|
| 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). |