HD Pentax DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED PLM AW Experiences 

My pleasure Mitch!

Dank je man! Het is dan ook een droom combinatie. Voordat ik het door had was ik bijna een kwartier verder zag ik later.... :-)

I have that feeling as well :-)

Thanks my friend! Pentax did goooooood with this one :-)

I agree it's not priced to please most of us, but as you may see from similar offerings of other manufacturers, these are all in the same ballpark.

Mike, I am interested to see some image comparison between the new 16-50 and the original 16-50. I own the original one, images are sharp between F8 and F16, anything below F8 are very soft looking images. I cannot make up my mind if I should upgrade my original lens.

Dear Michal Nicak, I'm so happy that you respond to my video (and website article ) as well. I've seen you trolling the release wherever you can. Perhaps you can clarify what your issue is? Let me explain you a little bit about photography; Aperture control on lenses are there to give the photographer creative control about their images. You might choose a blurry background or the opposite a front to back sharpness. I've used this lens as I would do in real world situations; I asses the circumstances and choose the best settings for that particular photo. In the 20-odd examples you will see that I've used f2.8 in the portrait of Remco, but also smaller apertures for my landscapes. I have the strong feeling that you should spend your time on a few photography lessons so you might better understand the creative brain of a photographer. I wish you all the best.

@@andyyang7053 Hi Andy. I believe there are some examples on Pentax's corporate site that show (big) differences. I sold my 16-50 years ago when I went full-frame so could not compare them myself.

@@andyyang7053 Here is the Pentax's corporate page that compares with the original 16-50. www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/star_lens/special/sp_da16-50/

Oh dear, another believer in the myth, or half-truth at best, that an F2.8 lens should be mainly enjoyed at F2.8, and hence primarily tested at that aperture. As Mike points out, lenses have an aperture range to give you options as a photographer who knows how aperture affects DOF and composition, not to mention exposure. Naturally, if I pony up the money for a fast-aperture lens, I want to know if wide-open is useable when I need it. But I also want to know where the lens reaches its peak - usually on stopping down a bit - and over what aperture range that lens sustains critical or at least decent sharpness before diffraction takes its toll. BTW, the DA18-55 kitzoom may reach a decent sharpness level at medium apertures, but those rocks you're sneering at (and so much else) will look significantly better shot with a lens of the new DA*'s calibre, particularly in the corners. Fact.