Originally posted by IchabodCrane I suggest you take a look at the Pentax DA 17-70. It's bigger than the Sigma 17-70 C and not as fast at the wide end but the contrast is superior and, IMHO, so is the color for landscapes. By the way, I have both.
Hadn't thought of that one. Reviews seem to be positive, on the other hand it's €100 more than the Sigma version, and slower. How do you think it fares against the Sigma across the frame at 17 mm?
Originally posted by mohb I spent most of my adult life (40+years) carrying cameras and lens up and down some of the biggest mountains in the world and Scotland was my winter playground and no WR. AS I said it's nice to have but I don't see why a lens should be excluded if it isn't.
I didn't exclude any lens due to lack of WR, if I had the two Sigmas and the Tamron would not be on the list
I know people have taken and are still taking pictures in bad weather without weather resistant bodies and lenses, the same way people have taken sports pictures with manual focus lenses in the past. That doesn't mean that weather resistance and autofocus are not a blessing
Originally posted by frogoutofwater What are your typical subjects when you're shooting outdoors and in what kind of light? When my husband is mountain-climbing, about 60% of his photos are of the landscape, about 20% are portraits of the people he's with and the remainder is mixed, including the occasional critter. Generally, there's lots of light (all that snow, not a lot of trees). So the WR 18-135 works well for him and he throws in the nifty fifty (because it's inexpensive, lightweight and fast) - but the 18-135 is what's on his camera most of the time.
Depending on the activity I mostly shoot landscapes, people scrambling/climbing/walking, and the occasional portrait. Wildlife isn't really important, and if something interesting crosses my path I have the HD DA 55-300 WR in my backpack. So wide-angle performance across the frame is important to me, but not necessarily wide open, and I will also zoom in for some whole body shots of climbers from different perspectives.
Originally posted by cali92rs WHy is constant f2.8 important? You aren't going to be shooting landscapes at f2.8. You mention this being an outdoors lens, so you will have plenty of light at your disposal (heck, you may even need an ND filter to use f2.8 in sunny conditions).
I didn't say that f/2.8 is important, I wrote that f/2.8 would be a plus, but not necessary. It can be useful in bad weather, for night sky photography (shots of the milky way) or at dusk or dawn. But it really isn't too important - my favourite lens out of the list doesn't have it.