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

Erinobecherini

sent on 19 Febbraio 2019

Pros: Sharpness, versatility, is a starry.

Cons: I don't know

Opinion: I have owned this lens for several years then, moving on to full frame I sold it. I have to say that the criticisms read on several reviews have never found me agree. This is a wonderful goal. Now maybe passed by the new Pentax but in my opinion really great. Some have had problems with the engine, maybe this is the Achilles heel, for the rest I always liked it very much.

Abulafia

sent on 11 Luglio 2018

Pros: More than excellent construction. Excellent sharpness from F/4 onwards. Very micro-contrast. Naturally bright and well balanced colours. Fuzzy level.

Cons: Price now disproportionate. Bad resistance to backlight, with tremendous flare very often colored. Remarkable chromatic aberration. Reveable ergonomics, the zoom ring is very small and backward, in contact with the machine body. SDM engine at risk of breakage if the lens is rarely used.

Opinion: I bought this lens by paying it €200 used, since it had the SDM engine broken; This does not prevent you from using the autofocus lens, as it is possible to convert it to "whisk" (exploiting the internal engine of the camera) with a simple computer operation. My judgement is therefore influenced by not being able to use the ultrasonic motor and the very low price paid to take the goal. We immediately clear the field from doubts: The lens is not worth the thousand euros that it costs from new, with that figure is much better, even just buying the new D-FA 15-30 for full frame, or the excellent from 20-40 Limited, or the bright Sigma ART 18-35/1.8; With much less expense there are the honest Tamron 17-50/2.8 and the remarkable Sigma 16-50/2.8 as well as the Pentax Da 17-70/4 and the Pentax da 16-45/4. These last four lenses are definitely worse in general, but with a much more inviting quality/price ratio. The major problems are related to backlight: The flare is difficult to control and often ugly and colored green. More than the frontal light, it fears the side lights or in the corners of the frame. Chromatic aberration is also very evident, but much easier to control and correct. In contrast, the lens is sharp, resolute, bright and clear, and returns vivid but natural, detailed and three-dimensional images. In addition it is built in a more than excellent way, it seems ready to make war (and it has no problems with water, snow, rain, mists, humidity, oil, beer and whatnot). It is also very well balanced, easy to handle in hand and for anything "heavy" or uncomfortable. The only flaw at the constructive level is the zoom ring, really too backward and a little ' small, but the race short enough to be usable in any case in speed. My specimen is also very sharp at f/2.8, with acceptable edges; At F/4 however it improves visibly, especially in homogeneity. At f/5.6, for landscape, it's perfect.

DArt 84

sent on 10 Marzo 2017

Pros: Various optional, sharpness, color

Cons: chromatic aberrations, rendering the edges, resistant to flare, price

Opinion: Four and a half years of honorable service in my hands. It is the best standard zooms currently available for Pentax aps-c, which does not mean it's perfect despite being one star. It has some weaknesses but in general lends itself well to tutto.rnrnPartiamo with the build quality and equipment. It has almost everything that Pentax offers in its lenses (if we exclude the edge over those for 645): SP coating, SDM, the proverbial tropicalization, AF / MF switch on the lens also, focus.rnLa internal construction is typical of the star. In short, it is remarkable and very reliable. Unfortunately has a bad reputation for having an SDM motor which breaks into several pieces, problem solved in the newer games Front obiettivi.rnrnL'elemento is well 10mm larger diameter of the Tamron 17-50, a feature that makes me turn up a little 'nose considered the equal opening and only one millimeter longer excursion focale.rnrnLe rings are nice and fluid. The zoom is a little 'of resistance from 28mm to about salire. The short stroke of the focus ring does not facilitate the manual focus, currently outstanding feature if you run videos. With a little 'of exercise you can tame it, certainly not as fast as in the 50-135 who has a run much lunga.rnFondamentale, again for the video, the presence of quick-shift focusing, always standard on SDM. rnrnOtticamente is complex to describe. The sharpness is also satisfactory at full aperture, and almost at all focal lengths (but as a portraitist are not fussy on the subject, do not pursue the extreme sharpness). The sharpness of the edge decays fairly quickly, unless you stop down the lens of a pair of stops. Vignettes are quite well gestite.rnrnCome previously mentioned in contrast, optically the sore point is the chromatic aberrations. In contrast areas returns a blue fringe quite extensive, so much so that many owners of 16-50, including me, have wondered if they had not in his hands a flawed model. Probably the worst defect of this lens, which tends to disappear by closing at least (repeat at least) two stop the diaframma.rnrnSegue resistance to flare. In fact it is expected given the size of the front element, which strives to manage them, his behavior in this regard I find it average for its category. Simply a little 'attention and are unable to come to capo.rnrnSul side accuses the wide angle barrel distortion, but nothing surprising for a blurred standard.rnrnLo zoom also is average, a satisfactory smoothness for its category, the most hard and tending to the ring on the lower half of the focal. Definitely designed to make better where it is present, or on the long side. The 9-blade diaphragm is appreciated moltissimo.rnrnNel Overall this lens has the strange peculiarity is that various flaws but no real lack. It's nice to use both 16mm to 50mm. It known defects but allows you to deal with any situation then returns with a worthy result. Whatever the medium requires a user, it is able to esaudirla.rnÈ a constatazione less trivial than it seems: the Tamron 17-50, which is in the same category, has a sprained whisker below 20mm, even difficult to be corrected in post-production, and accuses the backlight so heavy, as also struggled to keep up with the focus .rnrnE I close the analysis with one of the most painful notes: the price. On the list we are above 800 euro, when those equivalent third-party come to spend half or less. It is clear that much of the spending goes for options at its disposal. At this point I would recommend it to those who matter to work with the photos that will trip and apart from the yield optical research something rugged and reliable, and that it is able to keep up and not miss shots, otherwise it is better to save and opt for third-party solutions that do not have too much to envy optically (but only optically).

Maxbarbieri

sent on 17 Marzo 2016

Pros: bright zoom, fast ultrasonic AF, very good "grip", and optimum efficiency

Cons: Extremely delicate due to shocks (other flaws have already been reported, but are within the limits dell'accettabile in my opinion), bad service Pentax

Opinion: I bought this zoom just came out (to match the Pentax K10D). I've used it for years with satisfaction (although sometimes suffered from a front-back focus that could not be corrected because the K10D not allow fine adjustment order). One day, unfortunately, going by car over the dunes in Brazil with the camera around your neck I hit the lens side (my inattention of course) but the bump on the side "rubberized" optics was not then "so strong" (no clear sign aesthetically stayed perfect) but it was enough to split the interior plastic hook that serves to squeeze out completely zooming. Shaking felt the piece of plastic "dancing" in the barrel. I continued to use the optics for years, pulling out manually the zoom..poi one day I said to myself "ripariamolo on." Contacted the Pentax in Florence first ask detailed information explaining the problem (replace internal and micror plasticA still use with Pentax lenses satisfaction of 70-80 years in MF..pesi but strong, not to mention dell'80-200 f2.8 Tamron (model 30A) that has followed me for the world without suffering ever a scratch (1,5kg of pure metal). Just to say that I do not start at all biased against the Pentax, but one thing is certain: excellently car bodies built, but extremely delicate recent optics in my opinion.

Phil3rd

sent on 01 Maggio 2015

Pros: tropicalization, construction, focal, bokeh

Cons: chromatic aberrations a little 'too present, suffers from the flare.

Opinion: nothing more to say than to what is written in the pros and cons. great lens but flaw in some places, although this still remains the best available lens for Pentax of these focal. It closed a bit 'from the best, at about f5.6. bokeh great considering that it is one enough tuttofare.rntra zoom lenses Pentax * star is perhaps the least convincing optically (excellent lens is clear, but the other star * are almost perfect)

Ares982

sent on 13 Gennaio 2013

Pros: Tropical conditions and constant f2.8, wide-angle and telephoto good, soft and pleasing bokeh, color rendering exceptionally unique character.

Cons: Loses quality at the edges, resistance to purple fringing is not optimal, of little use in external f2.8, first samples with known jams SDM, the diameter of the front lens of 77mm

Opinion: ? the best standard zoom for the Pentax DA series. This does not mean that it could be improved though: apart from the chronic problem of the SDM (resolved in the most recent examples) is guilty of sharpness at the edges especially at full aperture. Its sweet spot is around f5.6, where it becomes very usable and offers excellent quality at both 20-40 mm (where for the better), but also acceptable to the extreme telephoto and wide angle. The color rendition is superb, and where the risolvenza is not extraordinary, it returns a three-dimensional feel very special, and offers a good level of contrast. The bokeh of this lens is very good, never pushy and usually nice and creamy. The price, however, does not justify the offer qualitative, counting the Tamron equivalent provides quality somewhat similar to lower price. Significant distortion, it offers a good resistance to flare, I instead found significant problems with purple fringing in areas of high contrast, easily corrected in post-production. The construction is excellent, Is a tank and allowing the sealing AW really extreme use. One particular zoom, which is worth taking used and free from uncertainties in the ultrasonic motor.