| Author: | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2012 Location: Fredericton, New Brunswick Posts: 632 | | Review Date: October 21, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $700.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Center Sharpness, Weather Sealing, Build Quality | | Cons: | Edges before F4(Not that bad, really) | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: Pentax K-5
| |
Recently purchased this from another member, since I've received it, I've only removed it to use a tele lens. This "Horrendous Softness" others speak of isn't really an issue, as it's very sharp in the center regardless of aperture, and by F4, it's very sharp across the frame. Personally, I suspect the corner softness was deliberate, as if they were trying to make it a nice portrait lens at 50.(As, at 16, there is distortion, but corners are sharper wide open it seems)
Only complaint might be the high price tag for new. And the fact that it doesn't have a button to transform itself into a 60-250.
| | | | | | | Senior Member Registered: March, 2010 Posts: 234
12 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 20, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $700.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, quality is greate in my case, bokeh | | Cons: | heavy aberations | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K7
| |
Now I think I’m ready to make a report about this Lens. Lets try!)
History of the purchase
I bought this lens in the May of 2012, it was used. And I bought it for my brother, who is also Pentaxian. Because he has Me as his elder Bro. Before making this purchase I already had FA 16-45 and Kit lens and some others, so I had an alternative and also tried and was looking after other Third party lenses, and actually was thinking about Sigma as a better choice. But there was a good lens with a good price in a very good placeand time, and brothers money btw %))), so it happened. I was afraid about SDM issues, I think everybody buying this lens is feeling weird about this issue, but the original owner had no SDM issues with it and I bought it. I had no reason not to believe him.
Condition and Price
It was almost like New with all stuff like boxes papers etc. Also there were two filters 77mm – UV and CPL both HOYA, I think, both used. The overall price was 700$ so it was a very good price. It was in Almaty Kazakhstan, only a few people use Pentax Gear there so the second hand prices for Pentax sometimes lower there than in the outer world)))
I tested it carefully, the SDM worked perfectly, it was sufficiently fast. But every test info is already posted I think here is almost the best link
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-16-50-vs-sigma-tamron-17-50mm/introduction.html
Relationship history and my feelings about this lens
Here I want to emphasize that everything I’m talking about is just my opinion with no pretends on overall sence.
So I bought it in May and left it home while getting to my PhD studies in Novosibirsk. My brother used it and was glad with pictures quality, and the fact he do not need to switch lenses, to make portrait or landscape.
My main experience with this lens happened this August (2012) when I was on my hiking trip to Tajikistan in Fani mountain. It was a hard choice what to take – I had a several options: FA 16-45 DA 14 Da 18-55 Sigma 10-20 DA * 16-50 DA50 – 200 and DA * 50-135. And a key parameter was weight-quality. Because it was 17 day trip with heavy backpacks, so every 100 grams were counted. And chosen pack was DA * 16-50 DA50 – 200 (and I was glad because of the first lens and not very glad about the second). So I had a continuous 20 – 25 day experience of DA *16-45 Usage.
Conditions were extreme also for the technique: It was warm in a daytime and cold in the night, almost every day s was rain or snow, and in the tent it was wet climate. It was always shaking in my Photobag. I also took off the hood and mounted used UV filter(sometimes I switched it to CPL), because it was usefull. And what I can say both lens and K7 worked well for the whole trip. I will never complain about this purchase.
My K7 with DA 16-50 were always on my neck, I almost hated them))) because I also had a 28 kilo in my backpack. And there was a lot of shots both portraits and landscapes, I was very glad with this lens. It fully satisfied my needs. In the trip I had no energy and time to switch lenses so 16-50 – was the best choice.
I think this lens is a very good choice for a hard trip.
PS
Yes there were aberations, I new about them.
Best Regards.
Sergey
Now Pictures. The best reasons to talk about lenses, some portraits – cropped.
1
2
3
4
Portraits
 | | | | | Banned Registered: March, 2012 Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh Posts: 1,668 | | Review Date: August 19, 2012 | Not Recommended
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | Optics, aperature, zoom range. | | Cons: | Significant reliability issues | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 2
Handling: 8
Value: 2
New or Used: New
| |
Please feel welcome to also review all of the comments under the B&H section as well. They match a lot of the comments found on ths site.
I'm suprised that this lens has the Pentax label on it. If one happens to only have this lens for about one year; and also NOT use it on a professional basis - then it should be the lens for you. I would also strongly suggest that if you really do need to get this lens - that you also get as much of an added warranty as one can possibly get - you'll need it. Due to numerous reliability issues, this is also not the one lens to rely upon in any type of circumstance. You will always need a back up second lens with you if you have this lens.
Not only is this the worst Pentax sdm lens but the worse presently marketed Pentax lens -period. I'd even purhcase the lowest price off Pentax brand and consider it better than this one.
It has major issues with build quality and reliability. Problems with focusing ability failure in about the first year (or so) of even moderate (and cautious) use. Also major problems with the zoom locking up.
Sure this does not occur in all of the purchases of the lens', but this lens is the worst example of these concerns.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2011 Posts: 20 | | Review Date: August 7, 2012 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharpness, color, contrast | | Cons: | back focus (now is set in the camera) | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 8
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-x
| |
Hi, i think the measures must be forgotten and it must be just use and enjoy. It is a really versatile lens, with very good sharpness.
Together with a Flash, that produce brilliant pictures.
(sorry for my English) | | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2007 Location: Prague Posts: 1,199 | | Review Date: June 8, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $550.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp and a lot of contrast | | Cons: | af could move faster, bokeh is so-so | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: k-5
| |
I only regret I didn't buy this lens earlier. I was put off by bad reviews initially, but I tried Sigma 18-50/2.8 and Tamron 17-50/2.8 and neither convinced me. And my friend did let me try his DA* and I knew this is it.
The optics is truly higher class than the tamron, not only the build quality.
The bokeh is not great, but I cannot expect it to be great considering the FL range.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2009 Location: Oxford, UK Posts: 2,375
7 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 1, 2012 | Not Recommended | Price: $961.00
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | Build quality, performance at f5.6 | | Cons: | CAs, poor to very poor below f5.6 | | Sharpness: 3
Aberrations: 3
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 1
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax K5
| |
I've found this lens to have great build quality and the weather-sealing is a boon in a damp climate. The autofocus isn't the fastest but it is fast enough and accurate and I've had no problems with it. There is more flare and CA than I was expecting, but then as with any lens these are only hassles if you are not prepared to work around them and/or correct in post.
Apertures:
At f2.8, my 16-50mm is so soft at any focal length as to be unusable for more than the lowest quality shot. Brick wall tests, focus tests, etc, have checked out OK so I think it is just soft, period.
At f4 it is better but still not good and shots at this aperture are really OK only for web use sharpened and reduced if the image is of something taken fairly close. My 18-55mm kit lens does a better job at f8 than my 16-50mm does at f4 or below.
The sweet spot is f5.6. My 16-50mm lens performs well at this aperture, perhaps as it was intended to. Images at f5.6 at 20-45mm are pleasing - with great contrast and Pentax colours and plenty of detail resolved fairly sharply. The image is a bit distorted at the borders at 16-18mm and gets a tad softer at 45-50mm. The sharpness is not up to the standard of my DA limiteds, but as with any lens it's the overall rendering which matters and I like it.
At f8 the lens is better than at f4 but not so good as at f5.6. One can see the sharpness and contrast beginning to go. The slide into softness, diffraction et al starts again at f9 and above.
Overall, however, for a lens marketed as pro and sold for a sky-high price, I am extremely disappointed. Maybe I have a poor copy but checking the web suggests that a lot of folks have had similar experiences with this lens. If it were an f3.5-5.6 or so kit lens for a few bucks the optical performance might be thought outstanding, but for the price (and I bought it for less than it currently goes for) this lens is a ripoff considering the very narrow sweet spot at which it hits the kind of performance its price might suggest.
I realize my rating is rather harsh. If this lens cost considerably less and/or was reworked as an f4 lens and/or had a similar performance at f4 and f8 as it does at f5.6, then I would have rated it much more highly. I would rate it at 8 for its sweet spot performance, docking points for it costing so much and for flare/CA.
Update on 23 July 2012. I have had the lenses calibrated by Pentax service here. The difference was night and day, and I can see that when properly set up this lens can produce work of good quality. Alas, within ten days of getting the lens back, the zoom and the focusing system stuck solid. I managed to work them free very slowly and carefully but there is now a loose and rasping sound from within, so something has failed or popped out. So back to the service centre again. I won't change my rating now. On song, 8 would be fair for this lens but two failures one after the other on a new lens is really deserving of a 3 at best.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2011 Location: Chester Posts: 719
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 10, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $1,000.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Build, ergonomics, weather sealing, sharpness, rendering | | Cons: | massive CA, very flare prone | | New or Used: New
| |
First of all, the only two negatives I can think of WRT this lens are two pretty prominent negatives. Then again, one can be easily fixed in post, and the other is very easy to avoid.
The CA on this lens is absolutely insane, it's pretty much impossible to take a picture without it. But then you can fix this in literally a single click in Lightroom, so I've never found this to be an issue. Optically, it's a fault, but it doesn't actually get in your way.
The flares can be pretty intrusive at times. If you have a bright light in the frame, you're going to get a flare. It works against bright back light incredibly well actually, but it flares like nothing else. Keep the hood on.
Those two caveats aside, this is an absolute dream of a lens. I find it mind-boggingly sharp in the centre at all focal lengths and apertures, almost as sharp as the 50-135. They're a fantastic pair, though this one focuses much faster and feels nicer to use IMO. It's as sharp as my 50mm f/1.4 at equivalent apertures.
I think it has pretty prominent field curvature, because a lot of people don't like the sharpness at the edge of the frame. It does drop slightly, but if you actually compose and focus on something near the edge, you'll find (or I do at least) that it's impressively sharp at all focal lengths, maybe less so at 50mm. And at f/2.8 at 50mm, you're generally going to have a lot out of focus anyway if field curvature is causing you problems.
Anyway, it feels incredible, it looks incredible, it produces sharp images at all apertures and it produces distinctly lovely pictures. If you can live with the massive CAs, the flares and the field curvature, you'll have a beautiful lens.
I probably wouldn't pay the current US prices for it, but it is a fantastic lens if you can afford it.
UPDATE: Took this, the FA 50/1.4 and the 50-135 to Malta for a holiday and I basically shot the entire time with this one lens. It's just beautiful to use and shoot with, the only negative I can think of in real use is it's size and weight. The other negatives don't come across to me, even for work.
Ether by OlexiPhotography, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2012 Posts: 691
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 16, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $1,100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | WR, tough as nail, micro contrast, beautiful bokeh, rich colour | | Cons: | Heavy and large compared to Sony 16-50 SSM | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K5iis
| |
The strength of this lens is its micro contrast, bokeh, wr, and f2.8.
The build quality is extremely good and no issue with sdm since day 1.
The good news is that with the new k5iis there is an improve in focus speed. It is now comparable to 18-135 testing them one after another. Ca @ f2.8 has also reduced using the new body. Overall sharpness increased as well.
Shot at f2.8 16mm ISO200
YH__0371 by Lightbulb2012, on Flickr
In short, it is a keeper!
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2008 Location: Hawkesbury Posts: 1,899 | | Review Date: March 12, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $1,000.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Good colour reproduction | | Cons: | Heavy, expensive and inconsistent sharpness | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 6
Value: 5
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K20D
| |
I had a copy of this lens for work. The first thing you notice about it is that it is big and solid with a lot of inertia. It seems to weigh more than the camera body, possibly because much of the weight is towards the front of the lens.
I found the best feature of the lens was it's colour reproduction. Bokeh is good at some middle focal lengths. I found sharpness varied too much across the image circle at different focal lengths and apertures and it was difficult to really pin down any particular sweet spots for the lens.
Performance at 16mm was the most disappointing.
I appreciate that Pentax made the lens weather sealed although I don't really know how effective it is on lenses that change length with zooming.
Thankfully our copy never exhibited the SDM focus issues that so many users experienced. Focus was a bit slow and often missed the mark in dim, low contrast conditions; more than I thought a F2.8 lens should. I didn't find the lens attractive enough to buy one myself. Instead I went for a bunch of second-hand primes and a standard 18-55mm zoom. I just couldn't see enough value in the DA*16-50.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Cochrane, AB Posts: 508 | | Review Date: March 12, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $700.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Construction, WR, Silent focus | | Cons: | Zoom sticks | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 7
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-x
| |
I want to review this lens after 2 solid months of use. Bought this used from Henry's ebay store.
I believe my copy back-focuses 1/2 to 1 inch, so I can't provide strong comments on its performance below f5.6. It strikes me as soft at 2.8, even accounting for back focus. At f4.0 its good and at f5.6 fantastic. My suspicion is that its excellent down to f4.0 and good at f2.8, but I haven't gone through the trouble yet to adjust the K-x.
As others have noted, there is a noticeable distortion at 16mm, but I find the in-camera correction works well. I find it takes good pictures from roughly 20mm through to 50mm, going all the way down to 16mm will result in decent shots but not as good as above 20mm. Or I don't have the composition skills to work at 16mm, which is quite possible.
Since I bought it, it has rarely came off my camera, the focal range works quite well for how I shoot (essentially alot of my own familty with the odd "artistic" outing) and although some people describe it as heavy, I find it has a nice heft and solid, quality feel in the hand.
The SDM is almost distracting its so quiet, I've had to turn the beep notification back on so I know when this thing is in focus. It took alot of gettign used to. I took alot of out of focus pictures when I first got this thing due to the SDM alone.
For the (retail) price, I would have expected this to have better image quality below f4.0, but I intend to hold absolute judgement until I have it mounted and AF adjusted on a K-5. It gets a 7 on overall value proposition. If this is not a huge outlay of cash for you, I say go for it. If spending more then $500-$700 on a lens makes you nervous, its probably not worth the money.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2009 Location: Edmonton, AB Posts: 2,519 | | Review Date: February 27, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $950.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | WR, quiet autofocus, sharpness | | Cons: | weight, reliability, focus creep | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K20D, K5D
| |
This is one of my favourite lens, it is usually between this lens and my M50 1.7 whenever I can only choose one lens to come with me when I head out (even then the M50 usually hides in my pocket!).
All the pros have been discussed to death, and mine is for sure one of the better copies as I get amazing sharpness, without a whole lot of CA throughout the f range.
My main issue with this lens has been focus creep as it seems to creep a little bit if your aiming down at all. But other than that it has be a joy to use.
As for reliability I have not had any issues with the SDM drive. I've had an issue where the zoom collar seized up on me. I also have sent it back twice for large dust particles being found on the inner elements... but its WR that shouldn't happen. Well... no, its WR when attached to a camera, off the mount dust can still sneak in through the holes in the mount. Luckily I bought extended warranty with this lens... something I recommend anyone who purchases expensive glass to do anyways.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2010 Posts: 91 | | Review Date: February 11, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $840.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | colors, image quality | | Cons: | poor performer on 16-18mm f2.8-4.0 | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax K-7
| |
I want to tell my story. It has the happy end but sad beginning. At the moment I mounted this lens I thought "wow!". That "wow" was more about its appearance, build quality, big front element compared to the crappy 18-55 DA L (it was given me for free while I was awaiting for the 16-50 arrival). First sessions, however, faded the impression quite a bit. Sharpness was.. average when stopped down to f8-f11 and very poor wide-open. Focusing was inaccurate and I had-to re-adjust it through menu every week or two. To say the least I was really disappointed by its performance. After couple of months my camera fell onto ground with the lens mounted. "Now, I'll finally free of using it" I thought. But by the happy accidence it was only protector filter which broke but not the lens or camera itself. Then were another few months of unhappy shooting with it. I was even going to send it to Japan for repair or something (the guarantee was obviously lost due to falling). Things became much better when I found the way to enter service menu on my K-7. I tried numerous combinations of AF adjustments at different focus lengths and finally found the adjustment amount (+120) where the lens really shine. The camera itself or just the lens was severely backfocused. After the adjustment my only complain about the lens is heavy barrel distortion at 16mm and somewhat soft corners at 16-20mm on wide apertures. Vignetting can be easily compensated in post processing. CA eventually disappeared, sharpness became very good and even excellent stopped down to f5.6. The strange thing is that AF microadjustment through menu wasn't helpful and I had to re-adjust it often but once adjusted in service menu it is good for over a year already.
Recently I bought DA 18-135 for I wanted the versatility of that all-in-one zoom lens it provides. I was wrong in my decision. Comparing output of those two I clearly understand why 16-50 has its star designation.
I think that there is/was some assembling error which leads to severe backfocusing on this lens. Modern "smart" cameras try to "fight" with it somehow and thus it gets inconsistent output, CA, softness, etc. (that's only my guess based on my personal experience with that lens)
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2011 Posts: 118 | | Review Date: November 22, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $850.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, color rendition, handling | | Cons: | CA | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 8
New or Used: Used
| |
I bought this lens used from a friend who had its SDM fixed in Japan. I don't have any issues with AF or SDM thus far.
Like many F2.8 zooms in this range, it is quite sharp, though not as sharp as primes I enjoy the versatility of zoom.
Bit of a problem with aberrations wide open but goes away by F5.6 or so.
Nice lens to use with the combination of a flash.
The price tag may put off some people who are looking for performance value, but considering it has a built-in motor and weather sealed I don't think the price is that bad.
| | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2008 Location: Montreal Posts: 24 | | Review Date: November 5, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $950.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp (for my needs), SDM, Versatile | | Cons: | Heavy/Bulky | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
New or Used: New
| |
Bonjour PF,
Just got this lens today, and been shooting a lot of frames to see if I got a good copy. I'm more worried about the focusing (split image) and glass quality of the lens than the SDM. But for now, all seems well. I'll update my review if I have issues.
I'm writing as well as I took the plunge and got this lens as well as the DA* 50-135mm f2.8. I wanted the practicality of a zoom lens with the quality of my DA fixed focal lengths (if that's possible...) to replace my kit lens.
I have both the DA 18-55 mm WR and DA 55-300 mm, and they're good, but on the long run started to get frustrated as the more frames I took, the more I saw a difference between the quality of the pictures between the zoom and my fixed focal length lenses. Especially for shallow depth of field and bokeh. (My fav is the DA 100 mm when I take portraits, but not as practical as the DA 18-55 mm or DA 55-300 mm...)
All this to say that for anyone in the same position as me, that have started seeing the difference with the kit lens, I can vouch that this lens is leaps and bounds ahead for my needs. I know some will say that it's not the equipment that makes the pictures, but in some cases it helps a lot.
For the con, it's just that I'm used to having my fixed focals on (mostly 21, 35 and 100mm on my K-5), but this lens is still small compared to the equivalent of the big guys.
Also, another reason I thought I'd give my 2 cents, is that this forum helped me take an enlighten based on a lot reviews that have a good description of how the lens feels, at least for user, which helps a lot more than graphs and numbers.
I'm not regretting it one bit (unless something goes wrong...) . | | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2010 Location: Kalamata Posts: 224 | | Review Date: October 17, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $800.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | contrast, versatility | | Cons: | bulky | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 8
New or Used: New
| |
Apart from being bulky, a very nice lens.
| | |
![SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM Review RSS Feed](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/rss/rss_feeds14x14.gif)
![SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM](https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/221200712913.jpg)
![SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/221200712913.jpg');)
![SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/smc_Pentax-DA_16-50_2_8_ALEDIF_SDM_star_optics.jpg');)
![Buy the SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM](https://www.pentaxforums.com/content/camerapics/pentax-button.gif)
![Read our SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM in-depth review!](https://www.pentaxforums.com/content/homepage/pflensseal.gif)
![Add Review of SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/digitalvb/pentax_red/buttons/addreview.gif)
![Buy the SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/digitalvb/pentax_red/buttons/buylens.png)
