Bad review for DA* 16-50mm


Link Posted 12/10/2011 - 13:07
m42geo wrote:

Can you please post a full size image of your grandson? thanks

I'm not sure if I can post a full sized version as I think the hosting site will reduce it in size but I have put it here.

The orignal pre editing shot is also here.


Edit - I have put the edited image in the Gallery here too.
Last Edited by GlynM on 12/10/2011 - 13:14

George Lazarette

Link Posted 14/10/2011 - 10:23
So it seems that the people who complain about this lens don't own it. They've just read a few "tests".

Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.


Link Posted 14/10/2011 - 12:44
I would love to own another DA* lens, but just cannot justify the cost involved for so little improvement. Review after review seems to back this. I think Pentax seriously need to review this lens & its cost before I would consider buying it now...
PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released


Link Posted 14/10/2011 - 18:32
I am currently saving up funds to purchase a DA* 16-50mm. Based on user experience and other information found on the internet, I am pretty certain that I will be very happy with this lens. I believe the trio of zoom lenses developed in co-operation with Tokina, the DA 12-24, DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135, are all exceptional lenses.




Link Posted 14/10/2011 - 20:10
I don't think worries about SDM failures should deter potential buyers as there are now 'tried and tested' DIY fixes available that cater for all levels of technical expertise.

link(scroll down to the post for 13/10/2011) and link



Link Posted 14/10/2011 - 22:22
'Tried and tested DIY fixes' - hmmm, possibly not what you want to be reading about when you are thinking about spending a very large amount of money on an SDM lens... You might conclude screw focus isn't such a bad idea after all


Link Posted 19/10/2011 - 16:27
I have the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135 and DA 12-24. The only lens that demands AF, in my opinion, is the DA* 50-135. That's the sports lens. It's also the lens with the broken SDM auto focus. My 16-50 is working flawlessly. Grumbles loudly.

Wide to normal focal length lenses can be used quite handily without AF. Many times the 16-50 and 12-24 are used in manual focus because it works better than AF for the uses to which those two lenses are put by me. With wide and super wide lenses, I often find that there is nothing on which to focus where I want to put my focus setting to get the depth of field the way I want it anyway.
Albert in the Canadian Rocky Mountains
K3, M 400/5.6, M 100/4 macro, DA 12-24, DA* 16-50, DA L 55-300
FA 24-90, 1.7X AFA, 1.4X-S
AF 540 FGZ flash
Last Edited by Canada_Rockies on 19/10/2011 - 16:29
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.