I had the 16-50 and enjoyed it. I Enjoy using primes more, and have 15, 21, 35, and 50mm lenses that cover that range adequately. But I never had any quality or mechanical issues with the lens.
I have never had the 28-70 so can’t do any sort of comparison. However, as I recall the 28-70 had the reputation of being a very sharp lens that had a fatal construction flaw; one of the lens elements would delaminate. If you believe the stories, it was not a question of whether your copy of the lens was going to delaminate, rather it was a question of when. I was wandering through eBay recently and noticed a 28-70 for sale at a very reasonable price. In the fine print the seller noted that they had not gotten the sharp images from the lens that they expected and thought maybe one lens element was out of alignment. I think they had one of the infamous cases of delimitation. For which, AFIK, there is no cure. stan > On May 20, 2016, at 1:08 PM, Ken Waller <kwal...@peoplepc.com> wrote: > > Other than the obvious focal length difference and AF drives, I'm wondering > what list members think of the two - one better than the other etc. > > Kenneth Waller > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller > > -- > 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.
