Pentax SMCPDA 16-45mm f/4 vs Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5

iamweasel · 06-26-2008, 11:05 AM

I have to choose only one of them. What do you think I should get?

maxwell1295 · 06-26-2008, 11:49 AM

I have no experience with the 16-45/4 myself, but by all accounts it's an excellent lens. I have the 17-70 and I'm lovin' it! It's plenty sharp throughout the range and if you like getting up close, it's a fun lens to use. It's practically welded to my camera. Unless you need to have a constant aperture lens (I lust for the DA*16-50) I think it's safe to say that you couldn't go wrong with either. I'm just a little more partial to the Sigma.

Bramela · 06-26-2008, 01:30 PM

I will second Maxwell's comments. I have the 17-70 and I would definitely not part with it. Its a brilliant lens, sharp as one could ever want, and is a great macro lens as well. Can be picked up these days at , what I would call, a reasonable price.

simonkit · 06-26-2008, 01:55 PM

You'll be lucky to get a definitive answer to this one - lots of happy owners of both on the forum, both very good lenses...

I chose the Sigma 17-70, mainly due to its larger zoom range and can honestly say I find it excellent

simon

tybeck · 06-26-2008, 02:01 PM

Simon is right. I have the Pentax 16-45mm f/4. Very nice, sharp across its whole range. Really great, especially for the price. My only caution is that f/4 isn't fast enough for some lower light shots since you have to kick up the sensitivity. If you want faster on the wide I'd go with the Sigma. Since I mainly use my 16-45mm as a hiking/walk-around lens it's most used during the day and not so much of on issue for me.

Originally posted by simonkit

You'll be lucky to get a definitive answer to this one - lots of happy owners of both on the forum, both very good lenses...

I chose the Sigma 17-70, mainly due to its larger zoom range and can honestly say I find it excellent

simon

iamweasel · 06-26-2008, 02:29 PM

Thank you for the inputs guys. I did some search and found a lot of positive feedback for this particular Sigma lens. The shots are impressive too!

I will decide tonight if I am going to order it. Got the go ahead from the commander-in-chief (wife).

heatherslightbox · 06-26-2008, 03:33 PM

Another vote for the 17-70. Indeed, the fast speed on the wide end does work very well in lower light situations. I love the range. I am curious to see what the Pentax version will be like, but unless someone comes out with a 17-70/2.8, I don't expect that I'll be getting rid of my Sigma anytime soon.

Heather

Ed in GA · 06-26-2008, 03:47 PM

Although I no longer have it, I'll cast a vote for the DA 16-45.

Raybo · 06-26-2008, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by Ed in GA

Although I no longer have it, I'll cast a vote for the DA 16-45.

Thanks Ed!

Ray

Ed in GA · 06-26-2008, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

Thanks Ed!

Ray

And Ray,

How are you liking the lens?

Ed

Nesster · 06-26-2008, 04:48 PM

I would trade my 16-45 for the sigma, mainly for the bit of extra long range. The pentax is a decent lens, not as sharp as people may think as it disguises any short comings with contrast. I really like it... but would trade 1mm at the wide end for the 70 at the long.

Raybo · 06-26-2008, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by Ed in GA

And Ray,

How are you liking the lens?

Ed

It shares time on my camera along with my 105 series I.

Ray

Entropy · 06-27-2008, 06:58 AM

I have the Sigma 17-70 and love it. I don't see the benefit of constant aperture if that aperture is constantly slower than that of a variable aperture lens - the Sigma will be equal to or faster than the 16-45 at all focal length ranges where the two lenses overlap. The Sigma only hits 4.5 in the last few mm of zoom at the long end.

Great image quality, more range than the 16-45, and faster. The only benefit I can think of for the 16-45 might be:
Quick shift focus (I assume the 16-45 has this for rapid finetuning of AF results manually)
Possibly smaller and lighter
Pentax name

**rparmar** · 06-27-2008, 07:19 AM

I did this comparison and bought the DA16-45mm. No regrets. Reasons?

1mm in wide end means more to me than 25mm in tele
better IQ overall and especially border resolution on wide end
no need for speed at wide end since DOF too small to be useful
however need faster speed at portrait lengths (so use different lenses)
constant aperture nice
quick-shift focus handy (wish my FA limiteds had this)
100g lighter

I'd buy the DA12-24mm or DA14mm as well if I had the money and they improved the distortion characteristics. In the meantime I await the DA15mm with great interest.

Raybo · 06-27-2008, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by rparmar

I did this comparison and bought the DA16-45mm. No regrets. Reasons?

1mm in wide end means more to me than 25mm in tele
better IQ overall and especially border resolution on wide end
no need for speed at wide end since DOF too small to be useful
however need faster speed at portrait lengths (so use different lenses)
constant aperture nice
quick-shift focus handy (wish my FA limiteds had this)
100g lighter

I'd buy the DA12-24mm or DA14mm as well if I had the money and they improved the distortion characteristics. In the meantime I await the DA15mm with great interest.

I have to agree with you rparmar!

"no need for speed at wide end since DOF too small to be useful"

The 16-45 is a great lens!

Ray

06-26-2008, 11:05 AM	#1
iamweasel Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 49	Pentax SMCPDA 16-45mm f/4 vs Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 I have to choose only one of them. What do you think I should get?

06-27-2008, 07:19 AM	#14
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	I did this comparison and bought the DA16-45mm. No regrets. Reasons? 1mm in wide end means more to me than 25mm in tele better IQ overall and especially border resolution on wide end no need for speed at wide end since DOF too small to be useful however need faster speed at portrait lengths (so use different lenses) constant aperture nice quick-shift focus handy (wish my FA limiteds had this) 100g lighter I'd buy the DA12-24mm or DA14mm as well if I had the money and they improved the distortion characteristics. In the meantime I await the DA15mm with great interest.

06-27-2008, 07:47 PM	#15
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by rparmar I did this comparison and bought the DA16-45mm. No regrets. Reasons? 1mm in wide end means more to me than 25mm in tele better IQ overall and especially border resolution on wide end no need for speed at wide end since DOF too small to be useful however need faster speed at portrait lengths (so use different lenses) constant aperture nice quick-shift focus handy (wish my FA limiteds had this) 100g lighter I'd buy the DA12-24mm or DA14mm as well if I had the money and they improved the distortion characteristics. In the meantime I await the DA15mm with great interest. I have to agree with you rparmar! "no need for speed at wide end since DOF too small to be useful" The 16-45 is a great lens! Ray

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 17-70mm vs pentax 16-45mm or OTHER!	clipsed	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	02-22-2010 07:50 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS: SMCPDA 16-45mm Zoom f/4.0 ED/AL	mmzymxf	Sold Items	8	04-12-2008 07:57 PM
Pentax SMCPDA 16-45mm Zoom f/4.0 ED/AL	Ardy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	03-17-2007 07:15 PM
sigma DC 17-70mm vs. Pentax DA 16-45mm	Edvinas	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	11-19-2006 10:48 PM

06-26-2008, 11:49 AM	#2
maxwell1295 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Long Island, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,703	I have no experience with the 16-45/4 myself, but by all accounts it's an excellent lens. I have the 17-70 and I'm lovin' it! It's plenty sharp throughout the range and if you like getting up close, it's a fun lens to use. It's practically welded to my camera. Unless you need to have a constant aperture lens (I lust for the DA*16-50) I think it's safe to say that you couldn't go wrong with either. I'm just a little more partial to the Sigma.

06-26-2008, 01:30 PM	#3
Bramela Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Newcastle Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,284	I will second Maxwell's comments. I have the 17-70 and I would definitely not part with it. Its a brilliant lens, sharp as one could ever want, and is a great macro lens as well. Can be picked up these days at , what I would call, a reasonable price.

06-26-2008, 01:55 PM	#4
simonkit Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: North Wales, UK Posts: 645	You'll be lucky to get a definitive answer to this one - lots of happy owners of both on the forum, both very good lenses... I chose the Sigma 17-70, mainly due to its larger zoom range and can honestly say I find it excellent simon

06-26-2008, 02:01 PM	#5
tybeck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 452	Simon is right. I have the Pentax 16-45mm f/4. Very nice, sharp across its whole range. Really great, especially for the price. My only caution is that f/4 isn't fast enough for some lower light shots since you have to kick up the sensitivity. If you want faster on the wide I'd go with the Sigma. Since I mainly use my 16-45mm as a hiking/walk-around lens it's most used during the day and not so much of on issue for me. Originally posted by simonkit You'll be lucky to get a definitive answer to this one - lots of happy owners of both on the forum, both very good lenses... I chose the Sigma 17-70, mainly due to its larger zoom range and can honestly say I find it excellent simon

06-26-2008, 02:29 PM	#6
iamweasel Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 49 Original Poster	Thank you for the inputs guys. I did some search and found a lot of positive feedback for this particular Sigma lens. The shots are impressive too! I will decide tonight if I am going to order it. Got the go ahead from the commander-in-chief (wife).

06-26-2008, 03:33 PM	#7
heatherslightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,599	Another vote for the 17-70. Indeed, the fast speed on the wide end does work very well in lower light situations. I love the range. I am curious to see what the Pentax version will be like, but unless someone comes out with a 17-70/2.8, I don't expect that I'll be getting rid of my Sigma anytime soon. Heather

06-26-2008, 03:47 PM	#8
Ed in GA Guest	Although I no longer have it, I'll cast a vote for the DA 16-45.

06-26-2008, 04:40 PM	#9
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by Ed in GA Although I no longer have it, I'll cast a vote for the DA 16-45. Thanks Ed! Ray

06-26-2008, 04:42 PM	#10
Ed in GA Guest	Originally posted by Raybo Thanks Ed! Ray And Ray, How are you liking the lens? Ed

06-26-2008, 04:48 PM	#11
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	I would trade my 16-45 for the sigma, mainly for the bit of extra long range. The pentax is a decent lens, not as sharp as people may think as it disguises any short comings with contrast. I really like it... but would trade 1mm at the wide end for the 70 at the long.

06-26-2008, 05:01 PM	#12
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by Ed in GA And Ray, How are you liking the lens? Ed It shares time on my camera along with my 105 series I. Ray

06-27-2008, 06:58 AM	#13
Entropy Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Owego, NY Posts: 976	I have the Sigma 17-70 and love it. I don't see the benefit of constant aperture if that aperture is constantly slower than that of a variable aperture lens - the Sigma will be equal to or faster than the 16-45 at all focal length ranges where the two lenses overlap. The Sigma only hits 4.5 in the last few mm of zoom at the long end. Great image quality, more range than the 16-45, and faster. The only benefit I can think of for the 16-45 might be: Quick shift focus (I assume the 16-45 has this for rapid finetuning of AF results manually) Possibly smaller and lighter Pentax name