Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-24-2011, 06:19 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bridgetown West Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 850
DA 15-60* or Sigma 17-50?

About to get back into childrens portraits and at the moment only have a 10-20, not exactly a portrait lens! Only do outside work, no studio. I also want to use this lens in conjunction with the UWA for landscape work.
Ok so the Sigma is about half the price of the Pentax, but is the Pentax twice as good?
Would like to hear from users of both lens. Money is an issue so the Sigma is first choice, but I don't want to regret the purchase down the track!

05-24-2011, 06:43 AM   #2
Veteran Member
MrPetkus's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 388
I never cared for the DA* 16-50 and sold it. What about the Tamron 17-50/2.8? It's relatively inexpensive and an outstanding lens - sharp with warm colors.
05-24-2011, 06:52 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by MrPetkus Quote
I never cared for the DA* 16-50 and sold it. What about the Tamron 17-50/2.8? It's relatively inexpensive and an outstanding lens - sharp with warm colors.
....the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 has terrible bokeh.

Christmas market in Aschaffenburg | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
05-24-2011, 08:03 AM   #4
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,419
xx-50 is not really the best FL for portraits. A Tamron 28-75 may give you a bit more working room.

05-24-2011, 09:10 AM   #5
Veteran Member
krypticide's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,079
Had the Sigma but went with Pentax for the weather sealing.

Sent from my EVO 4G with MIUI
05-24-2011, 09:34 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
About to get back into childrens portraits and at the moment only have a 10-20, not exactly a portrait lens! Only do outside work, no studio. I also want to use this lens in conjunction with the UWA for landscape work.
Ok so the Sigma is about half the price of the Pentax, but is the Pentax twice as good?
Would like to hear from users of both lens. Money is an issue so the Sigma is first choice, but I don't want to regret the purchase down the track!
Sigma 17-50 is a great choice if budget is an issue.
05-24-2011, 01:16 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteOriginally posted by MrPetkus Quote
I never cared for the DA* 16-50 and sold it. What about the Tamron 17-50/2.8? It's relatively inexpensive and an outstanding lens - sharp with warm colors.
Agreed, and the Tamron was my choice for 3 years while I shot APS-c wide angle on Pentax. I took over 15,000 shots with it. One only need to look through the Tammy Club to see examples of its excellence. I sold it to help fund my full-frame body and new, wide-angle lenses.

Of these 3 lenses, it is the best wide open, with the Sigma 17-50 2.8 next. On the Nikon forums the 17-50 Tamron is hghly praised.

QuoteQuote:
SpecialK xx-50 is not really the best FL for portraits. A Tamron 28-75 may give you a bit more working room.
Agreed--I used the 17-50 mostly for landscapes, and my 28-75 mostly for portraits.
05-24-2011, 02:51 PM   #8
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
Another option is the DA 17-70mm/4 SDM. It isn't weather sealed.

05-24-2011, 03:27 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,421
Optics aside, I am never going to buy another Pentax SDM lens - not-at-all-proud owner of DA 17-70/4.0 f'ing SDM MF lens.
05-24-2011, 03:30 PM   #10
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
I thought the old Sigma 18-50 was inferior to the Tam 17-50, but the new Sigma 17-50 is even better than the Tammy but is more expensive.
05-24-2011, 03:40 PM   #11
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by excanonfd Quote
Optics aside, I am never going to buy another Pentax SDM lens - not-at-all-proud owner of DA 17-70/4.0 f'ing SDM MF lens.
I had one for about a year and never had any problems with the sdm but admit that I was concerned. I currently have 1 SDM lens and that is the DA* 300mm. I am reluctant to through out that kind of money the DA* lenses demand with a 1 year warranty and problems they have.
05-24-2011, 05:01 PM   #12
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
Best to stick to an f/2.8 zoom if your doing portraits with it, so the Tamron 28-75 is just about perfect. But you could do a lot better with a little more investment into the lens (a DA/FA limited comes to mind...)

Last edited by Ash; 05-24-2011 at 05:07 PM.
05-24-2011, 05:16 PM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Montreal
Posts: 197
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
I thought the old Sigma 18-50 was inferior to the Tam 17-50, .....
Most reviews say the Tamron is a bit better/sharper than the Sigma,

but having owned a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC MACRO for a year or so
and shooting mostly wide open/night shots, out of curiosity I did buy a Tamron
a few months ago to compare performance and determined they were just about equal. (tested copies anyway)

What is not equal is the build quality and materials of the Tamron, it felt/handled like a plastic toy compared to the Sigma.

Had I noticed any low-light / sharpness improvements over my Sigma I surely would of kept the Tamron
since 95% of my shots are at night/f2.8 but returned it to store after a few days of testing.

Michel

Last edited by mlatour; 05-24-2011 at 05:23 PM.
05-24-2011, 05:41 PM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by mlatour Quote
Most reviews say the Tamron is a bit better/sharper than the Sigma,
I had a similar experience comparing the Sigma to the DA* 16-50... no discernible difference between 'em, so I sold the 16-50 and bought something else.
05-24-2011, 08:22 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bridgetown West Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 850
Original Poster
Thanks for the input. I guess it might laso be worth considering a prime. FA 77 springs to mind for only a little more than the Sigma 17-50. Or even the Sigma 85 (when it comes out in Pentax mount), although a lot more $ than the others. What about the Sigma 24-70, any good?
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!
k-mount, lens, pentax, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: Sigma 150-500mm HSM, 150mm MACRO HSM, Sigma 18-250 HSM, Sigma 10-20mm HSM mackloon Sold Items 7 05-01-2011 02:25 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 100-300 f4. Sigma 1.4 Teleconvertor. Sigma UV filter. Cases, Caps, Box & garethwebber Sold Items 3 12-03-2010 03:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax AF-540FGZ Flash, Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6, Sigma 170-500mm F5-6.3 davebest Sold Items 12 06-25-2009 02:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:33 PM. | 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