|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
|
![]()
The 16-45 has the same issue the FA* 28-70 has when getting close up photos, the front of the lens sticks out so far it gets in the way of the on board flash at times.
Here is a sample photo using the DA 16-45 on the K20D! ![]() Tom |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,177
|
![]()
Lens looks good and I really LOVE the Jeep!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
|
![]()
Hi Harriet, it belongs to a friend who uses it as a dune buggy to run around the fire trails in Northern Wisconsin. I was over there today and took the photo just because I thought it looked kind of like a fun toy.
Tom |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
|
![]()
I chose Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 as my walk-around lens replacing the kit's lens for the following reasons:
I wrote about Pentax 1-lens choices and it starts with the Sigma 17-70mm as a central piece. 1/3 sec, f/5.6, 53mm, iso 400, 0 Ev ![]() 1/5 sec, f/6.3, 17mm, iso 500, 0 Ev ![]() 1/40 sec, f/4.0, 40mm, iso 400, 0 Ev ![]() Thanks, Hin |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 835
|
![]()
I have to say I am tempted to pick up a Pentax 16-45 while they're still readily available. I have the DA* 16-50 and I haven't had any problems so far... but I must admit I am just a bit concerned about all the talk about the unreliability of the SDM motors in Pentax's DA* line. I wouldn't mind having a reliable non-SDM zoom in this range - especially if the price is reasonable - just in case.
Granted, the WR version of the 18-55 kit lens is also appealing. But the optics of the 16-45 are considered superior by most who've had a chance to work with both lenses (not that the 18-55 is a slouch). But this brings me back to Harriet's suggestion: the Pentax DA 17-70 lens. This also has an SDM motor - which concerns me a bit - but I wonder if the set-up for this lens might be different enough make the SDM technology more reliable than in the DA* line. Also, no one has said much so far about the image quality of this lens versus the Pentax 16-45. Anyone have anything to offer? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Posts: 1,381
|
![]()
I have had the 16-45 for about 4 years now and like it very much. My 12-24 does stay on my K20 most of the time though. I do not know anything about the 17-70 - I though about it a bit, but have stayed with the screw drive.
I will say that over at the PentaxForums.com marketplace, I have seen a number of what appears to be very well cared for 16-45s in the $200+ area, which is about half price. It appears that after upgrading to the 16-50/2.8 folks start to let the 16-45 go. Just a thought... ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|