Thanks Dario. I will not be rushing out to get the superior, but not that much, 16-45. If I can afford it the DA 12-24mm will be finding a happy home here.
The 18-55 has more CR at 18mm which is easy to correct in CS-RAW. This improves the sharpness a bit too. The slight barrel distortion at 18mm can also be corrected easily. Why are your 18-55 images so unsharp on the right side at 45mm? They seem almost as sharp as the 16-45 on the left side. I do not see this with my lens. And what's the big deal of fixed aperture zoom? OK it is nice if using manual exposure but how often do we do that? The 18-55 is faster at 18-20mm, f4 to 35mm and only drop from f4.5 to f5.6 at 50mm. So there is no speed advantage for the 16-45. I like the nice light well built little plastic lens. It fits well with the little DS and I have some primes when that a little better resolution is more important than the versatility. Powell >> Has anyone actually done a side-by-side comparison of the 2 lenses? I >> currently have the kit 18-55 lens with my DS, but I'm wondering what >> I'm missing (other than the obvious width), by not having the 16-45. > >You're mainly missing the obvious width and something at edges (when stopped >down). > >> Is is worth going out and spending the cash to upgrade? > >Compare by yourself and then decide: > >DA 18-55 @ 18mm f/4: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0103.JPG > >DA 16-45 @ 18mm f/4: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0112.JPG > >DA 18-55 @ 18mm f/8: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0105.JPG > >DA 16-45 @ 18mm f/8: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0114.JPG > >DA 18-55 @ 45mm f/4: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0106.JPG > >DA 16-45 @ 45mm f/4: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0109.JPG > >DA 18-55 @ 45mm f/8: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0108.JPG > >DA 16-45 @ 45mm f/8: >http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/IMGP0111.JPG > >Cheers, > >Dario >www.dariobonazza.com > > >
