Pentax SMC DA 16-45mm f/4 ED AL : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

What do you think?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 259000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

user172585

sent on 11 Luglio 2024

Pros: High optical quality despite being an old project; constant aperture, very useful when using a flash;

Cons: Construction apparently a bit weak; generous dimensions; soft colors, but it is not necessarily a defect;

Opinion: A surprise this 16-45, taken to replace the 18-55. At full aperture it already goes quite well (I use it on a K5-IIs) closing a bit it improves quickly. The colors are not "vibrant", it goes well with the "Brilliant" profile present on the Pentax, but I must say that they are very workable. The construction leaves a little to be desired: the cylinder that pops out when zooming in (note: it fully extends to 16mm and retracts to 45mm) moves slightly when touched and is also visible in the viewfinder when focusing. I'm not saying it's prone to breaking, but compared to more modern zooms it doesn't give the impression of being as solid. At 16mm it seems very correct to me as far as distortions are concerned. I can't express myself on sharpness, but I can say that it does better than 18-55, at least up to f8. The dimensions are generous when compared to the 18-55, but it doesn't weigh much, on my camera it is very well balanced. The AF uses the in-camera motor, so it's a bit noisy. My sample has no infinity autofocus issues reported by other reviewers. On balance I like it a lot, it is neither bright as the 16-50 nor tropicalized, but I find it less demanding, less heavy and therefore also a bit street-oriented, although it is still not really small.

Rossostarter

sent on 22 Marzo 2021

Pros: Great yield to be a zoom

Cons: Nothing

Opinion: Some project choices are unsinkable, but if the choice of an unusual focal excursion coupled with an unusual sizing guarantees me excellent results as in this case, welcome. A comment on indoor focus... I've had disastrous results with both tamron and sigma in most cases, so their IF can keep it

AlbertoGiovanni

sent on 09 Ottobre 2017

Pros: Optical quality

Cons: Length at 16mm

Opinion: Great lensCost little, optically good, average design quality, better than 18-55 and 16-50 f 2.8 for surrender The only flaw is that it stretches too far to the wide angle, I like the AF lenses insideForce was built like the 16- 50 would have been perfect Overall rating 8.5rnPs is optically superior to the so famous Canon 17-40 but you know, series l you can not criticize ......

_ep_

sent on 15 Dicembre 2014

Pros: Weight size brightness

Cons: Focal length, construction and material usage

Opinion: I left 17 17 for this purpose, apart from the construction and the focal length for now is better as far as the focus, the detail. Sharp and very sharp, the blurry I can still fine but something makes and certainly not essential. Bought used at 150 €, I think it was a great deal

Marcop

sent on 20 Novembre 2014

Pros: Lightweight, diaphragm f.4 constant image quality.

Cons: Build quality is not the best, a few millimeters more on the canvas, slight distortion at the edges on the wide side.

Opinion: A lens is no longer in the catalog, you will find on the used market at ridiculous prices (200 e.) And offers a lot in terms of image quality (better f.5,6-8 the diaphragm). Compared to optical most popular and expensive as the DA 17-70 or even the DA 16-50 (star) holds great comparison. A few millimeters more on the paintings did not hurt, they are often forced to change perspective to get to 60 or 70mm. Personally I still use it with great satisfaction.

Innerlight

sent on 20 Novembre 2014

Pros: Image quality, constant aperture, versatility, speed, focus, optical construction excellent, excellent color

Cons: Short focal length, mechanical construction in some specimens to improve, not to tropical distortion evident from 16-20 correctable in post production

Opinion: From the optical point of view is an excellent lens. Best of optics as the SMC DA 17-70 f / 4 and SMC DA * 16-50 f / 2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 SP, colors and sharpness are excellent since the maximum aperture , I suggest you use F4 to F8. The only flaw is a distortion corrected to 16 mm in development. The use of the lens hood is required above under 28mm. Be careful if you buy the lens used without a hood that it costs about 70 Euros. The average price of used is from 200 to 220 Euros.

Abe68

sent on 09 Dicembre 2012

Pros: image quality, constant aperture f4, price

Cons: short focal length, diffilcoltà of some specimens to focus at minimum range, embarrassing games on the barrel, only suitable format APSC

Opinion: Although not having this point I could use it for a couple of years, the building leaves much to be desired and lacks the sealing was found in most specimens a certain difficulty in focusing at minimum focus. That said optical quality and at a good level, and taking into account the price at which it is used may be a good upgrade to the 18-55 standard. The colors and sharpness are excellent especially since the maximum aperture at 16mm focal length decreases slightly to maximum 45mm. Diaframmando there is an increase in performance and decrease in vignetting at f8 images are sharp at all focal lengths and on almost the entire frame. The colors are warm in style Pentax, on my copy I noticed an imperfect seal species to flare with the source of light almost out of frame.

Galdor

sent on 15 Marzo 2012

Pros: constant aperture, image quality, versatile, minimum distance of focus, fast autofocus, price

Cons: the minimum focal length, the maximum short focal length, not weather sealed

Opinion: I purchased this lens to replace the valid while SMC Pentax DA 18-55 3.5 to 5.6 ED WR, both for the best optical performance at all focal lengths, that for the diaphragm constant. I found just excellent from the optical point of view. In many cases if the beats on a par with the most expensive SMC DA 17-70 f / 4 and SMC DA * 16-50 f / 2,8 and costs much less. The picture quality is excellent at all focal lengths and has a nice color rendering. He did not even particularly pronounced distortion at 16mm, and they are still easily correctable in post production. The vignetting at 16mm can sometimes be obvious wide open, but stopping down one or two stops, the problem disappears. The focal more behaves very well from this point of view. The zoom is a little short from the "tele", 45mm can sometimes be few. But he has a minimum focusing distance of very short which allows you to use it even for close-up photos and details with a magnification ratio of approximately 1:4. One downside to this lens is the focal length at minimum: using the built-in flash you get pronounced shadows and so you need to use only a 20mm focal up or with an external flash. The other defect or failure in my opinion is the tropicalization. It would be helpful since the combination with SLR as K5 and K7. It is used with good facilities and really good prices.