Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

16-50 f2.8 DA*

28 Aug 2008 2:14PM
Ok, who has this lens or at least a link to a good review?

If you own it, how do you rate it?

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

NigelPP 11 5 United Kingdom
5 Apr 2009 9:05AM
I own one. Haven't had much time for photography lately but I am pleased with the results so far. There is a review here


pulsar69 13 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
7 Apr 2009 10:56PM
I too own this lens and have used it for a year now , it is a fantastically sharp and clear lens , the only reservation I have with it is the focussing , it can be a little hit and miss especially when used the sonic motor , have sent mine back to be calibrated once allready and still it is only about 85 percent ...
TimJ 13 482 2 United Kingdom
8 Apr 2009 5:38PM
From what I remember, this lens was a joint venture with Tokina so in terms of optical quality you might want to look for reviews of the Tokina 16-50 f/2.8
alfpics Plus
15 361 1 England
9 Apr 2009 2:44PM
AP rated it their 'zoom lens of the year' award recently! (Feb 14th 2009)
Bellie 10 507
9 Apr 2009 2:46PM
There is a comparison here with the 16-45mm, on the Pentax User site done by Pete, that might be of interest.
GSPlemper 8 9 England
5 May 2009 6:31AM
I recently bought the 16-50 DA* and the 50-135DA*. I must admit it was with great trepidation as I have read some awful reviews (although the AP award and reading of their constant f2.8 prompted my interest).

Before getting the zooms I had the 21, 35 macro and 50 1.4 FA along with the 16-55mm Mk 11 and as some of my work was in low light situations I decided I needed a high quality fast zoom.

I ordered the equipment from SRS microsystems and they arrived the next day. I have always been sceptical about zooms producing the equivalent of prime lenses but in this case I have been absolutely stunned by the quality of both optics. I cannot say much about edge sharpness as most of my work involves people but to my eye the images from the 16-50 are outstanding, even at f2.8. I certainly could see a difference in images between the 16-55 mkII and these lenses. The idea of having dust and weather sealing is very attractive although this aspect has been not been tested.

People have questioned the focus capabilities. All I can say it that I have never experienced any problems and the quietness of the lens focus is quite eerie. I say this with a reasonable amount of experience as I have had particular problems with the primes, especially the 1.4. When I say problems I am sure these were down to my own poor technique rather than the quality of the lenses and I remember back 30 years ago when I would return home from the Woolwich Tramshed only to find a number of images would be out of focus. As those lenses were all manual I could not blame the lenses and accepted that the poor focus was down the cameraman and of course, the beer. I am certain that with today's Pentax equipment missed shots due to focus and camera shake would almost be absent, no matter how much beer I had drunk.

I sometimes think that we are becoming lazy and amost seem to think that the camera has a duty to make up for our own lack of technique. It's OK that is my Victor Meldrew impersonation over with. Smile
GSPlemper 8 9 England
16 May 2009 3:48PM
Sorry, I should have written DA 18-55 AL II kit lens. The 2mm really does make a difference.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.