16-85 - Portions of Images Blurry

I`ve recently started to notice that parts of images taken with the 16-85 are blurry

Mostly it seems to be at the widest range, and on the right hand side of the images (although there is one example where the left side is affected).

For example these two were taken minutes apart a few days ago, first @16mm and the second @23mm.
The third is a crop of the right side of the image, which appears all blurry.







@23mm seems okay.

The following was taken a few years ago, on the K5IIs (all the others K3).



To my eyes the left side of the following are "off" as well.





It seems that others have also encountered such issues e.g.
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/16-85-issues-58761

Unfortunately my lens is out of warranty; is this fixable even?

I suppose my only option is to contact the official Pentax repairers for advice.

Has anybody else suffered from such an issue with the 16-85?

Thanks
Adrian

Hi Adrian

Sorry you're having this problem as well! (as originator of the thread linked to above).
Its such a shame as the 16-85 is potentially a great lens. It might be worth giving Alan Marlow a ring; link. I believe others here have used his services for lens calibration etc. Having said that, I am not sure that he can fix it a due to the the way the lens is constructed; I don't think it has fine adjustment screws to shift lenses - rather plastic shims IIRC.

I eventually went down an alternative route; K1 + 28-105!

Hello Andy
Thanks for your feedback.

I'll get in touch with Alan, I might as well contact SRS (from whom I bought the lens new) ; they might be able to confirm whether it is repairable.

So frustrating having invested £500 on it, 3.5 years ago.

Perhaps a worst case scenario would be trying to get compensation from Ricoh, under the conditions of the sales of goods act I. E

You have six years to take a claim to court for faulty goods in England, Wales and Northern Ireland; in Scotland you have five years.

In fairness one would expect a £500 lens to perform better.

I 'upgraded' from a Sigma 18-50 to the 16-85, mainly for the weather sealing and extra 2mm. I loved the Sigma, and if I'm forced back into the market, I'd likely opt for a Sigma 17-50.

I agree totally that potentially it is a great lens, and it's been a pleasure to use.

I don't think that I'll be following your route of a K1, though, having only gone onto the K3 just over a year ago😏

Thanks
Adrian

That was my thinking at the time! Having said I went down the 28-105 route, I had also originally gone for the 16-85 to get the extra few mm (APSC) equivalent at the wide end. SRS fully refunded as an offset against the K1 and lens.

I suppose a question might be whether it has recently gone blurry (ie did it take a knock at some time), or have you only just become aware of it? If the former, might be worth trying an insurance claim repair if you have such covering accidental damage?

Andy
I have noticed the blurry over the past months, however the image I posted of the bluebells was taken over two years ago, on a different body, and more annoyingly, whilst still under warranty.

If I were to spend more time trawling through the images taken with the lens, I could well encounter more?

Alan Marlow has confirmed that unfortunately he is unable to help at this time.

I1ll next drop an e-mail to John Pye Technical; my preference would be to get the lens repaired, if possible and within financial reason.

The lens is blemish free, never received any bumps or knocks (which makes it worse somehow).

Regards
Adrian

How annoying not to have spotted it earlier! Reading between the lines from SRS, there had had quite a few of these lenses that were bad. But it would seem from others, if you get a good copy it is really good! Hope you have some success with this.

The lens will be sent for inspection by John Pye Technical; I reckon on no more than £150 if it can be fixed.

I took a few test shots today using the Sigma 10-20; all good and sharp, what a great lens this is.

If fixable and financially viable, great; if not then going back to Sigma seems the most logical option.

Thanks
Adrian