[dgaies]

Nice photos! There's no denying that the 50-135mm has a winning optical formula.

Agreed, very nice photos, from both the 50-135 and from the 50-150.

Bottom line, I can't see the optics of either lenses ever holding anyone back

[Basset]

Very useful thread for me, as I had been thinking about how to save $$$ for the 50-135, and now the notion of finding a used (smaller) Sigma 50-150 for less $ is very appealing. Those rugby photos did it for me.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I think that the 50-135mm and 50-150mm are basically the same size. The size/weight savings come into play when comparing those lenses to the 70-200mm lenses.

That being said, the 50-150mm would probably still get the nod for sports, due to the faster HSM motor and the slightly longer reach.

[dgaies]

I think that the 50-135mm and 50-150mm are basically the same size. The size/weight savings come into play when comparing those lenses to the 70-200mm lenses.

That being said, the 50-150mm would probably still get the nod for sports, due to the faster HSM motor and the slightly longer reach.

You're right, the DA*50-135 and Sigma 50-150 are almost identical in size.

I think the previous post mentioned "smaller" to differentiate the new 50-150 from the older (and smaller) 50-150.

As for price, I think you'll find that a used Sigma 50-150 and a used DA*50-135 aren't that different in price. I'd say on average, the DA* might be $50-100 more. Part of the problem is that the (smaller) Sigma 50-150 is no longer made and there aren't very many out there.

[Frogfish]

You're right, the DA*50-135 and Sigma 50-150 are almost identical in size.

I think the previous post mentioned "smaller" to differentiate the new 50-150 from the older (and smaller) 50-150.

As for price, I think you'll find that a used Sigma 50-150 and a used DA*50-135 aren't that different in price. I'd say on average, the DA* might be $50-100 more. Part of the problem is that the (smaller) Sigma 50-150 is no longer made and there aren't very many out there.

Not too sure about those prices DG. I paid GBP399 (and later got the 18% VAT back too !) whereas Amazon lists the going price for a 50-135 as $800-1,000. That's quite a difference and it'll be more now since the 50-150 can now only be found used.

[dgaies]

Not too sure about those prices DG. I paid GBP399 (and later got the 18% VAT back too !) whereas Amazon lists the going price for a 50-135 as $800-1,000. That's quite a difference and it'll be more now since the 50-150 can now only be found used.

My post was comparing the price of a used 50-150 to a used 50-135. You would have a hard time finding a used Sigma 50-150 (for Pentax) for less than $600-650 while a used DA*50-135 typically sells for $700-750.

[Frogfish]

My post was comparing the price of a used 50-150 to a used 50-135. You would have a hard time finding a used Sigma 50-150 (for Pentax) for less than $600-650 while a used DA*50-135 typically sells for $700-750.

Sorry. My misunderstanding.

[dgaies]

Sorry. My misunderstanding.

No need to be sorry

You're right that when they were new, and there was a larger price discrepancy, especially outside the United States.

[jeverettfine]

I have been thinking about a zoom in the 50-? range and the 50-135 fits with what I have now in that range: Three Pentax-A lenses, 50 f/1.4, 100 f/2.8 (not the macro), 135 f/2.8. Plus I have a Sigma 90 2.8 Macro-A. I have no problem with manual focus primes and in many ways prefer them. It would be hard to get much sharper. Plus, all three together cost less than half the price of even a used 50-135. Still, zoom with autofocus is pretty good stuff. The SDM issues also slow me down. Now, i am pretty impressed with the sample pictures from the Sigma 50-150. Hmmmmm

[hyyz]

... I think the difference between the Sigma and Pentax lenses (other than size with the Sigma update) are colors. ...

+1. Right to the point.

How come I don't like the photos taken with 50-150 Sigma? Feel like each one has been taken with some kind of warming filter on. I don't have this lens but it reminds me some impression I gained while using Sigma lenses. Color is definitely not right. Feels like everything is burnt.

I do have Pentax 50-135 and I can say photos taken with it are much more natural and pleasing.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

How come I don't like the photos taken with 50-150 Sigma? Feel like each one has been taken with some kind of warming filter on.

I shoot all of my pictures in RAW, and manipulate the color/temperature/saturation to taste, and I think that I usually tend to favor a warmer look for a lot of my pictures, so I don't know how much of that could necessarily be attributed to the lens.

The camera body used and the post processing obviously have a big effect on the colors, so it would be interesting to see back-to-back shots taken with both lenses on the same camera with the same post-processing.

[hyyz]

Forgot to mention, those are great pics. Please don't mind what I said about the difference on color between the two lenses. I was curious if that color attribute to the lens or something else.

It would be interesting to find out how much lens plays a role in color nowadays. Camera does play a role too.

BTW, a friend used to sent me the photos he shot during a wedding using N***n D7000. When compared to the ones I took with K10D + 50-135mm, I found myself dislike the N***n ones simply because of the color.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

If you (or anybody else) is interested in participating in an experiment, I would like to see how somebody else might process my images. I've posted the original RAW PEF file for one of my previously posted pictures. Specifically, this picture:



As anybody who shoots RAW knows, the final image can end up looking quite different from the original image after "developing" it, especially in terms of color and saturation. I would be interested to see how someone else might process the image, and what the final result would look like. If anybody is interested in processing the picture using their own methods, feel free to download the original PEF file from here:

https://resources.oncourse.iu.edu/access/content/user/ealucas/Filemanager_Pu..._50-150mm/RAW/

And please post your results here.

For your info when adjusting the white balance, the picture was shot indoors at night (during our family Christmas get-together). The room was lit with standard incandescent lighting, but I also had two White Lightning strobes with medium softboxes pointed at the ceiling at opposite ends of the great room, triggered by a hotshoe-mounted radio trigger on my Pentax K-x.

If you do download the image, you'll see that even at f/2.8 the lens is razor sharp.

[JHD]

I do have Pentax 50-135 and I can say photos taken with it are much more natural and pleasing.

Interesting, I find the colors overly saturated.

[janstew]

The older 50-150 but the data will tell you otherwise no idea why .........the colours are pretty much spot on
cheers
Jan