[pentagor]

Hi!

I would like to upgrade my 18-55 KIT lense. I also need some mm in the 50-70 range, because I have a Tamron 70-300 for the telephoto end.
In your opinion, would a Sigma 17-70 be an upgrade compared to KIT lense, or just a replacement? Pentax DA 18-55 is just a KIT lense, but I'm very happy with the pictures it reproduces. It is a vigneting at 18mm that bothers me, and it's a bit too slow for indor shooting. I wouldn't go for longer than 17 or 18 mm at a wide end. Maybe Pentax 16-45, but that again... need something from 45 to 70.

What would you choose for upgrade and for filling the 50-70 range?

Thanks!

[Lensvision]

The 18-55mm is one of the best kitlenses around and doesn't need upgrading in my opinion. I don't have the Sigma 17-70mm, but from what I've read and heard about it it would be a good addition next to the 18-55mm to fill the gap.

[Ash]

The kit lens is good, but not great.
The DA 16-45, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 18-50/2.8 and Tamron 28-75 are all better for image quality (hence they're all dearer).

Kit lens is the best value for money hands down, but when you need better performance, there's no substitute for quality (and I'm not just talking about Arnott's biscuits!)

The Sigma 17-70 is faster at the wider end (f/2.8), but not that much faster at the telephoto end (f/4.5). If you need speed, then go Tamron 28-75 (if you don't need wide angle so much) - it's f/2.8 all the way. Otherwise, the Sigma 18-50/2.8 is a good compromise, but not as much reach...

Decisions, decisions...

[palmor]

I have the 17-70 and I have to say that I love it. I got it before my trip to Alaska last summer and I'm SO glad I did.

A ton of examples of this lens can be found here:

Alaska Photo Gallery by palmor at pbase.com

[NaClH2O]

Hi!

I would like to upgrade my 18-55 KIT lense. I also need some mm in the 50-70 range, because I have a Tamron 70-300 for the telephoto end.
In your opinion, would a Sigma 17-70 be an upgrade compared to KIT lense, or just a replacement? Pentax DA 18-55 is just a KIT lense, but I'm very happy with the pictures it reproduces. It is a vigneting at 18mm that bothers me, and it's a bit too slow for indor shooting. I wouldn't go for longer than 17 or 18 mm at a wide end. Maybe Pentax 16-45, but that again... need something from 45 to 70.

What would you choose for upgrade and for filling the 50-70 range?

Thanks!

The kit lens is a great "bang for the buck" lens, but there are lots better out there. I would say yes, the Sigma 17-70 is an upgrade to the 18-55, as is the 16-45, the Tamron 28-75. I went for the Tamron, but I knew that I was eventually going to get Pentax DA 12-24, so I could afford to skimp on the wide end. Like virtually everyone else who has the 28-75 I love the lens, but, for me 28mm isn't wide enough, hence the DA 12-24. BTW I have kept the 18-55 and still use it, tho not as much now that I have the 12-24.

NaCl(now I'm thinking of another FE to go along with my 16mm Zenitar)H2O

[gnaztee]

Saltwater,

I'm looking to go the same way as you ( I have the 28-75, looking to buy the 12-24). Do you find you're in between lenses much? In other words, are you sitting in the 15-35 range (or something like that) where you ever wish you had a 16-45 or 17-50 instead? It's a worry of mine, just wondering what you think.

Todd

[heatherslightbox]

I'm also in the 17-70 club and I like it a lot too. I've still got my 18-55, but I'm not sure if I'm going to hang on to it or get rid of it. At this point, for what I do, I don't think that I need to go any wider than 17, so I'm pretty happy.

If you're interested in the 28-75 and don't need to go as wide as the 12-24 or 10-20, but would still like another lens that's a little wider, then something in the 17 to 20-35 range might work. Since these lenses were designed more for film, there aren't too many new ones available anymore, but you may be able to pick one up used reasonably through Fleabay or KEH.

At one point, I was thinking about doing the 28-75 + wider prime or zoom combination, but it would've put more of a strain on my budget than I was comfortable with, so that was one of the things that pushed me towards the 17-70. Another thing was that for me, it made more sense to carry around only 1 lens that could do it all versus 2 lenses that covered basically the same range.

Ultimately, it boils down to 2 questions--budget and space in the camera bag.

HTH,
Heather

[fullframefool]

Hi!

I would like to upgrade my 18-55 KIT lense. I also need some mm in the 50-70 range, because I have a Tamron 70-300 for the telephoto end.
In your opinion, would a Sigma 17-70 be an upgrade compared to KIT lense, or just a replacement? Pentax DA 18-55 is just a KIT lense, but I'm very happy with the pictures it reproduces. It is a vigneting at 18mm that bothers me, and it's a bit too slow for indor shooting. I wouldn't go for longer than 17 or 18 mm at a wide end. Maybe Pentax 16-45, but that again... need something from 45 to 70.

What would you choose for upgrade and for filling the 50-70 range?

Thanks!

I am in the same boat and have just dumped my Nikon D series equipment. Any advice on lenses would be greatly apreciated on my end.

[jdg]

Is the sigma 28-70mm f2.8 EX DG a good walk around lens?

[Torphoto]

The sigma or tammy 28-7x mm F2.8's are fine lenses but why do you need to cover the 50-70mm gap? There is actually such a small difference it's not worth it. Now if you want a better lens yes there are lots better than the kit lens.