I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. In portrait the upper half tends to get soft. I have two copies of this lens. The one I'm using now is very good when it is sharp, but inconsistent. I would pay to have one of them tightened, but I'm afraid that it will just get loose again rather quickly. I think the build quality is simply awful. Great glass inside though unfortunately. I tend to use it stopped down to f9-f11, but at f7.1 and lower the corners get pretty sad looking, so only good for closeups or when DOF is in play. Its pushing me to bite the bullet and start saving for a 16-50, though I don't know if I will really get any better IQ from that at the 16mm mark to be honest. I really wish pentax had some better wide-normal zooms at a reasonable price. The 17-70 doesn't do it for me.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:13 PM, steve harley <p...@paper-ape.com> wrote: > on 2013-07-23 13:44 Aahz Maruch wrote > >> Steve, the other advantage of the 16-50, of course, is that you're not >> having to switch lenses. > > > yes, for a couple of years a 16-45mm was my most-used lens > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
