|
User Reviews
Send this to a friend
|
| Pentax 16-45mm f/4.0 SMC PDA ED AL Zoom Lens for Pentax and Samsung Digital SLR Cameras |
| |
 |
| Manufacturer: Pentax |
| Customer Rating: |
|
| List Price: $599.95 |
| Sale Price: $330.95 |
| Availibility: Usually ships in 1-2 business days |
|
| Buy Now |
|
| |
Product Description |
| Pentax DA 16-45 f4 ED AL Lens Features The PENTAX smc P-DA 16-45mm F4.0 ED/AL is recommended for use with digital cameras. It features a 3X zoom ratio with focal lengths covering ultra-wide angle to normal ranges, incorporates a high-refraction extra low dispersion (ED) glass element to produce a high-resolution, high-contrast image with true-to-life color rendition, and aspherical lens elements to help transmit the light more efficiently through the lens to the focal plane. The smc P-DA 16-45mm F4.0 ED/AL is well-suited for advanced amateurs and professionals. Features - PENTAX KAF Mount
- Extra-low Dispersion (ED) glass lens for superior sharpness and color correction
- Responsive “Quick-Shift Focus System” allows instant shift from AF to MF
- The image circle is designed to match the CCD used in PENTAX digital SLRs
- Convert focal length to 24.5mm-69mm with *ist D
- Comes with a lens hood to minimize flare and ghost images
What's in The Box:- SMCP-DA 16-45mm Zoom F4 ED/AL w/Hood (21507)
- Lens Hood PH-RBL 67mm (38737)
- Lens Cap F 67mm (31653)
|
|
Product Details |
- Designed for proprietary PENTAX Kaf Mount
- Extra-low Dispersion (ED) glass lens for superior sharpness and color correction
- Responsive Quick-Shift Focus System allows instant shift from AF to MF
- Image circle is designed to match the CCD used in PENTAX digital SLRs
- Convert focal length to 24.5mm-69mm with *ist D (optional)
|
Video Reviews |
 No video reviews found for this product.
|
Customer Reviews |
 Old prime fanatic finally slips into the Zoom world |
| Review Date: January 9, 2007 |
| Reviewer: Dana G, Worcestrer, Massachusetts |
I was one of those holdouts that carried lots of prime lenses, disdaining zooms as "a compromise". No doubt, I missed some fine lenses because of this.
The lens that sold me on zooms is this lens, the 16-45 f/4 Pentax. The lack of distortion, the contrast, the fine color control, all finally convinced me that a zoom can perform some of the functions of a prime.
I've been using this lens for a while. In my studio, the 50mm primes have become the main portrait lenses with the digital cameras. But now, I'm not afraid to use a zoom lens on a job. A big step for me!
It extends quite far when zooming, a fact I don't like, and for those who care, the on-camera flash is blocked by the lens hood (I use studio strobe, so it's of no import to me). As a modern lens, it has a polycarbonate barrel (they don't seem to be inclined to make zooms in the Lmited series. Too bad).
If I could use it on the film cameras, I probably would. No aperture ring means it's definitely meant for the current cameras.
Despite all that, I highly recommend this lens. It's a great "walk around" lens, going from very wide to moderate telephoto (remember, it's for the APS-C sensors). Image quality is astounding to an old grouch who loves primes, and even for a lens in general it's right up there.
If you're faced with the choice of the kit lens or this lens, take the 16-45. If you are serious about your craft, or you make a living at it, it's well worth the price! |
The Pentax 16-45mm f4 is a Keeper.
|
| Review Date: November 30, 2007 |
| Reviewer: Paul Connell, ME United States |
Ditto Dana G's review. I migrated from a pretty extensive Nikon film system, and have used all kinds of other brands of film camera equipment, either on assignment or as a community college photo instructor during the 70's and 80's. I tried a variety of zooms, including varifocals with ELD glass. They were visibly softer than their equivalent single-focal-length counterparts. I noticed this after I had spent a long time using one particular varifocal. One day I switched back to a prime and when the prints came in, WOW! You could even tell with a casual glance at a 3X5 proof, that there was a huge difference. And the wide angle range in those 1970'5 and 80's zooms alway seemed extra soft and distorted. So I just gave up on zooms until I experienced digital.
I'm not one of those people who photographs charts. But I've a LOT of experience looking at real world images. In fact, as long as the lens seems to be working I don't really pay attention to it. However, in this case, I was shooting some photos of rocks along the Maine coast, from a tripod, and I decided to try to use a few Pentax prime lenses--a 40mm SMCP DA 2.8 and the Pentax FA 50mm 1.4--just to see if zooms had improved. All shots were in the 35-60 mm range, around f5.6-f8. When I uploaded these images into Photoshop, I was flabbergasted. The 16-45 mm gave nicer color and was at least as sharp as the two primes. Since then, I've had occasion to compare it against my Pentax DA 14mm 2.8, and I haven't noticed any real-world difference at the wide range either. But it's the fact that, if there were a difference, I would have to look really, really hard to see it that impresses me!
I find that I use the !6-45 more than any other lens that I own. I purchased it as an "upgrade" from the kit lens. And, as an aside, the Pentax K10D seems as if it were custom designed for migration from film or prosumer digital. The value for the money in this system is unmatched by any other maker. Amazon's latest body price=$530 after rebate. Not bad for a camera with shake control, self cleaning ccd's and the build-quality of a $1,500 Nikon. |
Awesome lens
|
| Review Date: November 14, 2006 |
| Reviewer: J. Melartin, Montclair, NJ USA |
I bought this lens for my 35mm pentax camera, since I'll be buying one of the dslr bodies sometime. It is fantastic: very very sharp and with great saturated color. On par, sharpness-wise with my Zuiko (50mm f1.4 & f1.8, 85mm f/2) and Nikon primes, but with better color! The contrast is good as well, there are rumors that the lens underexposes a bit - perhaps it does, but that works well with film.
On a film camera, there's vignetting when you zoom wider than 21mm - but that's a nice special effect, a sort of semi-fisheye at 16mm. Also, using the supplied lens shade isn't a great idea when shooting with 35mm film cameras, as the vignetting starts early.
Overall, this is a super lens, the best zoom I've owned.
11/2007: I've been using this lens with a K100D with great results. The tone is if anything more concentrated on a digital body - though for some reason the slight underexposure trend does exist with digital but not film. The lens has decent close focus ability - your shots of kittens and flowers come out awesome!
I recently bought the 43mm Limited, and while it has greater resolution and tonality, and does better in low light, on a photographic (rather than pixel peeping) level the 16-45 is in the same league. I still highly recommend this lens as the best medium zoom value that Pentax offers. |
Great image quality for a reasonable price, with few "issues"
|
| Review Date: November 13, 2007 |
| Reviewer: N. Ambalavanan, Birmingham, AL |
I have had this lens for almost a year, and taken hundreds of photographs with it. It is usually on my K10D with a circular polarizer. There are many "pros" and few "cons":
Pros:
1) It is considerably lighter and smaller than one would expect for a constant aperture f4 lens, as it is designed for digital SLRs. You can leave it on the camera as your walk-around "normal" or "street" lens.
2) Image quality is superb, from the center out to the corners, even at f4. I have the 18-55 kit lens, and the difference in image quality at f5.6 is obvious, but less striking at apertures of f8 or smaller.
3) Makes a great travel lens due to its widest 16mm focal length, especially combined with a polarizer for landscapes, cityscapes etc. Even though the Pentax K10D has shake reduction built-in, one should preferably use a tripod with a bubble level, if for no reason but to make sure the horizon is level (unless you like fixing them in photoshop!)
4) It is a lot cheaper than the 16-50/f2.8 (which may be a bit better)
Cons:
1) Don't use the built-in pop-up flash with this lens in the wide-angle position - you will see a black semi-circle in the bottom half of the image. You need to use a hot-shoe or off-camera flash.
2) Although it is reasonably light and a better performer, it is a bit heavier than the cheaper 18-55 kit lens (which is only 2 mm longer at the short end and 10 mm longer at the long end)
3) If you can afford it, the 16-50/f2.8 may be a slightly better performer which is also weather-sealed (the K10D is weather sealed, the 16-45 is not - don't take it out into the rain) and has a wider max aperture (better for low light shooting, isolating foreground subjects)
4) 45 mm is sometimes a bit too short, and perhaps a 17-70 would be better if you find yourself often taking portraits
5) If you need just one lens for travel, an 18-250 lens is sometimes preferable (the longer zoom helps you compress foreground and distant objects, and avoids "zooming with your feet"), although it would not have the wide constant aperture and is more limited in the wide-angle department. |
Five decades and they are still at it
|
| Review Date: August 5, 2008 |
| Reviewer: Christer Medin, Atlanta, GA USA |
Pentax have always produced fine glass at a manageable price, and this lens is no exception. I own Pentax primes going back to the 1960s and have been spoiled by the wonderful qualities of those lenses; to the point where I--like other reviewers--did not consider zooms. However, when I purchased a K20D I felt it deserved better than the 18-55 kit lens (version I not II) I had floating around for a general-purpose 'travel' lens. Reading the reviews on the 16-50 I was concerned with the quality control issues and opted to pass. So that left the 16-45 seeing as the 17-70 was still not available at the time.
And I am glad I made that choice. Initially I was dismayed at my pictures as they did not seem as sharp as I would've expected; however after using the (very nice) K20D focus adjustment I realized my particular 16-45 and my particular K20D did not quite agree and needed a little assistance. After performing a fairly casual focus adjustment (picking real world objects and testing it out) the 16-45 not only met expectations but greatly exceeded them. I own some VERY sharp lenses including a Super Takumar 28/3.5 M42 mount and this lens is every bit as good as any of them. Contrast, color, sharpness are all up to par with the massive resolution the K20D sensor is capable of. I would not even consider the 16-50 since it's just a stop faster and much more expensive than this little guy (unless you need the weather sealing); the 16-45 is just that good.
If you don't have it, and don't need the weather sealing, buy it now. If you want to print 5 feet wide, buy it now. If you want the best bang for the buck in any zoom lens, buy it now.
Just....buy it. (Unless you own one of those non K-mount bodies, that is.) |
Excellent Lens
|
| Review Date: January 5, 2007 |
| Reviewer: Gadget Man, California |
| This lens is sharp, works very smoothly and has beautiful color. It's a first rate lens. I only wish it was just a tad bit longer - 16-60mm - that would be the equivalent of 24-90mm. As it is it is the equivalent of 24-67.5mm in 35mm terms. |
Clear and flexiable
|
| Review Date: November 4, 2007 |
| Reviewer: T. Heibeck, Richland, WA United States |
| I bought this lens instead of the 18-55 mm kit lens and I am very satified with that decision. The images are clear and the colors true. For normal picture you really don't see any distortion. I don't have a good prime lens to compare it to yet, but for general use and walking around this is a very good choice in a mid- to high-end lens. This glass will most likely become my general use lens. |
After years of use, this lens still rocks!
|
| Review Date: February 5, 2009 |
| Reviewer: Clamdigger, Pahoa, Hawai'i USA |
| I won't repeat all the superlatives others have already written... Read their in-depth reviews! However, I would like to mention that I bought one of these 16-45s way back when they first came out - must have been around '03 or '04 - and after thousands of pictures it still functions perfectly. I use it more than all my other lenses combined, which means daily. I find it incredible to see Amazon offering this gem for two & a half c-notes in Feb 2009; I paid more than twice as much - in Hong Kong, no less... land of really cheap camera gear! - and I still think *that* was a bargain. Very few zooms can go up against fixed focal length primes and come out on top: for the Pentax system, this is the one that can! Grab one while you can... |
THIS LENS JUSTIFIES THE HYPE ABOUT IT.
|
| Review Date: February 8, 2009 |
| Reviewer: Tabulrasa, Waldport, OR |
I bought this lens in large part because of the excellent reviews of it on this site. It is almost everything the best reviews say it is. More specifically, optically it is everything they say it is: superb. My quibbles are two-fold, and may be unjustified. First, the lens is not built like the very best lenses -- too much plastic! Then again, the lens costs about $250, which makes it an incredible bargain for this quality of glass. (It may be that we simply have to get used to all the plastic. I remember the first time I picked up a Pentax DSLR (in 2004); compared with my LX, it felt like a toy because of all that plastic. I doesn't feel that way any more.)
My second quibble is about the focal length. 45mm (~67.5mm w/35mm format) is a very odd focal length, not quite long enough for a portrait lens.
On the PLUS side: I am surprised that none of the reviews mentions that the lens will focus down to eleven inches. I took a picture of a log on the beach at about that distance (11"), and the detail, and the color, were stunning. This lens is vastly superior to the 18-55mm kit lens, and for the money, it is a great bargain. There is also a 16-50mm Pentax zoom available with a fixed f/2.8 max aperture, but it costs about 2.5 times as much as this lens and is substantially bigger. |
One of the best kit lens on the market
|
| Review Date: December 12, 2009 |
| Reviewer: J. Zou, WV |
I have used this lens for more than two years. I love this lens for its wide angle, excellent sharpness, low distortion, overall excellent image quality. It is one of reasons I still use my Pentax K100D.
I have Canon XT and 18-55/3.5-5.6/IS Lens. I have to say Canon has lots of good cameras and excellent lenses. But Pentax 16-45/4.0 is way better than Canon 18-55/IS, and way way better than 18-55/non-IS lens (I cannot understand why people want to pay $50 for a used Canon 18-55/non-IS, which is very poor and cheap-made lens). |
|
This entry was posted on Sunday, September 13th, 2009 at 6:25 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
|
Entries (RSS)