No problems here with SDM either, not for 16-50 or other DA* lenses. On Larry's question - why the 20-40? For me, it is two things. I've bought and sold many lenses; one of the few that I really regret selling is the FA20-35. The 20-40 allows me to have a renewed acquaintance with an updated form of that lens. Second, one word: lens hood. Now that I have the 20-40 in hand, and I think about what goes into the travel bag, the 20-40 wins hands down because of the unobtrusive hood. I'll tuck the 15mm in a corner of the bag someplace in the off chance I need to go that wide, and I'll have the 50-135 for the 50mm (and beyond) range.
Oh by the way, it helps that the 20-40 is WR, the 16-50 not so much. stan On Dec 26, 2013, at 7:44 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > The SDM on my 16-50 never failed. Exposure count is probably well over10k. > > Paul via phone > >> On Dec 26, 2013, at 7:19 PM, Miserere <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I'm curious, what is the appeal of the 20-40? Other than size, what >>> are the advantages of it over the 16-50? If the advantage is size, >>> how much smaller than the 16-50 is it? >> >> >> How much smaller than the 18-50mm is the 31 Ltd? So it's about that >> difference. Plus, the SDM will never fail on you cos it's a DC AF motor. >> This was the main issue that kept me from buying the 18-50mm back in the day >> (Mark is the only person I know who's never had an issue with that lens and >> its SDM). >> >> Oh, and let's not forget the fondle factor of the 20-40mm :-) >> >> Those are my thoughts, which are mostly useless given I'll never buy either. >> Cheers, >> >> >> —M. >> -- 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.
