[csa]

In the future, I am considering perhaps upgrading my 18-55WR lens. I still would want a zoom, close to this, or even a little wider. I do not want any SDM lenses, as I'm fearful of failure in them. I know this may be foolish, but I've read about them failing quite a bit. Anyway, anything in the Pentax line-up that would be an upgrade in sharpness, fast, etc.? If not what about Sigma or Tamron? I would consider using this lens for night sky photography also.

Thanks in advance!

[bdery]

The obvious answer, since you want wider, would be the 16-85. It fits your requirements.

The 18-135 would be a less expensive, but worthy upgrade too. It's not wider however. Both lenses have DC motors, reportedly more reliable than SDM.

You don't mention if you still want WR, and your budget. If WR isn't important, there are many possibilities.

The Sigma 17-70 is an excellent choice. There are three versions, the most recent ("Contenporary") is great. The older version 1 (I own it and love it, though the 16-85 has made it redundant and I'm going to sell it soon) has better macro capabilities.

Pentax makes a great 17-70 also, but it's SDM and you don't want that. Then there's the discontinued Pentax 16-45.

If you wand a faster lens, Sigma and Tamron have 17-50 f2.8 lenses, and Pentax has the WR 16-50 f2.8. All three are excellent lenses.

That covers most options I can think about. If money is a problem, a used version of the Sigma 17-70 sells for roughly 225$ I think. Probably the cheapest way to upgrade the image quality. Otherwise, the best choice will depend on your actual needs.

[devouges]

I went with the 18-135mm and I love it..... quiet fast focus and pictures are good.

[DeadJohn]

Consider the Pentax 16-85 or 18-135. They have "DC" motors not "SDM". If you value a wide aperture more than you value zoom range, and can live without weather resistance, Sigma and Tamron have 17-70 f2.8 lenses.

[TedW]

I went with the 18-135mm and I love it..... quiet fast focus and pictures are good.

I second this.

[UncleVanya]

The obvious answer, since you want wider, would be the 16-85. It fits your requirements.

The 18-135 would be a less expensive, but worthy upgrade too. It's not wider however. Both lenses have DC motors, reportedly more reliable than SDM.

You don't mention if you still want WR, and your budget. If WR isn't important, there are many possibilities.

The Sigma 17-70 is an excellent choice. There are three versions, the most recent ("Contenporary") is great. The older version 1 (I own it and love it, though the 16-85 has made it redundant and I'm going to sell it soon) has better macro capabilities.

Pentax makes a great 17-70 also, but it's SDM and you don't want that. Then there's the discontinued Pentax 16-45.

If you wand a faster lens, Sigma and Tamron have 17-50 f2.8 lenses, and Pentax has the WR 16-50 f2.8. All three are excellent lenses.

That covers most options I can think about. If money is a problem, a used version of the Sigma 17-70 sells for roughly 225$ I think. Probably the cheapest way to upgrade the image quality. Otherwise, the best choice will depend on your actual needs.

Nothing else to add other than I have the 18-135 and so my 18-55's sit on the shelf now lonely. The info above covers most anything you could want to know. The user reviews section has data on how these fare and the for sale likely has you covered when you want to buy. One stop shopping! Enjoy the journey.

[08amczb]

I've went for the Tamron 17-50 F2.8, it much better than the kit lens. (I had focus issues first, but it had been fixed under warranty.) I've also bought the 100 macro (I know you would like a zoom) and now all pictures come from any other lens looks soft for my eyes.
Before the Tamron 17-50 I've bought a used Tamron 18-200, but it wasn't too good IQ wise, but I liked how versatile is it. I've used it as my longest lens before I bought the 55-300. Now I don't use it so I suggest avoide the superzooms. I don't have the 18-135, but I think that's an exception.

[Adam]

In the future, I am considering perhaps upgrading my 18-55WR lens. I still would want a zoom, close to this, or even a little wider. I do not want any SDM lenses, as I'm fearful of failure in them. I know this may be foolish, but I've read about them failing quite a bit. Anyway, anything in the Pentax line-up that would be an upgrade in sharpness, fast, etc.? If not what about Sigma or Tamron? I would consider using this lens for night sky photography also.

Thanks in advance!

If you want to see a significant increase in image quality, go for the Sigma 17-70mm "C" or the Pentax 16-85mm. The Pentax 18-135mm is also a very versatile choice.

HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 Contemporary Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

The best value (at the moment) would be the Sigma lens, which is $100 off ($399):
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM Lens for Pentax 884109 B&H

[csa]

I really appreciate all the replies, everyone! It looks like the best upgrade for me will be the Pentax 16-85; or the Sigma 17-70! I really don't need a zoom longer than these; so I'd disregard the 18-135. I've read the reviews before, but now will really re-read those on the 16-85, and the Sigma 17-70!

Adam, thanks for the links, they are a big help! Just reading the link on the Sigma, I see it also has Macro; this would be most useful, for an all around lens. Looks like it will be the Sigma! I will keep my 18-55WR, as the value is low, and it's nice to have WR if needed.

Thanks again, this site is the best!

[Bagga_Txips]

I have the 18-55 WR, the 18-135, and a Sigma 17-50 f2.8. For both me and my wife, the Sigma is the first choice short zoom, unless it is raining. Fortunately I use primes more often.

I have never felt the need for the 17-70, because I have 70+ covered on two other zooms and my DA70. I hope this doesn't seem like showing off, it's more the case that I find the Sigma so nearly perfect, it's very impressive, though too heavy for lazy me!

Maybe another path would be to buy the Tamron 17-50 f2.8, then later but soon you could get the Pentax 10-17 fisheye zoom - I reckon this option would be the most fun while sacrificing a tiny bit of IQ.

[csa]

I think the 70 reach will be handy for me.

[csa]

so I suggest avoide the superzooms.

Actually, in the future, I'm also planning on the Sigma Bigma, 50-500, while selling my DA 55-300, and my Tokina 400.

[csa]

then later but soon you could get the Pentax 10-17 fisheye zoom - I reckon this option would be the most fun while sacrificing a tiny bit of IQ.

I'm not really a "fisheye" lens person.

[furryurry]

If you wand a faster lens, Sigma and Tamron have 17-50 f2.8 lenses, and Pentax has the WR 16-50 f2.8. All three are excellent lenses.

That covers most options I can think about. If money is a problem, a used version of the Sigma 17-70 sells for roughly 225$ I think. Probably the cheapest way to upgrade the image quality. Otherwise, the best choice will depend on your actual needs.

Pentax 16-50 is SDM too. And for $225 you can also find a Tamron 17-50.

[kh1234567890]

The DA16-45 is obviously out of favour these days ...

Flickriver: kh1234567890's photos tagged with smcpda1645mmf40edal