There are at least two or three others on the list that feel as I do - that the lens is over rated.
Shel > [Original Message] > From: Paul Stenquist > Perhaps there is some sample variation. My 16-45 records fine detail > extremely well when used on a tripod and stopped down between f5.6 and > 11. > Paul > On Aug 23, 2006, at 11:14 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > I used it every day for almost a month. It's OK, but, IMO, over rated, > > especially when used for detail work. Not at all bad for portraits, > > some > > landscapes, travel ... but not up to critical standards or for fine > > details. What other way is there to evaluate a lens than by using it, > > i.e., an in use test? I used it hand held and on a tripod, I used it > > wide > > open and stopped down, I used it for close focusing and for distant > > objects. > > > > Shel > > > > > > > >> [Original Message] > >> From: Paul Stenquist > > > >> I tend to think you might be pleased with the 16-45 as well in a > >> longer term test. In use evaluation is invaluable but not always > >> accurate. > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
