Giving up the 16-45. what should replace it?

[jazzman]

I have decided to end my love hate relationship with the Pentax 16-45 (excellent in good light, doesn't do it for me in any low light conditions.. rooms with lights on, evenings etc).

What I am looking for is a "faster" zoom. The DA* 16-50 is not being considered given the many complaints right now. So, I am considering the
- Tamron 28-75 mm f/2.8 (not as wide but I can live with that)
- Sigma 18-50mm f2.8

Looking forward to your comments

[2fast4you]

The Tamron ist too long, but its a good and fast lens. I wouldnt buy a Sigma 18-50.
What about a Sigma 24-70??

[TheWengler]

I would get the Sigma, but I prefer landscapes so I make use of the wide angle.

[SpecialK]

I have the older version of the Sigma 18-50 which I like. Still available at Cameta Camera for under $300. Most people say the newer version is better.

[roscot]

I can not speak to the Sigma, but I can hardily recommend the Tammy, if the FL range is right for your shooting style. Acceptable wide open, very sharp at f3.5. Good color rendition, contrast, and for a zoom, good bokeh. Build is top notch.

Although mine is fine, you should be aware that there has been reports of some QC issues with both Tamron and Sigma lenses, mostly FF/BF issues. You may need to try a couple of samples to get a good one.

[creampuff]

jazzman, it a pity that you plan to give up the DA 16-45mm.
It is an excellent lens but one that requires familiarity with it's characteristics (mine has a tendency to underexpose between 0.3 to 0.7 EV). The more I use it the better the results I get. Personally I would stick with Pentax because pictures taken with the current crop of lenses give a nicer colour than offerings from other 3rd party lens makers.

A recent shot that I took from a dirty hotel window with the DA 16-45mm in falling light

[dndavis]

What creampuff said.

I sold my 16-45, in anticipation of the DA* 16-50 and to finance some primes.

I've given myself an assignment for the next six months, to shoot exclusively with a variety of MF lenses (Takumar and other). When I buy another zoom, it most likely will be the DA 16-45.

[jazzman]

Thanks to everyone who responded.

I have decided to hold onto the 16-45 for a little longer. I will try to follow creampuffs advise and get to know the lens a little better (I have a feeling I will be returning to the forum sometime next year with the same question )

[simonkit]

Originally Posted by creampuff

Personally I would stick with Pentax because pictures taken with the current crop of lenses give a nicer colour than offerings from other 3rd party lens makers.

Can't quite agree with this , the Sigma 17-70 is more than a match for the Pentax 16-45, many prefer it.

simon

[calicojack]

I second the comment on the Sigma 17-70. I bought it instead of getting the kit lens with my K10D. I've used it extensively since including a three week trip through Italy and Greece with beautiful results. Check out the Italy - Greece 2007 albums at briantimmins's photos and albums on webshots
OBTW, the GR1 - 12 2004 albums were shot with a Pentax Optio 33WR, p&s.
Regards & Season's Greetings,
Brian

[creampuff]

I do agree the Sigma is a fine lens that offers a very versatile focal range, especially on the long end. I seriously did consider it on my buy list but opted for the Pentax because:
a) I preferred the colours from the Pentax
b) I prefer a constant aperture lens
c) the Pentax was cheaper

[Buddha Jones]

I would only replace mine with the DA*16-50mm or the Sigma 17-70mm, but I'd opt for the DA* first. But I think I would prolly never get rid of the 16-45mm anyway.