On 1/6/2014 12:08 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
On 1/5/2014 12:16 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Have you compared teh Sigma and the 16-50? The latter, when properly
assembled, has very good image quality.
Paul
Indeed. Paul, the only issue here is to how to come up with 16-50 that
is properly assembled as you say. And notice - it is far outside of USA
we're talking about. My understanding is that Attila is from Romania and
me, as you know - the Israel is very small country as far as Pentax
corporate is concerned. In fact, I'm yet to see any Pentax lens (beside
the kit or double kit) to be offered for sale here in a non-virtual shop.
Again, ultimately the differences between lenses of this class are more
subjective. Further, it is very difficult to reason about them because
if person A values sharpness and person B values color rendition - how
do you make them talk the common language? Or if person A just likes the
way Sigma renders tones, it does not really matter what person B has to
say about Pentax DA* lens...
Since I'm totally happy with Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5, I should probably be
more quiet anyway :-).
Boris
Still, whether you live in a big country or a small one, the 16-50 you
get is assembled in the same plant as the one Paul gets. If Pentax Ricoh
(or Ricoh Pentax whichever it is) were to fix the quality issue for one
it would fix it for all.
--
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.
