one.
I was happy to note that the IQ obtained at mid-range stayed with the lens through 200mm with no drop off that I noticed. At 200mm and f8-f9.5 I did not see any PF or CA.
The 49mm fitting was a plus since we all already have a couple 49mm filters laying around.
If you are looking for value in a daylight walk-around lens that is WR this might work for you.
If you expect sharp shots at f/4.5@100mm or f5.6@200mm then don't stop here in spite of the price.
edit 5/6/2010 - weeks after writing this review I concluded the lens was not only the weakest of my dozen or so but that it might just be a bad copy. I returned it for an exchange but they issued a refund instead so I took that as a sign and no longer own the lens. Maybe I will try it again someday for that beach lens I need.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: July, 2008 Location: Western Canada Posts: 37 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: September 14, 2009 | Recommended | Price: $299.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Inexpensive, lightweight, weather sealed | Cons: | Nothing that couldn't be expected given the above | | I never tried the previous non-WR version to compare to, but after a little over two months with this lens my first impressions are:
1. Nice feel, not heavy but not really cheap or flimsy feeling either. Fairly tight but smooth zoom ring.
2. Has a 49mm thread with a hood that has a little panel that comes out (like a battery compartment lid) to be able to turn a circular polarizer or such.
3. Barrel extends on zoom and focus but front element does not rotate.
4. Did not come with any kind of case or bag (no biggie)
5. Mild CA/PF noticeable on 100%+ zoom
6. I have seen some very respectable sharpness from this lens. Put it this way, I've not been unhappy with shots taken with this lens even when pixel peeping, but still considering it's price.
7. I haven't shot any brick walls yet and I'm no expert reviewer (obviously) but on the negative side I notice some light falloff and softness at the corners especially wide open and at longer focal lengths. I would say that is pretty typical for a lens of this caliber- so no surprises there and no miracles.
I'm giving it an 8 with value and WR as big positives.
| | |