DA* 16-50 MK II?


Status
Not open for further replies.

Lightbulb

New Member
Jun 17, 2011
257
0
0
#1
Any chance of seeing one this year's Photokina? Maybe with shorter focus throw, less prone to flare, less CA, sharper wide open, and........cheaper price by using DC motor! :bsmilie:
 

Moonlightsg

Senior Member
Jan 28, 2010
764
1
18
#2
IIRC, there is in the road map... 2013 or later:D
 

detritus

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
2,922
3
0
shootingbugs.blogspot.com
#3
i thot the roadmap was very clear on this? there's no 16-50 replacement announced. anyway, if u read the fine-print below, anything can change :bsmilie:

for the 2 zoom lenses upcoming, the first one looks like a wide 10+ - 20+mm, more like a 12-24 replacement.

the second is a 20+ - 30+mm. a remake of the FA20-35 maybe?

the third looks like a 17-70 type. if its a fixed aperture zoom, it may be quite huge.

secondly, the way u poke holes in the 16-50 makes it sound worse than the 18-55... but thats not true leh. the 16-50 is pretty pricey but its also a very solid lens that can deliver very good results.

 

Last edited:

Bridgerock

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2006
668
0
16
#4
Been using 16-50 for quite sometime and I seldom need to change it out for other lenses. But the 2013 road map does shows that there will might be a DA* zoom lens of similar focal length (or ~30mm longer) than the 16-50. I wonder will it still be a F2.8 or F4. :p
 

Moonlightsg

Senior Member
Jan 28, 2010
764
1
18
#5
don't think a DA* short zoom Lens will be F4... F2.8 is min... or else is a joke...
 

Lightbulb

New Member
Jun 17, 2011
257
0
0
#6
Everyone entitles to his own opinion, my copy of 16-50 is inferior to 18-135 in many ways. At times it does nice photos, but I think there are ways to improve it further given the price tag. But then again the price is now cheaper @SGD 1100, maybe sometime is coming? ;p

I think the 16-85 could be a f 2.8/4 to be able to make some sense.
 

Last edited:

poseur

Senior Member
Jul 27, 2009
1,034
14
38
#7
i am quite happy with my copy. its sharp wide open. focus quickly. perhaps if u can tell us how inferior your 1650 vs 18135. ppl in the forum can help u.
 

detritus

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
2,922
3
0
shootingbugs.blogspot.com
#8
Lightbulb said:
Everyone entitles to his own opinion, my copy of 16-50 is inferior to 18-135 in many ways. At times it does nice photos, but I think there are ways to improve it further given the price tag. But then again the price is now cheaper @SGD 1100, maybe sometime is coming? ;p

I think the 16-85 could be a f 2.8/4 to be able to make some sense.
In addition to opinion, u are also entitled to fantasies. Heck, those guys hoping for an FF pentax had been doing so for years over at PF :bsmilie:

I liked the 16-50 when i had it. Switched to an FA31 cos i needed a lighter setup. Thats abt the only quarrel i have with this lens. Its heavy. :dunno:
 

Moonlightsg

Senior Member
Jan 28, 2010
764
1
18
#9
To me, the 16-50mm now is only a so so lens ... yes may be cannot compare to a prime... and I expect it can be better... it is double of the price of the 3rd party one and the weight is ...
 

jaiyen

Senior Member
Jun 22, 2011
3,143
8
38
#10
Moonlightsg said:
To me, the 16-50mm now is only a so so lens ... yes may be cannot compare to a prime... and I expect it can be better... it is double of the price of the 3rd party one and the weight is ...
Da1650 is a good lens if u know it well. For me it is a good lens.
 

Moonlightsg

Senior Member
Jan 28, 2010
764
1
18
#12
16-50mm is not bad... just that i feel it can be improved...

the length is useful for most of the usage...
i sure will use it when i travel and have event to shoot...
like the quickshift and the build of it

to me it is too heavy compare to other option...
price is ...
anyway this mode is somehow not new... may be lens wise is good still... but the elecitical part may need some update...
 

poseur

Senior Member
Jul 27, 2009
1,034
14
38
#13
Moonlightsg said:
16-50mm is not bad... just that i feel it can be improved...

the length is useful for most of the usage...
i sure will use it when i travel and have event to shoot...
like the quickshift and the build of it

to me it is too heavy compare to other option...
price is ...
anyway this mode is somehow not new... may be lens wise is good still... but the elecitical part may need some update...
its true i do wish its lighter tho. we are spoiled by pentax becos of those light light excellent prime n zooms.
 

Lightbulb

New Member
Jun 17, 2011
257
0
0
#14
Perhaps it could be lighter, judging by Sony SSM 16-50 and its filter diameter?

I guess this is not fantasy when it happens. :bsmilie:
 

Dec 2, 2009
310
1
18
Singapore - West Side
#15
Got this lens for more than 1.5yrs. Stay on my camera 60% of the time, % went up when on trip.. Have a Tammy 17-50 too, it was on par for both, except DA* deliver more vibrant color more contracts, but things have changed after calibration... DA* produce sharper image(focus more accurately).. now 17-50 sitting in cabinet dunno waiting for what.. Any taker?? hehe!
To me, it worth the $$. Factor in the weather resistant and quiet focusing.. useful for indoor and outdoor
Now, waiting for a WR wide angle... road map hint ;)
 

stuck

New Member
Mar 12, 2010
728
2
0
#16
Got this lens for more than 1.5yrs. Stay on my camera 60% of the time, % went up when on trip.. Have a Tammy 17-50 too, it was on par for both, except DA* deliver more vibrant color more contracts, but things have changed after calibration... DA* produce sharper image(focus more accurately).. now 17-50 sitting in cabinet dunno waiting for what.. Any taker?? hehe!
To me, it worth the $$. Factor in the weather resistant and quiet focusing.. useful for indoor and outdoor
Now, waiting for a WR wide angle... road map hint ;)
how do you know if your copy needs calibration? btw how much would the calibration cost & how long before you get it back from Emjay?

just bought this lens as well recently too. Maybe I've been spoiled by my previous experience with Pentax primes (the excellent fa35 & DFA50 macro), but I find it nowhere as sharp as wide open, which is mildly disappointing given its DA* designation. Its certainly a very useful FL range & the image quality is acceptable, but I expected much better given the price. :cry:
 

Lightbulb

New Member
Jun 17, 2011
257
0
0
#17
For my case it is free when it is under warranty. But sharpness is relative. I compared the sharpness of my DA35/2.4 against 16-50 @ 35mm/2.8, the latter is nowhere near the prime. You will have to manage your expectation, after all it is a zoom lens that performs better from f5.6 and up. But having said that many test report of Sigma/Tamron/Sony 17/50 or 16/50 perform better than the DA*16-50. That is why I wish for a mark II with equal or better performance given the price tag, but again some will think it is fantasy as in their eyes, it is good enough.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom