Sigma 17-70 upgrade to DA*16-50???

dazman · 10-02-2008, 05:43 AM

Hi All,

I currently have the Sigma 17-70, which I find to have it's pros + cons and overall is a fine lens. I have the opportunity to upgrade (?) to the DA*16-50, which I also see as having it's pros + cons.

What I'll be gaining with the DA*
SDM
Weather seals
Better IQ???...if a good copy
An extra 1mm on the short end - always wishing I had extra on the Sigma
No Zoom creep - drives me nuts on the Sigma

What I'll be losing from the Sigma
Lighter weight
20 mm on the long end - I use 50-70mm 25% of the time
Macro/close focusing - has shorter minimum focus distance than DA*
Less CA

Have I forgotten anything?

For what I'll be gaining with the DA* & losing from the Sigma, is the upgrade (?) worth the extra money? I know this is something only I can answer, but I'd appreciate any feedback from people who may have been in a similar position or have used both lenses.

Thanks

*OrenMc* · 10-02-2008, 06:04 AM

I had the Sigme and really loved it but I wanted something with a constant f/2.8. ( don't know if thats a factor for you )

soccerjoe5 · 10-02-2008, 06:56 AM

don't forget the better build quality. and i like the little window on the hood for a CPL.

ariahspam · 10-02-2008, 07:30 AM

It doesn't matter you use 50-70 25% of the time.

With 16-50 you have access to 50, and by minimal cropping, a little bit more.

So you should actually only count the amount of shots you have at 70 and, if a bit extremist, 60 to 70.

*maxwell1295* · 10-02-2008, 07:39 AM

I loved the 17-70, but really need a constant aperture lens since I shoot manually with flash when I do events. I ended up with the Sigma 24-60/2.8 which is a great lens. I feel it's quite a bit sharper than the 17-70, but it's a little short at the long end. I kinda missed shooting portraits at 70mm until I got the DA*50-135. Now I'm not lacking for anything. If you need the speed/constant aperture and use the wide end a lot, the DA*16-50 would be a good choice. If you can get away with something not as wide, the 24-60 is a fantastic lens. It also focuses close enough for me to shoot flowers with....something I did a lot of with the 17-70.

**roentarre** · 10-02-2008, 08:05 AM

Stick with sigma. There is little purpose to switch unless you found f2.8 bokeh an attractive option.

bdery · 10-02-2008, 09:27 AM

As you said, only you can answer. Balance your list of perks, and add:

Pentax : constant f2,8, window for filters
sigma : no risk since you already have it.

If you want seals, a faster lens with a slightly wide FOV, go with the Pentax. I'm not sure the absolute quality of IQ will be better, as the Sigma is amazing. By the way mine does not creep at all.

If you enjoy the reach and weigth of the Sigma, and if you're happy with your pictures, then why not spend money on something else? (like a wide angle lens

)