Best zoom lens for 20-70mm FL

curiouspeter · 01-14-2011, 05:43 PM

More choices?

Would you recommend the the 17-50mm over the 28-75mm? I heard that both are very good. But if I get one that starts at 28mm I will have an excuse to buy a 21mm Limited. Just to fill a "gap" you know.

But if I get a 17-50mm I will have a reason to buy the excellent 70mm Limited.

Hmm...

Would you say the 70mm is more "special" than the 21mm? Is this line of thinking an early sign of LBA?

paperbag846 · 01-14-2011, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by curiouspeter

Would you say the 70mm is more "special" than the 21mm? Is this line of thinking an early sign of LBA?

Yes, I do tend to find the longer focal lengths are more special in general (one of the reasons the FA 31 ltd REALLY stands out among wide angle lenses).

curiouspeter · 01-14-2011, 06:25 PM

Perhaps I may get the FA 31mm someday... for now it will be in my dreams.

My skill level does not justify paying $1000+ for a normal-ish prime lens (for APS-C) at this point.

paperbag846 · 01-14-2011, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by curiouspeter

My skill level does not justify paying $1000+ for a normal-ish prime lens (for APS-C) at this point.

That goes for most of us

.

Jewelltrail · 01-14-2011, 09:42 PM - **1 Like**

Quote:

paperbag846: That goes for most of us

Agreed!

Quote:

curious Peter: More choices?

Would you recommend the the 17-50mm over the 28-75mm? I heard that both are very good. But if I get one that starts at 28mm I will have an excuse to buy a 21mm Limited. Just to fill a "gap" you know.

I own and love them both--use each of them for different purposes. I shoot the 17-50mm as my main workhorse of my hiking adventures. The 28-75mm takes the family shots and other candid, poignant moments in life.

The answer to your question relies most upon what range is more important to you, but, if you do pick up a prime as you suggest above, then either lens will do. If it were me, I would opt for the 17-50/Da 70 mm combo--Yes, I defintely find the 70mm more special than the 21mm--I also find the Tamron 17-50mm more special than the 21mm.

Quote:

curious Peter: Is this line of thinking an early sign of LBA?

Absolutely, with this thread we have a documented diagnosis now. TURN BACK!

curiouspeter · 01-15-2011, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Jewelltrail

I also find the Tamron 17-50mm more special than the 21mm.

Wow, that says a lot.

To me, the main attraction of using a wide angle prime is the DOF scale. But I guess I can learn to focus on an object near the hyperfocal distance.

**Ash** · 01-15-2011, 01:34 PM

Only Tamrons are not built like DA limiteds, and don't have quick shift (if that matters). A favoured comparison of a 17-50 over a 21 ltd is of course subjective, but I do know the 17-50 (as well as the 28-75 and 70-200) are just about the best value for money in terms of IQ you'll ever find.

curiouspeter · 01-19-2011, 01:32 PM

I heard somewhere that the 17-50mm has a better build than the 28-75mm. Is this true? Or perhaps the lower weight (with the same material) gives a better impression of quality?

How does the build quality of the Tamron compare to that of the WR kit lens? If they are similar, it is probably good enough for me.

mlatour · 01-19-2011, 02:17 PM

After owning a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro for a year or so I recently gave
the Tamron SP17-50mm f2.8 XR Di II a look and went ahead and purchased one a few days ago.

After only an hour of playing around with it I was disapointed and
I am actually returning it tonite. First, as noted on many reviews it had front focus issues,
and more importantly the build quality is really really not up to par to the Sigma equivalent.
(the Sigma is a little more expensive but well worth it)

Most review say that the Tamron is sharper at f2.8 but I didn't notice a difference.

The 1mm (x1.5) gain at the wide end is noticeable and could come in handy at times
but I really dont feel like going back and forth to the camera store until I find a 'good'
copy that focuses properly so I'm returning it and staying with the Sigma.

**NaClH2O** · 01-19-2011, 02:39 PM

It is on of my favorite landscape/garden lenses. Very sharp throughout the entire zoom range and also sharp corner to corner. Excellent color rendition. Good close focuser and relatively impervious to CA or flare.

NaCl(if it was f/2.8 it would be the perfect garden lens)H2O

curiouspeter · 01-19-2011, 02:52 PM

Originally posted by NaClH2O

Have you thought about a FA 20-35 for wide end work?

I did briefly. I read a lot of good things about this lens. However, my 18-55 WR is quite acceptable over that range for now. Maybe later.

I actually considered the A 35-105mm f/3.5. But I heard it is difficult to use SR with a manual zoom lens.

01-19-2011, 02:17 PM	#24
mlatour Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Montreal Posts: 197	After owning a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro for a year or so I recently gave the Tamron SP17-50mm f2.8 XR Di II a look and went ahead and purchased one a few days ago. After only an hour of playing around with it I was disapointed and I am actually returning it tonite. First, as noted on many reviews it had front focus issues, and more importantly the build quality is really really not up to par to the Sigma equivalent. (the Sigma is a little more expensive but well worth it) Most review say that the Tamron is sharper at f2.8 but I didn't notice a difference. The 1mm (x1.5) gain at the wide end is noticeable and could come in handy at times but I really dont feel like going back and forth to the camera store until I find a 'good' copy that focuses properly so I'm returning it and staying with the Sigma. Last edited by mlatour; 01-19-2011 at 04:30 PM.

01-19-2011, 02:39 PM	#25
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	Have you thought about a FA 20-35 for wide end work? It is on of my favorite landscape/garden lenses. Very sharp throughout the entire zoom range and also sharp corner to corner. Excellent color rendition. Good close focuser and relatively impervious to CA or flare. NaCl(if it was f/2.8 it would be the perfect garden lens)H2O

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma Zoom Master 35-70mm f/2.8-4 lens	Moggman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	05-25-2015 12:10 PM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax-FA* 28-70mm F2.8 AL Zoom Lens (Worldwide)	dgaies	Sold Items	2	09-06-2010 10:50 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC-F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Macro Zoom Lens	wallyb	Sold Items	3	10-14-2009 02:16 PM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax M 35-70mm f2.8-3.5 Zoom Lens	Youngster	Sold Items	0	04-11-2009 06:28 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax M 35-70mm f2.8-3.5 Zoom Lens	Youngster	Sold Items	1	10-13-2008 10:39 AM

01-14-2011, 05:43 PM	#16
curiouspeter Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 34 Original Poster	More choices? Would you recommend the the 17-50mm over the 28-75mm? I heard that both are very good. But if I get one that starts at 28mm I will have an excuse to buy a 21mm Limited. Just to fill a "gap" you know. But if I get a 17-50mm I will have a reason to buy the excellent 70mm Limited. Hmm... Would you say the 70mm is more "special" than the 21mm? Is this line of thinking an early sign of LBA?

01-14-2011, 05:47 PM	#17
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by curiouspeter Would you say the 70mm is more "special" than the 21mm? Is this line of thinking an early sign of LBA? Yes, I do tend to find the longer focal lengths are more special in general (one of the reasons the FA 31 ltd REALLY stands out among wide angle lenses).

01-14-2011, 06:25 PM	#18
curiouspeter Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 34 Original Poster	Perhaps I may get the FA 31mm someday... for now it will be in my dreams. My skill level does not justify paying $1000+ for a normal-ish prime lens (for APS-C) at this point.

01-14-2011, 06:41 PM	#19
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by curiouspeter My skill level does not justify paying $1000+ for a normal-ish prime lens (for APS-C) at this point. That goes for most of us .

01-14-2011, 09:42 PM - 1 Like	#20
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	Quote: paperbag846: That goes for most of us Agreed! Quote: curious Peter: More choices? Would you recommend the the 17-50mm over the 28-75mm? I heard that both are very good. But if I get one that starts at 28mm I will have an excuse to buy a 21mm Limited. Just to fill a "gap" you know. I own and love them both--use each of them for different purposes. I shoot the 17-50mm as my main workhorse of my hiking adventures. The 28-75mm takes the family shots and other candid, poignant moments in life. The answer to your question relies most upon what range is more important to you, but, if you do pick up a prime as you suggest above, then either lens will do. If it were me, I would opt for the 17-50/Da 70 mm combo--Yes, I defintely find the 70mm more special than the 21mm--I also find the Tamron 17-50mm more special than the 21mm. Quote: curious Peter: Is this line of thinking an early sign of LBA? Absolutely, with this thread we have a documented diagnosis now. TURN BACK!

01-15-2011, 11:08 AM	#21
curiouspeter Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 34 Original Poster	Originally posted by Jewelltrail I also find the Tamron 17-50mm more special than the 21mm. Wow, that says a lot. To me, the main attraction of using a wide angle prime is the DOF scale. But I guess I can learn to focus on an object near the hyperfocal distance.

01-15-2011, 01:34 PM	#22
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Only Tamrons are not built like DA limiteds, and don't have quick shift (if that matters). A favoured comparison of a 17-50 over a 21 ltd is of course subjective, but I do know the 17-50 (as well as the 28-75 and 70-200) are just about the best value for money in terms of IQ you'll ever find.

01-19-2011, 01:32 PM	#23
curiouspeter Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 34 Original Poster	I heard somewhere that the 17-50mm has a better build than the 28-75mm. Is this true? Or perhaps the lower weight (with the same material) gives a better impression of quality? How does the build quality of the Tamron compare to that of the WR kit lens? If they are similar, it is probably good enough for me.

01-19-2011, 02:52 PM	#26
curiouspeter Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 34 Original Poster	Originally posted by NaClH2O Have you thought about a FA 20-35 for wide end work? I did briefly. I read a lot of good things about this lens. However, my 18-55 WR is quite acceptable over that range for now. Maybe later. I actually considered the A 35-105mm f/3.5. But I heard it is difficult to use SR with a manual zoom lens.