Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Pentax Lens Review Database » Digital Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » DA Zoom Lenses
SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM Review RSS Feed

SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM

Reviews Views Date of last review
125 388,700 Wed November 8, 2017
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
83% of reviewers $753.01 8.41
SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM

SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM
SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM

Like all other DA lenses, the SMC Pentax DA* 16-50mm is designed exclusively for Pentax APS-C format DSLR cameras. It was announced in late February, 2007. It auto-focuses with an SDM ultrasonic motor on the K10D (firmware 1.30) and newer cameras. On older cameras the lens will auto-focus with the 'screw drive' mechanism.

SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF]
Image Format
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
Automatic, 9 blades
15 elements, 12 groups
Mount Variant
Max. Aperture
Min. Aperture
AF (in-lens motor or screwdrive)
Min. Focus
30 cm
Max. Magnification
Filter Size
77 mm
Internal Focus
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 83-31.5 ° / 74-27 °
PH-RBJ 77 mm
Lens Cap
Weather Sealing
Yes (AW)
Other Features
AF/MF Switch
Diam x Length
84 x 98.5 mm (3.3 x 3.9 in.)
565 g (19.9 oz.)
Production Years
2007 (In Production)
$781 USD current price
Engraved Name
smc PENTAX-DA* 1:2.8 16-50mm ED AL [IF] SDM
Product Code
Internal zoom.
Three aspherical elements and two ED elements.

Screwdrive AutofocusSupersonic AutofocusQuick ShiftWeather SealedInternal FocusingAutomatic ApertureAPS-C Digital Only
Purchase: Buy the SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM
In-Depth Review: Read our SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM in-depth review!
Sample Photos: View Sample Photos

Add Review of SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM Buy the SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 46-60 of 125
Site Supporter

Registered: February, 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Posts: 5,808
Lens Review Date: January 19, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $750.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quality, WR, IQ
Cons: SDM unreliability
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 9    Autofocus: 9    Handling: 10    Value: 9    New or Used: New    Camera Used: K-5 IIs   

This lens has been greatly maligned by many for its SDM failure, and I too have suffered this. What impressed me was that Pentax repaired it free of charge despite mine being a second-hand lens bought from overseas. I have since bought a second copy new.

That said, in normal use the DA*16-50 is an excellent performer. The AF is not super quick, but it is silent, accurate and doesn't hunt. It feels great to use, and the WR is very reassuring in the field.

It is more prone to flare than the DA15 (what lens isn't?) and in very high contrast it shows some CA and fringing, but for a standard zoom it is a wonderful performer.

It deserves at least a solid nine, but I'm giving it ten to redress some of the unfairly low ratings it has been given in the past.
Site Supporter

Registered: October, 2011
Location: Aylesbury, Bucks
Posts: 492

3 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: October 21, 2012 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $1,000.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Build quality
Cons: Size, weight, handling
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 7    Autofocus: 9    Handling: 6    Value: 5    New or Used: New    Camera Used: K-5   

I bought this lens because I was looking for a decent standard zoom for my K-5.

I know that there are reliability issues with the lens, so I bought it new for 639 (some 200 less than the current RRP).

It is not a bad lens by any stretch of the imagination. Build quality is excellent and I liked the gold highlights and distance scale. This aspect is certainly way above the competition from Sigma and Tamron. I had few complaints about the image quality. It's not up there with my macro lenses, but perfectly decent:

Autofocus was snappy and accurate. This was partly down to the extremely short focus throw (no more than sixty degrees, if that).

However, problem was: I just didn't like it. I found taking it out and using it more of a chore than a pleasure and this is all down to the handling which is poor. Make no mistake, this is an enormous lens. The weight given above is wrong. With hood mounted, it tipped my kitchen scales at more like 660 grams. The weight is exacerbated by the extremely poor balance - uniquely among zoom lens, the camera is more wieldy with the lens fully zoomed out. Besides the weight, the relative sizes of the zoom and focus rings meant that my hand would, as often as not, twist the focus ring rather than the zoom ring when composing a photograph. Note that this a trait shared with the 50-135.

Another major issue is cost. This lens is plain not good value. Although not quite at the level of the Nikon 17-55, it is significantly more expensive than competing models from Canon and Sony. Given the price, I cannot recommend it. If you're looking for a fast, standard zoom, the Tamron 17-50 is a far better value proposition (optically superior too). If you don't mind sacrificing a little speed for extra reach, the Sigma 17-70 is hard to beat.
Veteran Member

Registered: February, 2012
Location: Fredericton, New Brunswick
Posts: 631
Lens Review Date: October 21, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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

10 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: September 20, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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 Im 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

Relationship history and my feelings about this lens

Here I want to emphasize that everything Im 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.
Yes there were aberations, I new about them.

Best Regards.
Now Pictures. The best reasons to talk about lenses, some portraits cropped.






Registered: March, 2012
Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,683
Lens Review Date: August 19, 2012 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | 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: 4
Lens Review Date: August 7, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | 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: 1,198
Lens Review Date: June 8, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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.

Registered: April, 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 2,126

7 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: June 1, 2012 I can recommend this lens: No | 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.


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.

Registered: June, 2011
Location: Chester
Posts: 719

2 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: May 10, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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
Lens Review Date: March 16, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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!
Veteran Member

Registered: February, 2008
Location: Hawkesbury
Posts: 379
Lens Review Date: March 12, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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.
Site Supporter

Registered: April, 2011
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 449
Lens Review Date: March 12, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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.

Registered: August, 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 2,525
Lens Review Date: February 27, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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
Lens Review Date: February 11, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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
Lens Review Date: November 22, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | 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.
Add Review of SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM Buy the SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:17 PM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]