Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 instead of kit lens for K-5?

zoltan1983snapper · 11-14-2010, 04:06 AM

Hey all--thinking of returning to Pentax and buying a K-5. Has anyone tried the new Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8? Compared it to the Tamron and/or WR kit lens? I'd love to have that constant aperture. But I'm curious about AF speed on the K-5.

PentaxRev · 11-14-2010, 06:35 AM

Mabelsound, I don't have the 17-50 or the K-5. I have the K-7 and my walk around lens is the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5. The AF speed on the K-7 is very respectable unless your in AF constant and from what I've read the AF in the K-5 takes that to a great new level. I love the extra reach of the 17-70 and frankly don't need the extra stop when I zoom all that often. I also have the Pentax kit lens. It's not bad.
I have decent glass in my kit and ironically my cheapest glass is also my only water resistant glass. That's the reason I bought the 18-55 and am glad I did. It's nice to be able to not worry about the weather. That's something you will have with either the K-7 or K-5.
If you are willing to spend a little more money on a lens, the Pentax 16-50 is an incredible addition to your kit and it's water resistant as well. It's built like a tank and from what I've read should last a lifetime. I hope to eventually get one.

jimr-pdx · 11-14-2010, 09:48 AM

I went with the DA 16-45 f/4 and have no regrets. I know many people get goosebumps about f/2.8 lenses but I'm not one of them; I'm sure it's a good lens (my Sigma was the same 17-70 PentaxRev owns & likes). With the K-5 the f/2.8 seems even less important for light gathering, though for deeply OOF zones I'm sure it is great. The 16-45 is available commonly and fairly cheaply in the marketplace on this site.

Nearly any good lens hooked to a K-5 is a good choice now, it seems!

zoltan1983snapper · 11-14-2010, 12:27 PM

Thanks, guys. I am thinking about just getting the K-5 and 31mm Limited (should never have sold my last copy, it's much pricier now) and slowly filling in the gaps with primes. But it might be nice to have a solid kit lens as I do this.

Anyone who actually owns and uses the Sigma, I would love to hear from you.

pop4 · 11-14-2010, 04:18 PM

I have the Sigma 17-50/2.8 and I've put my thoughts in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/114912-sigma-1...le-pentax.html

If you don't NEED the WR of the kit lens or the DA*, then I reckon it's a lens you should definitely check out. It is more expensive than the Tamron 17-50/2.8, but for me the extra for HSM is definitely worth it.

zoltan1983snapper · 11-14-2010, 04:42 PM

Excellent, thank you! I missed that mini-review.

hal_a · 11-14-2010, 05:06 PM

Hi,

I tried the Sigma, but ended up buying the Tamron version instead. I couldn't tell the difference between the output from it and the Sigma on my lowly *ist D. AF speed seemed comparable when I tried them both.

I think there are rebates on the Tamron so that might be even cheaper right now.

hal_a · 11-14-2010, 05:08 PM

Oh, forgot to mention, I only have experience with the older non-hsm version.

11-14-2010, 04:06 AM	#1
zoltan1983snapper Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 240	Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 instead of kit lens for K-5? Hey all--thinking of returning to Pentax and buying a K-5. Has anyone tried the new Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8? Compared it to the Tamron and/or WR kit lens? I'd love to have that constant aperture. But I'm curious about AF speed on the K-5.

11-14-2010, 04:18 PM	#5
pop4 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: YMML Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,879	I have the Sigma 17-50/2.8 and I've put my thoughts in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/114912-sigma-1...le-pentax.html If you don't NEED the WR of the kit lens or the DA, then I reckon it's a lens you should definitely check out. It is more expensive than the Tamron 17-50/2.8, but for me the extra for HSM is definitely worth it. Last edited by pop4; 11-14-2010 at 05:51 PM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-x: 55-200mm kit lens vs Sigma 70-300mm APO lens	ChopperCharles	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	9	01-19-2010 10:16 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax k-2000 + kit lens (18-55) + sigma zoom lens 70-300mm	dexmus	Sold Items	6	11-09-2009 05:25 PM
Kit lens replacement? Sigma 17-70 or Pentax 16-45?	brockj	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	04-29-2009 08:27 PM
kit lens vs Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX DG IF Aspherical	mike.hiran	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	02-26-2008 07:24 PM
Sigma 17-70mm vs Kit Lens	runjmb	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	08-21-2007 09:20 AM

11-14-2010, 06:35 AM	#2
PentaxRev Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: St. Louis, MO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 141	Mabelsound, I don't have the 17-50 or the K-5. I have the K-7 and my walk around lens is the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5. The AF speed on the K-7 is very respectable unless your in AF constant and from what I've read the AF in the K-5 takes that to a great new level. I love the extra reach of the 17-70 and frankly don't need the extra stop when I zoom all that often. I also have the Pentax kit lens. It's not bad. I have decent glass in my kit and ironically my cheapest glass is also my only water resistant glass. That's the reason I bought the 18-55 and am glad I did. It's nice to be able to not worry about the weather. That's something you will have with either the K-7 or K-5. If you are willing to spend a little more money on a lens, the Pentax 16-50 is an incredible addition to your kit and it's water resistant as well. It's built like a tank and from what I've read should last a lifetime. I hope to eventually get one.

11-14-2010, 09:48 AM	#3
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I went with the DA 16-45 f/4 and have no regrets. I know many people get goosebumps about f/2.8 lenses but I'm not one of them; I'm sure it's a good lens (my Sigma was the same 17-70 PentaxRev owns & likes). With the K-5 the f/2.8 seems even less important for light gathering, though for deeply OOF zones I'm sure it is great. The 16-45 is available commonly and fairly cheaply in the marketplace on this site. Nearly any good lens hooked to a K-5 is a good choice now, it seems!

11-14-2010, 12:27 PM	#4
zoltan1983snapper Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 240 Original Poster	Thanks, guys. I am thinking about just getting the K-5 and 31mm Limited (should never have sold my last copy, it's much pricier now) and slowly filling in the gaps with primes. But it might be nice to have a solid kit lens as I do this. Anyone who actually owns and uses the Sigma, I would love to hear from you.

11-14-2010, 04:42 PM	#6
zoltan1983snapper Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 240 Original Poster	Excellent, thank you! I missed that mini-review.

11-14-2010, 05:06 PM	#7
hal_a Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Montreal Posts: 60	Hi, I tried the Sigma, but ended up buying the Tamron version instead. I couldn't tell the difference between the output from it and the Sigma on my lowly *ist D. AF speed seemed comparable when I tried them both. I think there are rebates on the Tamron so that might be even cheaper right now.

11-14-2010, 05:08 PM	#8
hal_a Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Montreal Posts: 60	Oh, forgot to mention, I only have experience with the older non-hsm version.