Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-27-2010, 04:07 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Deiberson's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
Sigma 17-70mm

My goal is to get 2 reasonably sharp lenses covering 17-200mm. I'd like to grab something that's able to go to f/2.8 for low light conditions but that will produce great images when stopped down.
My other goal is to avoid spending huge amounts of money on a lens. Will the sig 17-70 dc/macro be a good candidate for this?
The other lens I was considering was the tamron 70-200 f/2.8, so any nuggets on that would be appreciated too.

The reason I ask is because I know I can get a 18-55 kit lens pretty cheap but I'd like something noticeably sharper and something that performs a little better in low light.

07-27-2010, 08:50 AM   #2
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,428
The Sigma is well regarded, though many people prefer the previous version.

I have that Tamron and it is very sharp.
07-27-2010, 08:52 AM   #3
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,949
Check out the reviews of the lens here: Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM

I'd personally recommend a constant F2.8 24-70 or 28-75mm, as you'll likely be at the winder end anyway. Have a look at the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 or Tamron 28-75mm F2.8.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

07-28-2010, 01:43 AM   #4
Veteran Member
mickey's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,073
I bought a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 DC macro recently and am very happy with it.
The macro is great, if you want to consider that.

I was thinking about going up to 200mm, the same as you.

I looked at the Tokina AT-X 828AF PRO 80-200mm F2.8 in a shop, and it seemed like a great lens.
PentaxForums.com Third-Party Lens Review Database - Tokina AT-X 828AF PRO 80-200mm F2.8 Lens Reviews

Didn't have the money to buy both of those lenses at the same time, and left with the Sigma only.

Needless to say when I went back a few days later, the Tokina had been sold.

07-28-2010, 05:27 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Deiberson's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
Original Poster
Adam,
What is the HSM model? There is one for sale on marketplace but "non HSM" After thinking about it the price seemed high for non HSM.
Thanks,
Kevin
07-28-2010, 05:48 AM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 423
I can highly recommend Sigma 17-70. I have got one myself and have been very happy with it. Here is a few shots taken with it:


.

.


I have also got Tamron 28-75/2.8 and it is a very good lens too but the focal length is not as useful on the digital body as on film so I usually have it mounted on my MZ-5 film camera instead.

Cheers
Kenny
07-28-2010, 06:37 AM   #7
Senior Member
fb_penpho's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 183
Another recommendation

This is using the screw drive focus version.




enjoy fb

Last edited by fb_penpho; 07-28-2010 at 06:40 AM. Reason: wrong size image
07-28-2010, 06:50 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Deiberson's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
Original Poster
is that the hsm or non hsm version? i don't know what the difference is.

07-28-2010, 07:12 AM   #9
Senior Member
fb_penpho's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 183
The original version was old style screw drive, I believe the next model went direct to motor drive (HSM) with optical stabilisation (OS) . The problem with SR and OS, one or both must be off, Both must NOT be on at the same time.
07-28-2010, 08:06 AM   #10
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,428
QuoteQuote:
The original version was old style screw drive, I believe the next model went direct to motor drive (HSM) with optical stabilisation (OS) . The problem with SR and OS, one or both must be off, Both must NOT be on at the same time.

And, at least with the 150-500, you must turn off OS when changing lenses to avoid damage (per Sigma).
07-28-2010, 09:38 AM   #11
Veteran Member
Ecaterin's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Seattle
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 723
Funny - I just bought the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 and Tamron 70-200 2.8 combo So far, I'm very impressed. The 17-70 is excellent, sharp and contrasty (a little soft at 70mm wide open, but that's the only spot on my copy & great a tad stopped down at 70, back to super sharp at @60mm - of course I'd be using the 70-200 at 70mm anyway, so no issue for me. At 70mm the *macro* is sharp as a razor - must have been a design compromise?).

The macro is outstandingly sharp:

50mm f/4


The 70-200 is also one of the sharpest lenses I've used. I test all my lenses against this brick building across from our apartment, and this one blows every other lens out of the water, wow. Granted this is at f/8, but the f/2.8 shot is still as good as any other lens I've shot this building with, beat out only by the DA70. The Picasa albums function reduced the sharpness & contrast somewhat and it still looks amazing:

200mm f/8


The trade off for bigger & heavy (omg that 70-200 is heavy even once I took the tripod collar off, but still very hand-holdable) is well worth it here. (But I'll have my primes back soon my preciousssss, yes I will ) I got this combo because I'm back-up 4th shooter on a wedding in 2 weeks, and I can say for sure that they'll give me exactly what I want - pro results in terms of sharpness, contrast & color - can't do better than this without spending lots more money. Now the only risk is photographer error - ha! Glad I've got this gig, cause 4th shooter is exactly the right place to start :P

I'd also add that I tried out the DA16-50 2.5 and the DA50-135 2.5 and BOTH lenses were defective. I about cried When will they get their QC & SDM issues under control? I don't doubt they're the cream of the crop optically, but I couldn't take the risk a second time in a row. The Sigma/Tamron combo was suggested by a pro I know locally, and I'm very grateful I took his advice
07-28-2010, 09:42 AM   #12
Site Supporter
stl09's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 485
17-70 lens

QuoteOriginally posted by Deiberson Quote
My goal is to get 2 reasonably sharp lenses covering 17-200mm. I'd like to grab something that's able to go to f/2.8 for low light conditions but that will produce great images when stopped down.
My other goal is to avoid spending huge amounts of money on a lens. Will the sig 17-70 dc/macro be a good candidate for this?
The other lens I was considering was the tamron 70-200 f/2.8, so any nuggets on that would be appreciated too.

The reason I ask is because I know I can get a 18-55 kit lens pretty cheap but I'd like something noticeably sharper and something that performs a little better in low light.
I personally have the Pentax 17-70 with constant f-stop and I'm very pleased with the lens. It focuses in quickly and it does very well in low light...my 2 cents
07-28-2010, 12:57 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,738
I have the Sigma 17-70mm and it is a very nice lens. f/2.8 is only for the wide end of the focal lengt (17-23 or something like that). The Macro is very good. The prices is about $280 + here in the marketplace. I have the non-HSM and it is very nice. The HSM one is a little bit more expensive.

Have you consider the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8? The is also a Non-HSM and a HSM only one. I have the HSM only and it is very nice and sharp lens. The Non-HSM is very popular and not that many people would like to sell it.


As other pointed out, the Tokina AT-X 828AF PRO 80-200mm F2.8 is also a very good choice. There is one in the marketplace for $500 for a used one. A good deal in my opinion.
07-28-2010, 01:26 PM   #14
Veteran Member
Reportage's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 739
It all comes down if you need the f/2.8?

Because f/4 means bumping up the iso pretty much to the max if want to catch your kids playing an indoor game or photographing a lowlight gig.

Noticed not a lot of indoor or lowlight shots of the 17-70mm.
07-28-2010, 05:04 PM   #15
Veteran Member
mickey's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,073
QuoteOriginally posted by Reportage Quote
Noticed not a lot of indoor or lowlight shots of the 17-70mm.
There's a challenge to be had, for sure.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
f/2.8, goal, k-mount, lens, light, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 17-70mm f/4 or Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 or sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4? shang Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-24-2010 05:30 AM
Sigma 24-70mm, Sigma 28-70mm, or Tamron 28-75mm? gkreth Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 05-23-2010 01:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:35 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top