| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2018 Location: Hérouville Saint Clair, Normandy, France Posts: 143
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 19, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Build quality, quiet, weather resistant, range | | Cons: | Slightly wobbly when extended | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: KP
| |
Very good all-purpose lens.
Crisp images, low CA.
Quiet zoom.
I had the Sigma 17-70 Contemporary, this one has the same image quality and bonus : weather resistant !
Use it in good light conditions.
Another forum user wrote this, and it is true :
"It's essentially a kit lens on steroids"
  | | | | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2013 Posts: 7
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 8, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Sharp, convenient, good AF, WR | | Cons: | Quite big with hood attached, distortion | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: k70
| |
The focal range is just fantastically convenient. If I need to go away with just one lens, I know it will work in most situations. I was using an 18-135mm, but I tended to not use it much past 100mm anyway, as the sharpness would drop off a bit. I also find the extra 2mm at the wide end useful.
It's a workhorse lens.
The sharpness is very reliable. I have sharper primes, but they are primes. The AF is not blindingly fast, but there is no hunting, it's accurate, and it's quiet. There is a fair bit of wonky distortion at the wide end, but that mostly disappears by 20mm or so.
If I have a criticism, it's that it can lack a tiny little bit of....err....something. Don't get me wrong I have taken some lovely shots with it. It can give fantastic detailed landscapes with really convincing greens. The 18-135 is definitely softer, and you have to shoot over f8 between 25mm-100mm to get anything like the image quality. But I felt my 18-135 was sometimes a bit punchier, and my 20-40mm definitely has more prime-like 3D depth. If my composition and lighting are right, the images are great, but I feel like the magic comes from the vision rather than the lens. Maybe that's what you get with a well corrected, consistent, modern style zoom, and maybe it's a good thing...?
Update;
Having looked back through some shots, there is definitely a drab 2D look which is very obvious, and tends to happen at the wide end in flat light. I might experiment with using generally a slightly wider aperture at the wide end and see if this helps. Certainly mid to long focal lengths seem to have much more pop, and scenes with more beautiful light will work well throughout the range.
Update 2;
I have found that I can get a bit more of a sense of 3D by shooting at around 5.6 rather than 8-9, which still gives reasonable depth of field at the wide end. However, to be honest I'm struggling to love this lens. I do feel that many people prize sharpness above all else, but for me a classy lens controls highlights and shadows more subtly than this one does. It's a sharp lens but without good rendering it can give an ugly confusing mess, with overcooked contrast in bright fine details, or a flat 2D look in low contrast scenes. My old SMC A35-105mm is so much better at rendering subtle tone gradations, giving beautiful believable colours, reach into the picture 3D depth, and it's ridiculously sharp to boot (although to be honest I think my copy is a freak because it is as sharp as my FA limiteds!). Unfortunately, it's manual focus, weighs a ton, isn't weather sealed, and doesn't have the wide end! Such a shame that despite ticking so many boxes as a do it all solution, the 16-85 just doesn't cut the mustard.
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2018 Posts: 12
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 28, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Vallue For Money | | Cons: | Very few | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K3ii
| |
Excellent lens for the money. Really sharp, the go-to walk around lens in so many circumstances. If you wanted to take all my lenses away apart from one, this would probably be the one I'd choose, as it's so versatile. Really light for the range and quality and handles really well. The AF is swift and silent. Difficult to find a negative, especially at the price!
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: May, 2016 Posts: 3,726
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 4, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | range, sharpness, close focus | | Cons: | large hood, front element wider than body | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: New
Camera Used: k-3ii
| |
I got this lens as an alternative to primes, it's more convenient when traveling. It fits that purpose well, the focal range is very handy. Paired with another lens, it allows for a flexible two lens kit:
- with a prime depending on the situation (normal, portrait or macro)
- with the 55-300 to cover a wide range
- with the da 15 if I need even wider angle and less flare
Across the range it's sharp. At 85mm it's better to stop down to f8. At 16mm it has some chromatic aberration and distortion is visible, but darktable comes with effective lens correction presets.. Flare control is good, especially considering the number of elements. Compared to the da limiteds, it's probably as sharp, but the rendering and color are not as special.
Bokeh is rather busy in close-up photos if branches or grass are in the background, otherwise bokeh is smoother (but not exceptional). I'm not rating how blurry the background can get but how I perceive its quality, it's not a large aperture lens.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2013 Posts: 7
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 29, 2015 | Not Recommended | Price: $600.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | tagliente anche a tutta apertura | | Cons: | nessuno | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: pentax k3
| |
Ottimo obiettivo, va bene anche per il ritratto, avrei preferito un f4 ma va bene cosi,
 | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2012 Location: Blenheim Posts: 1,297 | | Review Date: February 21, 2024 | Recommended | Price: $370.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | WR, useful zoom range | | Cons: | soft at wider angles/apertures, relatively expensive | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 7
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-70
| |
I've experimented with a range of lenses, and after reading good reviews of this lens, hoped it could become a walkaround lens to replace several other options that each almost meet my requirements, but not quite.
I have an older Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 which is a great all round lens, but not weather sealed, a D-FA 28-105 which is a fantastic lens that is sharp and weather sealed, but not quite wide enough on APS-C.
I also have the kit 18-55 DA-L WR version with a third party lens hood that is weather sealed, and very lightweight, and offers fairly good image quality for the price.
Finally, I have a DA 12-24/4 to cover for the wide end that I'm very happy with for sharpness across the zoom range, but it's not weather sealed, it's a bit bulky, and typically I'd carry it with the D-FA 28-105 to have all my focal lengths covered, which adds a bit of weight out hiking.
I'd read reviews of the DA 18-135, and the 16-85 is generally rated higher, so I had great expectations for this lens.
Could it replace all those other lenses as a single walk-around lens?
After owning it for several months, I have distinctly mixed feelings. It's one of the more expensive lenses I've purchased, even though it was second hand.
After starting to have some misgivings using it out in the field, I printed out a test chart and tested it on a tripod with 2 second shutter delay at different focal lengths and apertures to get controlled conditions.
There's some CA near the edges at wider focal lengths, but this clears up with smaller aperture and longer focal lengths.
There's also noticeable barrel distortion at 16mm.
By 28mm the CA is almost gone, even wide open, and the barrel distortion is gone too, although overall sharpness still leaves a bit to be desired until stopped down, especially in the corners and edges.
Beyond 28mm there's virtually no CA or distortion, and sharpness is greatly improved, although corners are still a bit soft until stopped down to f/8.
AF is quiet, and quick.
It's hard to assess bokeh, as due to sharpness issues, it's unlikely I'd use this lens wide open, and it's fairly slow anyway,
My main problem with this lens is that if it doesn't come into its own beyond around 28mm, why use it, when I have the D-FA 28-105 that is excellent at 28mm on APS-C, weighs about the same, has longer reach, and is cheaper?
Having the 16-28mm range covered without having to change lenses is convenient, but even at f/11 at 16mm it's not very sharp.
For a wide to short telephoto, my experience is that the Sigma 17-70 offers better sharpness and wider aperture across the range, although the lack of weather sealing is a drawback.
Would I recommend this lens? That's complicated.
I think the Sigma is out of production now, as is the DA 12-24, however for me, if weather sealing isn't critical, then I think I'd pick the Sigma over this as it's around used, at quite reasonable prices, or if carrying two lenses isn't an issue, The DA 12-24 + D-FA 28-105 give me better image quality with weather sealing from 28mm onwards.
For someone who wants to buy with a warranty, I would recommend this lens, although if you can survive without the wider end, and think there's any prospect of a full frame body in your future, a D-FA 28-105 might be a worthy alternative. The kit 18-55 stopped down is not much worse than the 16-85 at the wide end, and if you don't mind changing lenses, the 28-105 seems to have a sharpness advantage over the 16-85.
Maybe I'm being unfair comparing with a full frame lens, but given that they're similar weights and sizes, and anyone with a kit 18-55 can make up for the wider range not covered by the 28-105, I think it is a useful comparison.
If you're buying a body and lens together though, without hesitation I'd recommend the 16-85 over the kit lens, as it will do everything the kit lens does and more.
Enough words, here are some images so you can decide for yourself.
 16mm f/11
 31mm f/5.6
 85mm f/5.6
 35mm f/8.0
 48mm f/10
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2023 Posts: 4 | | Review Date: February 8, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $355.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | 5.3x zoom, really sharp, WR, SDM | | Cons: | A distance scale could have been useful | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: Pentax K-70
| |
After years of using the 18-55 kit lens, I wanted a lens that could reach larger field of view, but also be a short tele, with an improoved quality and sharpness.
Bought on MPB, at a really low price against the eBay prices and the condition of the lens itself (except for the missing filter door on the lens hood, kindly refunded), this "little" jewel, is a everyday lens with a good range of shooting.
Good sharpness wide open, but must go to f/8 to get some nicer detail. Top sharpness resists till 11, and till 50mm; 85mm is sharp too, but of course less as compared to the wider focal lenghts.
It's also my first lens with SDM, and WOW, there's some magic in there.
Only a month of usage and yet I totally love this lens, hope it will work with me for a lot from now on.
Edit: After 6 months of using and getting knowledge of this lens, i can say that it is still a very good one but i would have liked that it could be sharper at wider openings. Autofocus is good and neat, but sometimes at 16mm is better going on manual. I would recommend this lens to amateurs or as an everyday lens, because it's a very useful and comfortable, but it lacks the sharpness of a top quality glass.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2018 Location: Tokyo Posts: 10 | | Review Date: June 13, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Focal range, WR, AF | | Cons: | size, weight | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: KP
| |
Really gave me the freedom to take photos in various situation thus best fit for traveling. The image quality is way better than other zoom lenses that I have used and only after the Limiteds. Although I sold it to fund the 20-40mm due to its size and weight, it is really a recommended lens.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2017 Location: Sale, Cheshire Posts: 249 | | Review Date: September 1, 2019 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, contrast, build quality (including WR), | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-3
| |
A superb lens that is as sharp as a good prime lens throughout it's zoom range (when shooting in RAW and sharpening appropriately), with excellent contrast. The lens is extremely competent, well built, and versatile, from wide angle views to landscapes, portraits and an excellent close-up lens at 85mm. At 16mm a little CA can be seen in extreme contrast conditions (removed with software), but otherwise CA is very well controlled.
The review of this lens (particularly the outstanding MTF resolution graphs) on the 'Ephotozine' website illustrates how good this lens is.
The AF is quick and very accurate and consistent, performing well into almost darkness with the K-3.
This is now my everyday lens which consistently gives excellent results, with consistent performance across the lens.
This is my 1st choice lens for camera club competition entries.
Due to its excellent performance, versatility, and weather resistance I would be loath to part with this lens.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: March, 2014 Posts: 53 | | Review Date: May 29, 2018 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Weight, wr, image quality, versatile, allroundlens | | Cons: | Build quality | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax k3 and Pentax KP
| |
This is a very nice allround lens. If I only bring one lens, this is almost always my first choice. It has a versatile zoom range, wr, light weight and produces excellent pictures. I would preferred a konstant aperture at 1:4 in the whole zoom range.
For landscapes and cityscapes this is a very nice lens, and the low weight makes it easy to bring along when I´m hiking in the mountains.
My biggest down with this lens is the build quality. I have used mine for little more than a year, and mine has begun to losen between the focus ring og the zoom ring, opposite the zoom scale. It is now a smal gap, and the sealing is visible.
I have treated this lens with great care, and it has not droppet to the ground or slammed into walls.
It´s going inn for guarantee repairs.
I like the lens a lot, but the build quality could be a little better.
| | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2014 Posts: 16 | | Review Date: November 5, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $530.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp even wide open through all ranges, excellent performance, solid, silent AF | | Cons: | rather expensive, plasticky, odd looking front element, smooth zoom ring might move during handling | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-30
| |
I needed a new jack of all trades for a trip to Asia, since my kit 18-55 got a little messed up and wasn't weather resistant. I missed the wider end and telefoto during my last trips, where I had the Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art with me.
The ruggedness of the 16-85 paid off during the first Taifun with on/off showers, storm and whatnot. One less concern! K-30 and this lens make a good combo.
The AF and wide end made some snapshots possible from the hip, with only rough aiming. Since the K-30 is rather loud and clunky, this was the least obvious way, to take sneaky pictures.
Overall I am impressed by the optical performance. The Sigma is up to now the king of sharpness in my kit, but the 16-85 comes right after. With an AF, which actually hits! Throughout the whole range I am satisfied with contrast, sharpness and the hitrate of the AF. Weight is OK, balancing fair enough with the K-30.
During some situations I zoomed in or out unintended while handling the camera. The zoom ring is rather smooth, but could be a bit harder in my opinion. But thats a minor point.
I would recommend this lens to everyone, who needs a rather compact kit for rough weather and travelling. The bokeh is unforunately not the most flattering for portraits and the end of the telefoto range is limiting its versitility to some degree. But like buster2015 said: Just add a 135 prime (or 85 for all I care) and you good to go for shooting portraits!
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: July, 2016 Location: Roskilde, Denmark Posts: 2,632 | | Review Date: July 8, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $611.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, fast, silent | | Cons: | weight | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-S2
| |
This has become my new everyday lens. Of course the weight is a con when walking around, but I like the zoom-facility. This lens replaced my 18-50 DA-L lens, which came with my camera, - and what a jump in quality :-)
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2012 Location: Budapest Posts: 13 | | Review Date: July 4, 2017 | Recommended
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | super sharp everywhere | | Cons: | red ring; not parfocal, no distance scale | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-5
| |
Why not green? 
 | | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
