6 out of 7 people found this review helpful.
My worst buy ever
Date of Review: Apr 8, 2007
The Bottom Line: If you have kit 18-55 lens, avoid it. If dont then buy 18-55 instead this expensive lens.
I have photography experience from film and start shooting digital almost 2 yrs ago. I'm not fan of post processing by photo shop or something. I take it whatever comes from camera/lens.
Construction is solid. There is no flaw in body of the lens. Its a beautiful lens.
I'm giving it a ZERO because its no better than kit lens 18-55. There is NO need of wasting money on this lens for very very very slight improvement in image quality. If you have 18-55 then stay away from this lens. Its just waste of money if you have kit lens.
I have done testing on both 18-55 and 16-45 WITH tripod so I dont think there was much left in testing.
Look for websites of lens pictures and see the pictures taken from 18-55 and 16-45. You will find them nearly identical. If you have money then buy some other lens. Whatever 16-45 can deliver, 18-55 can deliver that too.
I have yet to see a tack sharp zoom lens from Pentax. Pentax dont know how to make tack sharp zoom lenses. And this is no exception.
No wonder who are looking for quality, dont go with Pentax. But people buy Pentax because this is affordable for more ppl than Canon. Which is a genuine reason.
Tack sharp is relative term. A guy shooting film knows what is tack sharp. People except Canon dont know what a tack sharp thing is unless then use prime lens. Which are also not all good.
