Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-02-2012, 06:19 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 117
Pentax 18-135 WR vs Sigma 17-70

Hi guys,
I'm looking to sell my Pentax KX and one lens to finance a new K30 + 18-135 WR combo.
My main question is that if I purchase the new 18-135 WR lens will this make my Sigma 17-70 DC 2.8-4.5 redundant? (I also have a Sigma 10-20mm to cover the lost 17mm).
ie How does the Pentax 18-135 WR compare to the Sigma 17-70 DC 2.8-4.5 for picture quality, sharpness, auto focus etc?
Will I lose anything by getting replacing my trusted Sigma 17-70 with the 18-135WR? One thing that jumps out at me is Macro. The Sigma is a macro lens isn't it? Can the 18-135 WR do this or would I lose macro ability?
I would obviously gain weather proofing with the 18-135WR which the Sigma doesn't have.
Any feedback would be welcome.
thanks

08-02-2012, 06:51 AM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,569
I'm thinking from old memories as I've owned both, but not at the same time.
Your Sigma is not quite a true macro, but at 1:2ish it's closer than most lenses. Technically you can let your 17-70 go, as the 18-135 will provide great images from 18-70 with weather seals and a nearly silent motor. AF speed should be as good with the DA perhaps better. Quick shift is a great feature when you need it, that and the quiet focus are very nice.

So other than that silly mm from 17-18, close focus and maybe 1/2 stop of light (plus letting go of an old friend) I'd let the 17-70 go. Don't sell it too soon though, make the 18-135 prove itself!
08-02-2012, 07:04 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 117
Original Poster
Thanks Jim.
Yeah, it's always hard to let go of a good mate! You've made some good points to consider.
cheers,
08-02-2012, 07:15 AM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,104
Very much in the same position as WA-surfer, but my redundancy concern is my Tamron 17-50 F2.8. Over the 17-50 range, I would think the Tamron superior, and certainly in lower light, but when travelling, lightness and simplicity from carrying a single lens can be a blessing ( periodically do business related round the world trips over a couple of weeks), so I'm a little concerned that the Tammy may end up feeling unloved back at home too often.

+ for 18-135 would be the WR if knowingly expected to be out in rain or on a beach/boat (aways nervous about sucking fine salt mist into camera innards); dust exclusion in Aussie summers when out in rural/bush settings; one lens covers more situations so could probably get away with a single lens when travelling with limited carrying capacity (vs carring the 17-50 + DA 55-300 to cover when 'just a bit more' reach is sometimes needed); quicker to get shots in more varied situations while getting the hurry-up from the family vs "hang on, I just need to swap lenses (again)" moments.
- for 18-135 would be inferior outcomes in low light situations, less sharp overall I would think and particularly so in corners, and Tammy left at home. Yet more $$ spent.

One option I have contemplated is to pick up a DA 18-55 WR cheaply for the odd time I really think I REALLY need WR, and stick with Tammy on all other occasions, and keep some money in my pocket for the next LBA moment. DA 18-55 WR pretty small and light so not too hard to find a corner in bag for it and knowingly trade off somewhat lower pic quality when it needs to come out for WR purposes. But doesn't address WR beyond 55mm.


Last edited by southlander; 08-02-2012 at 07:22 AM.
08-02-2012, 08:14 AM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,868
While not a true macro, the 18-135 does focus fairly closely, and will perform pretty well. I did the same kind of calculation a while ago, when mulling over a longer zoom than the 16-45 and the WR really tipped the scale. It's a nice walkaround lens.

I agree with the overlap, though, before you sell the 17-70. I wouldn't be able to resist taking some comparison shots across the zoom range.
08-02-2012, 09:57 AM   #6
Pentaxian
StephenHampshire's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winchester
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,326
QuoteOriginally posted by southlander Quote
Very much in the same position as WA-surfer, but my redundancy concern is my Tamron 17-50 F2.8. Over the 17-50 range, I would think the Tamron superior, and certainly in lower light, but when travelling, lightness and simplicity from carrying a single lens can be a blessing ( periodically do business related round the world trips over a couple of weeks), so I'm a little concerned that the Tammy may end up feeling unloved back at home too often.

+ for 18-135 would be the WR if knowingly expected to be out in rain or on a beach/boat (aways nervous about sucking fine salt mist into camera innards); dust exclusion in Aussie summers when out in rural/bush settings; one lens covers more situations so could probably get away with a single lens when travelling with limited carrying capacity (vs carring the 17-50 + DA 55-300 to cover when 'just a bit more' reach is sometimes needed); quicker to get shots in more varied situations while getting the hurry-up from the family vs "hang on, I just need to swap lenses (again)" moments.
- for 18-135 would be inferior outcomes in low light situations, less sharp overall I would think and particularly so in corners, and Tammy left at home. Yet more $$ spent.

One option I have contemplated is to pick up a DA 18-55 WR cheaply for the odd time I really think I REALLY need WR, and stick with Tammy on all other occasions, and keep some money in my pocket for the next LBA moment. DA 18-55 WR pretty small and light so not too hard to find a corner in bag for it and knowingly trade off somewhat lower pic quality when it needs to come out for WR purposes. But doesn't address WR beyond 55mm.

Interestingly, I have the 18-35 and am considering getting a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 for low light use- the 18-135 is f3.5 up to about 20mm, f4 to about 35mm then f4.5 up to 70 when it dives to f5.6. I still use my 16-45 f4, as the 16mm is a lot wider than 18. Can't comment on the Sigma 17-70 as I have never used one. I can confirm that the 18-135 is pretty reasonable, and can be used as a decent close-up lens.
08-02-2012, 05:55 PM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 117
Original Poster
Thanks guys.
Some interesting points and very helpful.
Good to know that the 18-135WR can do semi macro close ups.
08-02-2012, 06:28 PM   #8
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,194
Here's an album of very small flowers shot with the 18-135... it's not my Tamron 90, but not half bad either....

These little guys from a few feet.



And one of them up close..





DA 18-135 small flowers

08-02-2012, 06:40 PM   #9
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,387
to southlander
Having both the Sigma 17-70 and Pentax 18-55wr - I can confirm that the 18-55 is just as good under the following conditions: If you use the same aperture and are the same distance from subject. Where the Sigma improves on the Pentax is that it's slightly faster and can focus that much closer. So as a normal lens, the pentax is just fine and it's half the size and weight and water resistant. It also focuses very fast and accurately. I used it kayaking last weekend and the camera sat in the bottom of the kayak in two inches of water and it was not damaged.
08-02-2012, 06:53 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,569
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
Having both the Sigma 17-70 and Pentax 18-55wr - I can confirm that the 18-55 is just as good under the following conditions: If you use the same aperture and are the same distance from subject. Where the Sigma improves on the Pentax is that it's slightly faster and can focus that much closer. So as a normal lens, the pentax is just fine and it's half the size and weight and water resistant. It also focuses very fast and accurately. I used it kayaking last weekend and the camera sat in the bottom of the kayak in two inches of water and it was not damaged.
Yeah, my 18-55wr is pretty versatile. One big benefit is the 52mm filters which matches nearly all my primes. Its main downside is distortion, and I don't find it troublesome for 95% of my shots. Still, the 18-135 would be useful if I find the proverbial 'good copy' (once bitten twice shy). Most people find the 18-135 a step up optically, then add range and quiet focus.

Those small flowers are most impressive Norm!
08-02-2012, 08:34 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 307
Had both and sold both. Between the two, 18-135 takes the crown. 17-70 is slightly better in micro contrast but 18-135 is much more contrasty, much better color and the corners are pretty decent if you stop down. I may actually buy another 18-135.
08-05-2012, 03:54 AM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,352
QuoteOriginally posted by southlander Quote
Very much in the same position as WA-surfer, but my redundancy concern is my Tamron 17-50 F2.8. Over the 17-50 range, I would think the Tamron superior, and certainly in lower light, but when travelling, lightness and simplicity from carrying a single lens can be a blessing ( periodically do business related round the world trips over a couple of weeks), so I'm a little concerned that the Tammy may end up feeling unloved back at home too often.
I just got a 18-135 and also have the Tamron 17-50. I must say that the 17-50 doesn't get used much now. It lives on my also now less-used K-x. It used to be my most used lens.

I just returned from Australia where the 18-135 hardly came off my K-30. The Sigma 8-16 went on for the Jenolan Caves, and the 50/1.4 for some restaurant dinners, but that's it.

I'm going to keep the 17-50 though. It's still my go-to lens for general indoor and low-light shooting.
08-05-2012, 07:09 PM   #13
Veteran Member
liukaitc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,008
I think for outdoor event. two camera body, one with ultrai-wide angle lens, one with 18-135..can cover almost everything a photojournalist needed.
08-05-2012, 08:25 PM - 1 Like   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 117
Original Poster
Thanks guys. I just ordered the K30 and 18-135 bundle, so im really looking forward to playing with it when it arrives!
08-06-2012, 11:23 AM   #15
Senior Member
simbon4o's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 258
For the price of the 18-135 you can get sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 which is sharper everywhere compared to the pentax and some money will be saved for something else. If you are going to buy ultra zoom at least buy tamron 18-270 or something it will have more zoom. For me the 18-135 is too expensive for it's performance!
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!
18-135wr, dc, k-mount, lens, macro, pentax, pentax 18-135 wr, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens, wr, wr vs sigma
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 with Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250 dr_romix Pentax K-5 20 08-25-2012 07:19 AM
Pentax 50-135 and Sigma 50-150 Giklab Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 02-28-2012 08:03 AM
The 18-135 Pentax & Sigma 30/1.4 kshapero Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 12-15-2011 02:03 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA 135 2.8 and Sigma 2x TC <cheap! atlnq9 Sold Items 2 10-18-2011 07:58 AM
Replace Sigma 18-125 with Pentax 18-135? lawsonstone Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 12-04-2010 07:32 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:19 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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