Pentax SMC DA* 16-50mm F/2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM

Ahoy!

I've got my beady eye on this lens and would like to get qualified advice regarding it's quality and used price guide. It retails for circa £700.00 which makes me think that it's either grossly over-priced (I haven't done a comparison to either the more affordable, but highly rated kit lens replacement Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di-II or the Sigma 17-70 DC Macro) or if it's in the Carl Zeiss league. User reviews score it very highly, so if anyone here can shed some light on the matter in terms of quality, price and whether it's a coveted optic, it would be appreciated. It needs to be something pretty special to command the kind of money it retails for.

TIA.

Hi Pirate,

To me it seems it is priced somewhat below competition for similar lenses. I checked on cameranu.nl (SRS does not have a Canon equivalent) and prices are as follows:

Pentax 16-50 2.8 849e
Canon 17-55 2.8 899e
Nikon 17-55 2.8 1189e

So I would conclude that it is realistically priced. Another story is whether these lenses are worth the cost over Tamron or Sigma....

Great lens.

If you want sdm and or WR then its worth every penny.

Hi Pirate,

The 16-50 lens - buy it - if the results are not up to scratch that is the user not the tool and that is the same for all the fantastic DA* range

Have no illusions the DA* lenses have cost me a fortune; I am a working photographer of 50 years experience who due to photographic need and a bit of megalomania built up a huge assortment of lenses with accompanying bodies to drive them.

My journey started firstly in the old days when Pentax was king and subsequently over the years through Nikon and Canon in 35mm, medium format and Digital.

Up until a few years ago Nikon had established itself as my weapon of choice and frankly I had become increasingly critical of Canon on "Quality / Bang for the Buck etc.

I have a very wide range of Nikon lenses and Canon too which in both cases I have resold / re- bought to stay only with the best in class to do what want.

But I was on a trip in the Amazon region ( where I lived for a number of years) armed with a couple of Nikons (D2x and D2xs) and a couple of Dx Vr lens two of which were a newly aquiered ED 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G IF DX VR and a Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED IF AF-S R

A family member joined me sporting a Pentax K20 and a few lenses ; including two DA * which I had read the launch literature on and was very curious to see how they performed given the claims regarding weather sealing and most importantly optical performance.

Firstly I was just mesmerised by the results from a Pentax DA* 300mm f4. on a humble K20D ; I was mortified frankly, absolutely flawless and although the lens were up there on price with "NikCan" ( actually slightly more) it was a different class of tool.

I promptly bought a K20d and three DA* lenses (16-50, 50-135 and the wonderful 300mm.

*****' The 50 to 135 is the best zoom lens I have ever owned and used *****

The 300 is without equal unless you want to spend a couple of thousand and deliverers image quality hat is faultless

Comparing them to the Nikons simply underlined the stunning quality of the Pentax against what were considered to be legendary Nikon equivalents.

Of most interest to you was the comparison of the Pentax DA* 16-50 with the excellent Nikon ED 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G IF DX VR .

Like it's stablemates the Pentax was vividly better based on controlled comparative shooting

The 16-50's an excellent travel lens but I use it for commercial/ industrial work too and this is where it excels, with good close up capability ( not macro)

At the larger apertures on the "50mm end" it is also a lovely portrait lens too. - 1 would not be without it as a great all rounder, landscape, street photography, inside buildings - it is great.

*** The 50 to 135 ; this is the best zoom lens I have ever owned and used ***

I have held on to one Nikon body and a micro Nikkor but have subsequently sold all the Canon and fully committed to Pentax having added a DA* 200 and the superb 60 - 250 zoom

I started with Pentax when the first SLR was brought out, been through the best of Canons 35mm years as a buyer / user and then through the early patchy Nikon digital years but now. I am back with Pentax to stay.

Don't get overawed by all you read in reviews because there can be biased and in recent years Canon lost me because of the hype thy created ; their own dedicated published magazine, dealer discounts which caused many notable companies like Jessop's, Calumet, and many more to eliminate other makes.

All I know is that my Pentax kit never gets affected by humidity, weather, or anything else and after many many trips into the Amazon where I once lived I ceased to be concerned about moisture, fogging and the like.

Regardless of moisture resistance claims of "NikCan" we had problems with bodies on occasions unless great care was exercised in those humid conditions, particularly with lenses, too often with lenses I should say.

In 2010 I went to live in Illinois where winters are crazy ( - 29c is common) and again, out on frozen lakes and Forests, at seriously low temperatures, the DA* lenses and K7s never failed, when often my good friend (who worked for Calumet) struggled to "avoid he fog" with his Canons.

Back to the lens in question; The 16-50 is a serious tool ; if their's anything out there significantly better. I haven't seen it, so don 't hesitate to buy, you won't regret it BUT DON'T BUY A CHEAP FILTER whatever it is.

If you want to engage in your own assessment, go to a couple of camera club sessions, make real " under test " comparisons with the "NikCans".

So what next from Pentax; finally all we need now is a 100mm+ true macro, a 400 mm and an ultra- wide range travel zoom in DA* .

Full frame would be nice but again it has a place and is not the " b all and end all"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subjective Summary on the DA* lenses

(Based on meeting my expectation on image quality , handling and build compared to other "glass" I have used and regularly see the results from)

note; In all of them build is a 100/100 as a given

I thought of rating them all but frankly rating the the 300', 200 and 50 to 135 just means 100 / 100 on handling and optical quality against the competition.
----------------------------
I repeat what I said above; The 50 to 135 is the best lens I have ever owned and used it is indiscernible in image quality from a prime fixed focal length lens.
----------------------------
The 60 - 250 - 99/100 overall (Big) though on optical performance is definitely 100
------------------------------
The 16-50 for the price, against the competition , 100/100

There are wider ranging zooms out there; (by design that means their image is not so good when compared in the same range as the DA*16-50)
The build quality 120 out of 100 - it is as good as it gets
Image quality, as a professional lens 95+ ( not 100) but that is the same as most wide angle zooms because of the design complexities.

The 16-50 and the 60-250 lenses, when compared with others and with purely technical standards, deliver remarkable (professional) image quality skewed slightly towards the upper midpoint of their aperture range with a a marginal fall off at the largest and smallest apertures

At he extreme ends they are still capable of stunning quality j

Excellent write up by Daronl. Really needs to be made a sticky!

-

Wow! now I'll have to save up more money to get one

Oh for crying out loud, here was me happy enough with what I can afford, now will just have to save and save, will have to own at least one DA* series lens now before I die.

Great write up!

Credit to Daronl for an excellent write and real hard evidence on how good Pentax can be when stood up against the opposition. I am always envious of the 'grey lense' owners (Canon) as they look visibly impressive and I am sure that the 300, 400 and 500's do deliver as why else would all the prof's use them.

However my DA* 16-50mm is stuck to the front of my K10D and very rarely comes off, if it did then I'd have to go buy a DA* 300mm and that isn't on the cards at the moment.

I will however look at the DA* 50-135mm as that does seem to fill a gap, I have the DA 50-200mm but its not in the same league.

I agree with InFESTation. I thought I had my LBA under control. I have been eyeing the 50-135 for some time but could not justify the cost. With such a glowing report, I NEED one!

I was never a big fan of Zoom lenses until the DA* series came along - they really changed my mind! The 16-50 has had quite a log of negative press (partly due to SDM failures), but if I'm only taking one lens out then this is usually the one. WR, build, fast aperture and IQ are all big plus points for me

Daronl's review is quite refreshing to read too!

Agree with everything said in the post bar this.

100/100 every time ... even sold my 100-300mm f4 as I use this lens far more than I ever did the Sigma.

Another DA* fan here, more so since my 16-50 and 60-250 had new SDM motors.

I can't compare them with my Nikkors but I can compare my 300s....

One focusses faster and more accurately but the other has that bite...when the DA*300 locks on it's sharp and brilliant.

The other 2 DA*s are brilliant too, they've replaced a number of lenses including Sigma EXs and the famous FA24-90 - I have no regrets.

BUY IT!

I was up in Scotland last week and there is someone who occasionally works for me there who always takes the mickey about me using Pentax saying that "I should buy a decent camera" &c &c.

One afternoon there were to Pro' photographers came down to take some picture for a magazine and some advertising literature. His comment was "see - someone else has a decent camera".

I was asked what I use ... and obviously responded Pentax, what lenses, so, DA* 16-50, 50-135 & 300 amongst others.

The two both responded with comments along the lines of - "that is an excellent set of lenses and better than those I have. " One actually said he is thinking of selling up and moving across as a lot of his work is close to water and almost all is outside in all kinds of weather.

It certainly put him in his place.

I find the 60-250 massive so I don't have it but I'd agree the 16-50 is fantastic and if you have a use for one the 50-135 is simply the best zoom lens I have ever used.

understatement of the year



_