16-45 vs 16-85 (in the 16-45 range)

flektogon wrote:

Historicity wrote:

Uloo wrote:

I have both of them. In my experience the 16-85 is much better. Especially in day light condition. Also 45mm is the extreme on the 16-45 where its the sweet spot on the 16-85. The constant f-4 in my opinion is a marginal advantage. Also the 16-45 has only 6 aperture blades while the 16-85 has 9 if I'm not mistaken that's so much better when you shoot into the sun or other light sources. Its extremely flare resistant too and the out of focus area are much smoother.

However people complain about the wobbly built 16-45 I found out its more forgiving when dropped...... But that's an entirely different issue on my part.

Ulrich

These are my picture in this group with the 16-85: https://www.flickr.com/groups/pentax_da_16-85/pool/uloo

Ulrich,

Thanks. Your comment about the 16-45 being more subject to flare is consistent with my experience with it on 2-5-17. That could have been the reason my 16-45 & K3 became confused and over-exposed several shots -- maybe. There was a piece broken loose inside the lens so it is going back to KEH, but there were things I liked about the lens -- not enough to make me spend $565 for a new (albeit from old stock) copy however.

Still, Photozone or some review outfit like that rated the 16-45 above the newer 16-50. That is, the build of 16-50 was superior but the image quality of the 16-45 was better.

Lawrence

Pentax stopped the DA 16-45 production around 2008. Even when its price was highest, it didn't go above $350-400. I've got my for $400 (Disney) bucks. I do not have the DA 16-85 but I can imagine that it is better. If you want something in between, there is still the DA 17-70/4, or a similar Sigma lens.

I checked ebay and they have a bunch of them; however I discovered that I wasn't up to taking a chance on another used lens quite yet.  But 2008?  That's a lot time for small photographic shops to keep new ones on hand.  I've bought a couple of used lenses that sellers claimed were new however; so I have to decide whether to take a chance on iffy sales. 

Thanks

Lawrence

Lawrence