[Rico]

There is also the Pentax SMC FA 24-90 f3.5-4.5. It is out of production but you can probably make a request in the marketplace for one. It is a very good lens.

[qdoan]

Your goal is actually very similar to mine. I wasn't to cover from 10 to at least 200 with constant f2.8 if possible. The top end of that wont be purchased for a while though because I am on a budget.

Had anybody used the $900 Sigma EX? I would really like to know why there is such a premium on that lens over the other ones that are so similar.

The only difference that I van make out is that it had hsm. Is that feature really make focusing that much quicker/quieter?

There is one other major difference between the HSM and the non-HSM version... and that would be the IF, Internal Focusing..and the size. It weighs the same as the non-HSM, but is only 3.5in long, where as the non-HSM is 5" not extended and is 6+" fully extended.

This would be benefical and make life easier if you're shooting with polarizers or graduated filters..

Then question is.. how much is quietness/HSM, size and internal focusing worth to you? as it is an extra 4-500 bucks for those features.

[soppy]

+1 mikem.. a Sigma 17-70mm F2.8 EX DC non-HSM would be my ideal lens!

Could not agree more!

[soppy]

Alright well now that I know that's all I'm getting extra with the HSM, I think I'll probably go with the non-HSM, unless I find a good deal on the other one. I also plan on picking up a 10-20mm Sigma 1:2.8 EX to cover the wide end of things, so by not buying the HSM version, I am essentially getting two lenses for the price of one.

The Tamron sounds nice, particularly the color aspect of it as well as not having to buy giant filters, but ultimately I can fix colors in PP, whereas sharpness is a bit more difficult. Also the Tamron seems a little to tight on the wide end of things for me.