on 2013-03-13 5:04 Collin Brendemuehl wrote
Anyone here use the 16-45? How would you evaluate the results you get?
it is very good for the price; it was by far my most-used lens for a couple of years, and i've taken it on several trips; i've done a lot of plant photography and the 1:4 "macro" is a plus - gets you in pretty close
but i pretty much retired it when i got a real macro lens and started to cover the 16-45 range with primes, starting at 50mm; except for certain wider shots, i mostly shot the long end, so the comparison to my A 50/1.7 is stark: the 50mm prime is much cheaper, much faster, much lighter & smaller, much nicer to focus, significantly sharper (esp. corners) and a bit more contrasty; the only pluses for the 16-45 are flexibility and closer focus (well, autofocus too); i used to get "you've got a big lens" comments with the 16-45; do not get those any more
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
