50 - 200 WR IQ

The 50 - 200 does not get a great report on Photozone,
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/138-pentax-smc-da-50-200mm-f4-56-ed-review--test-...
just wondering if there was any improvement with this version ?, would also value views from users of either version

I've used the version tested, which is not as good as the 55-300mm, and I've been using the WR version extensively over the past few weeks. The WR version is an excellent lens and I've been very happy with the results.

The test you've linked to is a bit old now and perhaps no longer relevant to the current range.

I've tried the first version and soon sold it. I found the old F 70-210 to be sharper especially at the edge of frame. The Tamron 70-300 LD Di was also considerably better IMHO at 200mm. Unless I needed the light weight and compact size with "quick shift" focus I wouldn'y buy one personally. The DA 55-300 is a different proposition altogether, reputedly much better.

John

It's the WR feature that led me to use the 18-55mm and 50-200mm lenses in Paris a few days ago. If you see my image of Montmartre in the rain, it made those lenses a very good choice!

I quite agree that any of the XX-300 lenses are likely to perform better than the 50-200 at the longest end, but I've been using the 50-200 WR and surprised at how decent it is. It's particularly good in the middle of its range, but I've deliberately tortured it by shooting at 200mm/f5.6 and found the results towards the centre of the frame to be "good enough". Obviously things get better when you stop down. Borders at long lengths aren't so great but I'm not convinced that's a big issue (depending upon your subject matter).

I made the opposite decision to some others here - I sold the 55-300 and kept the 50-200 WR. It's size coupled with weather-resistance makes it more useful. And as John has pointed out, the WR lenses are great for travel.

So many thanks to you all for replies that strangely enough are exactly what my thinking was on this one.
I thought the 50-200WR would be like the 18-55WR which has very good IQ and solid build quality, and being compact is not too heavy. I seldom use a zoom so it is good to know that this is a good choice. I value John's comment on the Paris rain, because I don't know about the English summer but on the Isle of Lewis it is wet wet wet.
What is disappointing is that after a very cold winter with so much snow many were expecting a good summer. I have lived here all my life and have never known us to be so far into a year without a week of sunshine. The WR capability is therefore a very welcome feature, and I just want to thank you all for taking the time to reply.

Maybe these samples will help?

WR 50-200 at 200mm f5.6 - this is a crop of about 60% of the image (from the centre):





Another at full tele and wide open:





200mm at f10:





150mm at f7.1:





Personally, I think it's a decent little lens and certainly sounds like just the job for Lewis! One thing that has impressed me is the colours that come from it - quite nice rich tones, notably warmer than some of the independent brands.

If I get even close to that I will be more than happy,these are very impressive, many thanks for taking the time to post them.

In terms of bang for buck, both the WR "kit" lenses are stunners.

They make especially good sense in Blighty, what with the weather and all that, plus as people have shown they are none too shabby in the IQ department.

My entire kit now consists of K20D (gripped), DA 18-55 WR, DA 50-200 WR, FA 50 1:1.4, DFA 100 Macro and an AF360FGZ. The WR lenses are the most used out of that bunch, and if you shop around you can pick the two of them up for under £200 combined.

There will always be people who point to more expensive lenses and say that they're better than the WR pairing, they're probably right, but in terms of practical working lenses that will stand up to all the rain and dust, as well as being cheap to replace should the worst happen, I think they're peerless.

Pentax, for me, doesn't shout loudly enough about these lenses.

I haven't even mentioned that they're both nice and compact.

I have the Sigma 17/70 but have been thinking of purchasing the 18/55 wr do you think there would be ant benifit in purchasing it. I also have both the Pentax mk 1 and Samsung version, but Im not at all sure Samsung upgraded there lens as Pentax did on the K 20 I have the GX 20 hence the question.
Ian

I'm not convinced that Samsung ever did upgrade the lens.

For an inexpensive weather resistant lens the two WR zooms are hard to beat. I bought them at a reasonable price and sold the previous versions on eBay. I didn't get mega-bucks, but it was OK and it did help to offset the cost.

Exactly the approach I took. Never regretted the decision.

I would buy it if (1) the Sigma is too bulky for your needs (given that it is actually a great lens) and/or (2) the WR would be of use to you. I find being able to go out in typical UK weather without worrying is rather liberating!

I have never read that Samsung upgraded the original lens, so you may notice some improvement with the GX20 using the WR version. But it's unlikely to be quite as good as the Sigma.

Thanks guys will give it some thought but Im pretty well convinced on the merrits of buying the 18/55.

I took this lens to Cartmel Show recently and was very pleased with the results, 90% of the photos on this gallery were taken with the 50-200 WR

link

This is a very handy lens, small and light and if the weather is like it was on that day (showery) at least you don't have to keep sheltering it from the rain.
It's not as good as my Sigma 70-200mm or Pentax Da* but for less than £120 what do you expect?
A few of the photos were accepted by Stock libraries, so it can't be that bad.