Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-07-2014, 10:07 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Sigma 17-70 Contemporary vs Sigma 17-50 2.8

I would just wondering if anyone has both or if there are any reviews comparing the two against each other? I'm really loving my Sigma 17-70C but was wondering if I'm missing out on anything with the other Sigma. I know I'm losing 1 stop of light but I think with either my K3 or K5 I don't mind pushing the ISO up a little to get the images I need. Price wise right now they are both really close I mean like a 20 dollar difference. For me I like being able use the extra focal length the Contemporary give me as a check of a lot of my pictures I'm either shooting at above 50mm or between 17-28 mm. I'm eventually wanting to get into more professional type photography (meaning paid) so I'm willing to pay for the right lens.

Anyone have any thoughts on this.

09-07-2014, 10:18 AM   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: North Bohemia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,245
Or wait after photokina..
09-07-2014, 11:19 AM - 1 Like   #3
Veteran Member
nicoprod's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Berlin, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 519
You simply cannot go wrong with the DC 17-50mm. Sharp wide open on the K-3. I use it professionally for everything. Check my website.
09-07-2014, 12:47 PM   #4
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,670
I would guess that you might find it hard to get opinions from people who have owned both lenses. People tend to buy one or the other if they are looking at a Sigma normal zoom for APS-C. At the current price points, I can see that it might be a difficult decision. When I bought my 17-70/2.8-4 C, the spread was almost $100.


Steve

09-07-2014, 06:26 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I can see that it might be a difficult decision. When I bought my 17-70/2.8-4 C, the spread was almost $100.


Steve
Same here, about the same spread. My biggest concern is the optical quality. I have my 50's and 70-200 2.8 so I believe I'm covered there.
09-07-2014, 07:27 PM   #6
Veteran Member
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,630
From my point of view, there is a ''little'' difference from 17-50mm F2.8 to 17-70mm C. but you can check it here:

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Lens Image Quality

Move the mouse over and off the picture, and the little arrow above will show you what lens is.

17-50mm is a clear winner.
09-07-2014, 09:26 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JimmyDranox Quote
From my point of view, there is a ''little'' difference from 17-50mm F2.8 to 17-70mm C. but you can check it here:

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Lens Image Quality

Move the mouse over and off the picture, and the little arrow above will show you what lens is.

17-50mm is a clear winner.
Big difference based on those cameras. Hmmm
09-07-2014, 11:27 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY
Posts: 649
I had both lenses for a brief period and tested them side by side on my K-3. I found that the 17-50 2.8 is better optically in the low to mid of the range, but not by as much towards 50mm (distortion at 17mm on the 17-50 it's noticeably better than the 17-70). At 70mm, the 17-70 at f4 is identical to the 17-50 2.8's, cropped equivalent shot at f5.6. Better IQ and gain one stop 17-50, lose one stop when cropping to get the equivalent of the 70mm. Weight, size and range goes to the 17-70. Both are sharp lenses, the 17-50 being slightly sharper (not as significant as what is depicted in the link posted previously in the thread - maybe because tested on different camera? or copy of lens they tested?) Note that distortion is pretty bad at the wide end of the 17-70 until about 21mm. So I would suggest that it comes down to your needs. If wide angle is more important I would go with the 17-50, if you need that extra reach go with the 17-70, just realize it's more like a 21-70 since the 17-21 range suffers from a lot of distortion. I ended up keeping the 17-70 C and selling the 17-50. Either way, you can't go wrong with either lens. BTW, the 17-50 I tested it with was newest version, I think their are at least 2 versions out there.

09-08-2014, 09:16 AM   #9
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,670
QuoteOriginally posted by transam879 Quote
Weight, size and range goes to the 17-70.
...and there is the rub. The 17-70 is not a light lens. It was the weight penalty along with the extra money for the 17-50 that put the 17-70 in my bag.


Steve
09-08-2014, 03:20 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
...and there is the rub. The 17-70 is not a light lens. It was the weight penalty along with the extra money for the 17-50 that put the 17-70 in my bag.


Steve

How are the corners of your 17-70? I have the old 2.8-4.5 version and even at f/8 the corners at 17mm are never sharp due to field curvature. At f/11 it's acceptable but still not good enough.
09-08-2014, 06:38 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY
Posts: 649
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
How are the corners of your 17-70? I have the old 2.8-4.5 version and even at f/8 the corners at 17mm are never sharp due to field curvature. At f/11 it's acceptable but still not good enough.
The whole frame is sharp from low 20s-70 at f4 on mine. I stay away from the 17 end, stopping down it does sharpen a bit at 17mm but the distortion is pretty bad. I use it on aperture-priority mode and typically keep it set at f4 through the low 20s-70mm range. I had the older version before and it is a significant upgrade from that.
09-08-2014, 07:21 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
How are the corners of your 17-70? I have the old 2.8-4.5 version and even at f/8 the corners at 17mm are never sharp due to field curvature. At f/11 it's acceptable but still not good enough.
That is one area I was not happy with I'm my 17-70. 17mm corners were really bad. My work around was to make sure nothing of importance was in the corners. Framing is crucial when shooting at 17-20 mm.
09-09-2014, 12:29 AM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by bass3587 Quote
That is one area I was not happy with I'm my 17-70. 17mm corners were really bad. My work around was to make sure nothing of importance was in the corners. Framing is crucial when shooting at 17-20 mm.

And this is what's preventing me from upgrading my old lens. There isn't much choice out there. The Pentax 16-45 is mediocre, the 16-50/2.8 is horribly expensive and prone to SDM failure, the 17-70/4 is twice as expensive as the Sigma but with no real performance gains, the Tamron 17-50/2.8 is hit or miss (decentering issues), the Sigma 18-35/1.8 has the most awkward focal range ever (too long on the wide end, too short on the long end).

Looks like I'm gonna be stuck with mine indefinitely.
09-09-2014, 10:28 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Original Poster
One other thing we can do is shoot with our prime lenses. I'm only missing the 35mm from my set of lenses. My 15mm Pentax f4 is unreal and my 50's are all great.
09-09-2014, 11:18 AM   #15
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,670
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
How are the corners of your 17-70
QuoteOriginally posted by transam879 Quote
The whole frame is sharp from low 20s-70 at f4 on mine.
What he said. At 17mm the corners are not as sharp as the center, but it is due to (I think) spherical aberration, not field curvature (does not improve with de-focus). At 70mm the lens less sharp than at 50mm.


Steve

---------- Post added 09-09-14 at 11:20 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
the 17-70/4 is twice as expensive as the Sigma but with no real performance gains
You've got that one right. It is really not a very good lens.


Steve

(...ducking for cover...)

---------- Post added 09-09-14 at 11:24 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by bass3587 Quote
One other thing we can do is shoot with our prime lenses. I'm only missing the 35mm from my set of lenses. My 15mm Pentax f4 is unreal and my 50's are all great.
There is the key. I may yet buy the DA 15/4 Limited, but for now I shoot with the Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye when I want quality at the wide end*. Yes, the Zen is that good and very compact too. I thought I would have to retire it when I bought the K-3, but was nicely surprised to find that it still delivers nicely with that body.


Steve

* Rectilinear is not that important to me at the short end of things. I seldom have a need to de-fish.
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!
corners, f4, k-mount, lens, lenses, pentax lens, post, sigma, slr lens, steve, vs sigma
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 17-70 V1 vs Contemporary Spodeworld Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 18 05-02-2014 07:29 AM
Deciding between Sigma 17-50/f2.8 and 17-70/f2.8-4.0 Contemporary norArn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 08-12-2013 12:13 AM
Sigma 17-50/2.8 vs DA16-45 or 17-70 NitroDC Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-18-2013 03:52 PM
Tamron 17-50 2.8 to Sigma 17-50 2.8: Should I make the jump? johnnie518 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 12-29-2012 02:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:37 AM. | 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