16 - 45 versus 16 - 50

If you can find someone nearby who stocks them (or can make the pilgrimage to Watford), my advice is go and try them on your camera. Everyone is different and has slightly difference preferences. For example, I don't mind lugging a heavy camera around all day, others hate it. I chop and change lenses quite a bit (usually between the 12-24mm and the 50-135mm), others prefer to have one lens and stick to it. You may find that your mind is made up quite quickly when you actually handle one. I went to SRS planning to replace my kit lens with one of these and walked out with the 12-24mm instead

BTW another consideration is filter size/cost. The 16-50 takes 77mm filters which are pricey,the 16-45 and 17-70 take 67mm.

As to extracting money, I doubt many people would keep more than one of these options but they might add primes to complement the zoom, e.g. a 43mm Ltd...

Good luck with the choice, Kris.

---

Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
My website

No it's just a range that is used by many type of phtography and all come in his own place really.
The 16-45 is the cheap wonder lens which is superb for his price so we can forgive his little faults completly.
The 16-50 is a little overpriced if you compare it with the 16-45 but you get back weather-sealing, wider arperture and a better built quality.
The 17-70 is made to replace the 16-45 so far as I know but it just isn't that cheap as the 16-45 so if you don't use the extra range it isn't really worth it over the 16-45.

so get the 16-45 if it fits your bill.
if you need the extra range the 17-70 would be great.
if you need weather sealing or the wider arpeture get the 16-50.
It really isn't that hard

---

Stefan


K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ

I have the 16-45mm which I think is an excellent lens but have always wondered the same so when I saw the chance of a cheap(ish) 16-50mm on Ebay I took it.
I will pick up the lens on Thursday when I return to the UK for a couple of days .. will be interesting to make the comparison.

---

. My Flickr

John - do you mean irrelevant or insignificant?

---

Incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial - sorry, that's Perry Mason Speak!

What I did was mix my sentence a little I admit, but I think we probably have the gist of the meaning...

---

Best regards, John

Thanks John. I wasn't quite sure whether you meant that although one lens was of considerably higher quality than the other, it did not make any difference in this context.

[/pedant]

Not got the 16-50 as I dont have the funds, but I did buy the 16-45 at Focus for a mere £180, and all I can say so far so good. Nice and light and the IQ is impressive. only down sides is no weather sealing and screw focus.But hey, it was far less than the 17-70 and 16-50, and has that usual Pentax bonus of excellent IQ.

---

Some Cameras

[quote:3496ace15f="Offertonhatter. only down sides is no weather sealing and screw focus..[/quote]


The lack of SDM isnt too bad a thing. I've heard lots of bad things about SDM, especially with regards to failure.

As usual you only ever hear the bad things, nothing from the hundreds of thousands of users that have no problems at all with SDM.

---

. My Flickr

Unfortunately I would have to disagree with regards to the build quality of the 16-50 DA*. I would not say it is the worst lens I have, but for the money I paid, it is far below my expectations.
It squeaks as it focuses. It does not focus fast nor consistently. It also has started freezing up on zoom and focus, so I never know if the lens will be usable. It is out of warranty. I'm debating even trying to see how much to repair, or just go with the 16-45 or perhaps the 17-70.
It seems some batches were worse than others. The quality assurance for this lens is in the crapper.

The weather sealing is nice to have and have needed it quite often. Although I have no proof of the seals being inadequate, I do wonder if the behavior is due to faulty seals.
For the money, I'll rubber band a plastic bag over the lens/camera. That worked while I was at the bottom of Niagara falls before I got the 16-50, so don't see much point in the extra bucks just to "look good".

I have nothing to compare with...but I sometimes do not like 16-50 to think too long while focusing.

I still do not understand, is it matter of K10D or lens or my skills

I live with what I have got. Until I am sure that my skills have improved so much, that I can blame my equipment.

Think:
I have no use of weather sealed camera without weather sealed obye. That is one way to think .... when you feel it starts raining.....
Thats one reason to make the choice, may be.

---

Aiki

----
Pentax K20D; SMC DA 18-55mm II kit; Sigma AF 70-300/4-5.6 APO DG MACRO
GIMP Flickr
PPG

Well they create the acpectation you can use it in bad weather so if it got broken by using it in such conditions and also you expect that such a lens for that moeny would atleast work propperly for a good while so they need to replace it or make a sound offer, atleast that's how the law works here.
Pentax service are always quite helpfull I heard so maybe they can do something for you, who knows?

---

Stefan


K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ

Thats true, but i seem to remember my brother-in-law having similar bother with his canon lenses years ago and i think canon changed the motor type.


Have Pentax sold that many SDM lenses

Maybe I'm old fashioned but i feel that there is less to go wrong with a screw drive and Pentax havent mastered SDM yet.

amoringello sounds like you have one of the bad ones.
Unfortunately the QA for this lens has been indifferent I agree but they are not all that way. Mine doesn't exhibit any of the issues you have mentioned and whilst it's not perfect (periphery soft wide open) it performs very well when stopped down at all focal lengths.
I still rate it quite highly but it is not in the same league as my Oly 12-60.

---

Regards Huw

flickr

Well another way to look at it, I'm using the M SMC lenses and they are so cheap on ebay if you want to buy a different lense and they give superb results.
So if you can be bothered to manual focus, set exposure etc then it kind of grows on a tree if you know what I mean. lol

---