Collin, thanks to the fact that PDML is truly unique group, I've had a
chance to use DA 16-45/4 on several continents. It never disappointed me
or Galia for that matter. It is light, sharp and easy to handle (sans
the notion of being the longest physically at its widest zoom setting
which is not that big a deal as normally one would be looking into
viewfinder taking pictures anyway).
The only issue one might have with it is that it is relatively short on
the long end of the zoom range. So ultimately at the moment I am using
Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 (*) for my everyday zoom. It is slightly less wide,
but slightly faster (it turns to f/4.5 past 60 mm, so for all comparable
focal lengths it is faster than DA 16-45/4. IQ wise I have nothing to
complain about the Sigma. It is slightly bigger (67 mm filter thread on
Pentax vs 72 mm on Sigma) and it extends while being zoomed. It does not
have quick-shift autofocus and it rotates the other way around compared
to Pentax lenses (both zoom and focusing ring). Sigma can be had for
similarly low prices below USD 300.
(*) I'm talking about the least fancy no-OS no-HSM very first version of
this lens.
On 3/13/2013 1:04 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Anyone here use the 16-45?
How would you evaluate the results you get?
I'm looking for a carry-around for people shooting (dance studio).
And this is half the price of the 16-15/2.8.
Hopefully it produces a high quality image.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
