Advice re 70-200 lens for K5

Blueheeler · 10-24-2012, 10:10 PM

Folks,

I'm considering upgrading my long lens to a new 70-200 for my K5. My two best options at the moment are the Sigma 2.8 APO EX DG OS HS and the Tamron SP AF f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro. These match my criteria of being long enough and fast enough for portrait work to action shots. I already have the 10-70 range covered with a couple other pieces of glass and can't really see a need to go longer than 200. The K5 has an APS-C chip anyway so it's an effective range of 320 or thereabouts.

Does anyone have any experience of either or both of these?

Also, I note the Sigma has inbuilt image stabilisation which the Tamron does not. My K5 already has on board shake reduction (which gives me satisfactory results) and I understand that one does not use both body and lens stabilisation simultaneously.

Any thoughts on the Sigma OS stabilisation being superior/inferior to the K5 on board stabilisation?

Any other comparative thoughts between the two?

The Sigma is about AUD$450 more than the Tamron so is it $450 optically better, or is that just the price of in-lens stabilisation.

Any comments appreciated.

Thanks

Ray

kesong · 10-24-2012, 11:20 PM

Never used the tamron before.
But from my experience, I feel the sigma OS image stabilization is more effective than in-body SR at the long end (200mm).

Doanh · 10-25-2012, 12:39 AM

I don't know if this will help: I have the Tamron and Sigma EX APO (non DG) version (which reviewers say optically better than the Macro I & II versions). Optically I like the Tamron better in all focal ranges and apertures, better edge to edge sharpness (the Sigma is no slough by any mean), but AF the Sigma is lightning fast (both are screw drive). Now the new Sigma OS HSM version is reportedly better than the Macro versions, then I would say you pay $450 for OS and superior AF speed. Good luck with your lens search.

DSims · 10-25-2012, 01:07 AM

IF you need the AF speed the Sigma OS version is said to be completely worth the price difference.

scunning14 · 10-25-2012, 04:52 AM

I own the tamron. I have read that optics are about the same with a slight edge maybe towards the tamron. The HSM on the sigma might be slightly faster, but the tamron is pretty quick on a K5 from what I've seen. It hunts and is some what slow on my k10. The Tamron is lighter and has better macro capabilities from what I remember. I would say if you can afford it get the sigma, but tamron is a lot cheaper and will do great for portrait work. It is my go to lens now.

JinDesu · 10-25-2012, 05:00 AM

The latest Sigma is supposed to be sharper than the Tamron. It's AF is most likely a bit better - my Tamron tends to hunt a bit, and takes a while to lock.

Is the sharpness $450 better? Not really - but having owned the Tamron and my k-x, if I were getting a k-5 or k-5II, I would go for the new Sigma now (didn't have that option back then).

G and T · 10-27-2012, 03:45 AM

I owned the Sigma and sold it due to 3 HSM failures and for being very soft at all apertures. I now own the Tamron and have found it to be optically superior at all focal lengths and apertures,
but its AF is noisier and slower being a screw drive. I don't regret my decision to change lenses especially since I don't believe the Sigma is worth the price difference,its only advantage was its
fast AF.
Glenn

bdery · 10-29-2012, 04:50 AM

Originally posted by Blueheeler

Any thoughts on the Sigma OS stabilisation being superior/inferior to the K5 on board stabilisation?

They're supposed to be quite similar, and in-lens image stabilization will drain your battery ludicrously fast.

Originally posted by Blueheeler

Any other comparative thoughts between the two?

The Sigma is about AUD$450 more than the Tamron so is it $450 optically better, or is that just the price of in-lens stabilisation.

there are numerous reviews around, on this site, on dpreview, etc. In short, the Tamron is the sharpest, but in general both are great optically. The Tamron's AF is slower, not the best for sports, but since it's less expensive it could be a great choice.

Falcons · 10-29-2012, 05:16 AM

I went with the Sigma (non OS) version Digital Cameras -Buy CHEAP at Digital Camera Warehouse mainly because it was only $600 which was a huge saving over the OS version - almost $1000 difference.

Used it for soccer matches and am very pleased with it fast AF and sharp enough for me.

rawr · 10-29-2012, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by Falcons

I went with the Sigma (non OS) version

Good move

- some time ago I go the same deal from DCW, albeit it was about $40 cheaper then.
I've also found the 70-200 HSM II to be a very decent performer. More than adequate optically, and with quick AF, which is good for action. Only downside is that it is pretty big and heavy, so I usually use a monopod, especially if the light is low.

bdery · 10-29-2012, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by Falcons

I went with the Sigma (non OS) version Digital Cameras -Buy CHEAP at Digital Camera Warehouse mainly because it was only $600 which was a huge saving over the OS version - almost $1000 difference.

Wow, that's quite a great price! I've never heard of that website, is it reputable? Did you get good service?

EDIT : Shoot, it's an Australian website. Now if I could find such a website in the US or Canada, I'd be a happy camper!

**MJL** · 10-29-2012, 09:20 PM

Even it may not has the "fast & furious" AF comparing to Canon or Nikon lenses, I am extremely happy with the Sigma overall performance. I am sad to say their HSM beat Pentax SDM in every aspect.

I use neither lens nor camera OS as I use high shutter speed or monopod whenever possible. In my expereince, the OS can reduce the burst rate almost 100% in low light! Yes, it also eat battery alive, like dbery said.

One reason I am willing to pay extra for the Sigma is they have a 10-year Canadian Warranty.

You can see samples taken with this lens in/outdoor here:

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

steve1307 · 10-30-2012, 10:55 PM

I get a bit confused by all these versions of the same Sigma 70-200 / 2.8. This is my understanding of it.

70-200 / 2.8 EX APO - screwdrive? late 1990's - pretty good at the time
70-200 / 2.8 EX DG - still screwdrive, 2004-05 different coatings - a bit better
70-200 / 2.8 EX DG Macro HSM, 2006 - has fast HSM and shorter MFD but.... IQ was worse than before.
70-200 / 2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II, 2007 - improved the optics compared to the previous one.
70-200 / 2.8 EX DG OS HSM, 2010 - complete re-design and OS with big price hike

DCW has the superceded (2nd last one) only remaining in Pentax mount for $599.
The current OS version is the available everywhere in all mounts and is more than double the price (!!!) at DCW.

I have no interest in the expensive OS one but have been tempted by the cheaper one purely from a "value" point of view. I dont need it but its so cheap! *

The only thing is I dont know how much worse it is than the new one, ....
..... or if it really is much better than the previous (dud) one.....
.... or how it compares to cropping a DA70 or DFA100macro. I've been spoilt by the IQ of these 2 and the DA*300.

If I were to go somewhere specifically to use the 70-200 I probably would always want to take the DA*300 too (and another body if i had one). I dont know if I'd like to carry 2 lenses around that were that heavy, The one with the inferior image might end up staying at home.

$600 torwards a K-5 II or IIs? - maybe soon.
$600 for a 70-200 / 2.8? maybe later.

* Reminds me of a funny story.. Back in the 1950's my dad was working on ocean liners and start smoking because......and I quote...
" I could get them so cheap ! .. I couldn't afford NOT to smoke ! "

mikeSF · 10-30-2012, 11:02 PM

i dont know any of those 5 versions of the sigma, BUT another vote for the Tamron! It is a killer lens and i don't know what i'd do without mine. Sharpness is never lacking and colors are great. A little noisy AF if you are at a funeral or something, but I use mine mostly outdoors.

here are some shots with mine:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/sets/72157629063807169/

**wizofoz** · 10-30-2012, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by rawr

Good move - some time ago I go the same deal from DCW, albeit it was about $40 cheaper then.

Originally posted by steve1307

but have been tempted by the cheaper one purely from a "value" point of view. I don't need it but its so cheap!

me too! couldn't resist it for that price.

AF is much faster than the DA* 60-250 (but I prefer the colours of the Pentax lens)

I'd say go for the redundant lens and save the $$$. You don't need the OS with the in body SR.

10-24-2012, 10:10 PM	#1
Blueheeler New Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Warrandyte, Victoria Posts: 2	Advice re 70-200 lens for K5 Folks, I'm considering upgrading my long lens to a new 70-200 for my K5. My two best options at the moment are the Sigma 2.8 APO EX DG OS HS and the Tamron SP AF f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro. These match my criteria of being long enough and fast enough for portrait work to action shots. I already have the 10-70 range covered with a couple other pieces of glass and can't really see a need to go longer than 200. The K5 has an APS-C chip anyway so it's an effective range of 320 or thereabouts. Does anyone have any experience of either or both of these? Also, I note the Sigma has inbuilt image stabilisation which the Tamron does not. My K5 already has on board shake reduction (which gives me satisfactory results) and I understand that one does not use both body and lens stabilisation simultaneously. Any thoughts on the Sigma OS stabilisation being superior/inferior to the K5 on board stabilisation? Any other comparative thoughts between the two? The Sigma is about AUD$450 more than the Tamron so is it $450 optically better, or is that just the price of in-lens stabilisation. Any comments appreciated. Thanks Ray

10-29-2012, 09:20 PM	#12
MJL Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: The Canadian WetCoast Photos: Albums Posts: 384	Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Even it may not has the "fast & furious" AF comparing to Canon or Nikon lenses, I am extremely happy with the Sigma overall performance. I am sad to say their HSM beat Pentax SDM in every aspect. I use neither lens nor camera OS as I use high shutter speed or monopod whenever possible. In my expereince, the OS can reduce the burst rate almost 100% in low light! Yes, it also eat battery alive, like dbery said. One reason I am willing to pay extra for the Sigma is they have a 10-year Canadian Warranty. You can see samples taken with this lens in/outdoor here: Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database Last edited by MJL; 10-29-2012 at 09:57 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Help/Advice: 4-Month Expired Kodak Elite Chrome 200 ISO	lux-ad-artem	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	2	09-07-2012 07:33 AM
Advice and/or input for the DA 50-200 WR	Jean Poitiers	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	38	03-20-2012 02:33 PM
The other LBA (Lens Buying Advice) Tamron/Sigma 70-200, Pentax 50-135, or 60-250?	JinDesu	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-22-2011 10:42 AM
New here...advice, comments on KX and 50/200 lens...	george c	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	01-20-2010 12:25 PM
70-200/2.8 lenses - novice needing advice	adamkean	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	02-05-2009 04:38 PM

10-24-2012, 11:20 PM	#2
kesong Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: El Dorado Hills, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 191	Never used the tamron before. But from my experience, I feel the sigma OS image stabilization is more effective than in-body SR at the long end (200mm).

10-25-2012, 12:39 AM	#3
Doanh Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Edmonton, AB Posts: 247	I don't know if this will help: I have the Tamron and Sigma EX APO (non DG) version (which reviewers say optically better than the Macro I & II versions). Optically I like the Tamron better in all focal ranges and apertures, better edge to edge sharpness (the Sigma is no slough by any mean), but AF the Sigma is lightning fast (both are screw drive). Now the new Sigma OS HSM version is reportedly better than the Macro versions, then I would say you pay $450 for OS and superior AF speed. Good luck with your lens search.

10-25-2012, 01:07 AM	#4
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	IF you need the AF speed the Sigma OS version is said to be completely worth the price difference.

10-25-2012, 04:52 AM	#5
scunning14 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Virginia Posts: 195	I own the tamron. I have read that optics are about the same with a slight edge maybe towards the tamron. The HSM on the sigma might be slightly faster, but the tamron is pretty quick on a K5 from what I've seen. It hunts and is some what slow on my k10. The Tamron is lighter and has better macro capabilities from what I remember. I would say if you can afford it get the sigma, but tamron is a lot cheaper and will do great for portrait work. It is my go to lens now.

10-25-2012, 05:00 AM	#6
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	The latest Sigma is supposed to be sharper than the Tamron. It's AF is most likely a bit better - my Tamron tends to hunt a bit, and takes a while to lock. Is the sharpness $450 better? Not really - but having owned the Tamron and my k-x, if I were getting a k-5 or k-5II, I would go for the new Sigma now (didn't have that option back then).

10-27-2012, 03:45 AM	#7
G and T Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Langwarrin Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 382	I owned the Sigma and sold it due to 3 HSM failures and for being very soft at all apertures. I now own the Tamron and have found it to be optically superior at all focal lengths and apertures, but its AF is noisier and slower being a screw drive. I don't regret my decision to change lenses especially since I don't believe the Sigma is worth the price difference,its only advantage was its fast AF. Glenn

10-29-2012, 04:50 AM	#8
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	Originally posted by Blueheeler Any thoughts on the Sigma OS stabilisation being superior/inferior to the K5 on board stabilisation? They're supposed to be quite similar, and in-lens image stabilization will drain your battery ludicrously fast. Originally posted by Blueheeler Any other comparative thoughts between the two? The Sigma is about AUD$450 more than the Tamron so is it $450 optically better, or is that just the price of in-lens stabilisation. there are numerous reviews around, on this site, on dpreview, etc. In short, the Tamron is the sharpest, but in general both are great optically. The Tamron's AF is slower, not the best for sports, but since it's less expensive it could be a great choice.

10-29-2012, 05:16 AM	#9
Falcons Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Perth Photos: Gallery Posts: 669	I went with the Sigma (non OS) version Digital Cameras -Buy CHEAP at Digital Camera Warehouse mainly because it was only $600 which was a huge saving over the OS version - almost $1000 difference. Used it for soccer matches and am very pleased with it fast AF and sharp enough for me.

10-29-2012, 06:24 AM	#10
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Falcons I went with the Sigma (non OS) version Good move - some time ago I go the same deal from DCW, albeit it was about $40 cheaper then. I've also found the 70-200 HSM II to be a very decent performer. More than adequate optically, and with quick AF, which is good for action. Only downside is that it is pretty big and heavy, so I usually use a monopod, especially if the light is low.

10-29-2012, 08:48 AM	#11
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,362	Originally posted by Falcons I went with the Sigma (non OS) version Digital Cameras -Buy CHEAP at Digital Camera Warehouse mainly because it was only $600 which was a huge saving over the OS version - almost $1000 difference. Wow, that's quite a great price! I've never heard of that website, is it reputable? Did you get good service? EDIT : Shoot, it's an Australian website. Now if I could find such a website in the US or Canada, I'd be a happy camper!

10-30-2012, 10:55 PM	#13
steve1307 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,130	I get a bit confused by all these versions of the same Sigma 70-200 / 2.8. This is my understanding of it. 70-200 / 2.8 EX APO - screwdrive? late 1990's - pretty good at the time 70-200 / 2.8 EX DG - still screwdrive, 2004-05 different coatings - a bit better 70-200 / 2.8 EX DG Macro HSM, 2006 - has fast HSM and shorter MFD but.... IQ was worse than before. 70-200 / 2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II, 2007 - improved the optics compared to the previous one. 70-200 / 2.8 EX DG OS HSM, 2010 - complete re-design and OS with big price hike DCW has the superceded (2nd last one) only remaining in Pentax mount for $599. The current OS version is the available everywhere in all mounts and is more than double the price (!!!) at DCW. I have no interest in the expensive OS one but have been tempted by the cheaper one purely from a "value" point of view. I dont need it but its so cheap! * The only thing is I dont know how much worse it is than the new one, .... ..... or if it really is much better than the previous (dud) one..... .... or how it compares to cropping a DA70 or DFA100macro. I've been spoilt by the IQ of these 2 and the DA300. If I were to go somewhere specifically to use the 70-200 I probably would always want to take the DA300 too (and another body if i had one). I dont know if I'd like to carry 2 lenses around that were that heavy, The one with the inferior image might end up staying at home. $600 torwards a K-5 II or IIs? - maybe soon. $600 for a 70-200 / 2.8? maybe later. * Reminds me of a funny story.. Back in the 1950's my dad was working on ocean liners and start smoking because......and I quote... " I could get them so cheap ! .. I couldn't afford NOT to smoke ! "

10-30-2012, 11:02 PM	#14
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,622	i dont know any of those 5 versions of the sigma, BUT another vote for the Tamron! It is a killer lens and i don't know what i'd do without mine. Sharpness is never lacking and colors are great. A little noisy AF if you are at a funeral or something, but I use mine mostly outdoors. here are some shots with mine: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeoria/sets/72157629063807169/

10-30-2012, 11:29 PM	#15
wizofoz Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Melbourne, Outer east. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,695	Originally posted by rawr Good move - some time ago I go the same deal from DCW, albeit it was about $40 cheaper then. Originally posted by steve1307 but have been tempted by the cheaper one purely from a "value" point of view. I don't need it but its so cheap! me too! couldn't resist it for that price. AF is much faster than the DA* 60-250 (but I prefer the colours of the Pentax lens) I'd say go for the redundant lens and save the $$$. You don't need the OS with the in body SR.