Help me choose Pentax 16-85 vs Sigma 18-35

normhead · 08-10-2018, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by donpjt

Sigma 18-35 would be my recommendation. You can get a lot of cheap glass in the 50-100 range, but the 18-35 at 1.8 is great for low light, astrophotography. The lens is very sharp, great bokeh, can't go wrong with it. If you definitely shoot a lot of landscape or night/street photography, don't even think twice about the sigma. disclaimer, I don't own either of them, sorry!

Is astrophotography an intended use?
The Five Best Lenses For Astrophotography On The Market -

Personally I like astrophotography, but not enough to buy a lens just for astrophotography, and it's rare I want to stay up all night getting images. I would never think of an 18-35 for landscape, ƒ 8 us necessary for landscape, not ƒ1.8. If you buy a 1.8 lens for landscape you are going to pay a lot more than you need to. The 16-85 is probably better in any case.

Last edited by normhead; 08-10-2018 at 10:02 AM.

Pen-A · 08-10-2018, 09:34 AM - **2 Likes**

I agree that it´s a hopeless choice.. you need both, maybe

. Are you using a battery grip or willing to buy one? I think it´s mandatory with the Sigma.. I don´t have either lens but I´ve tried 18-35 with Canon 70d without one and it was agony. I also have Sigma 50-150/2.8 for crop which is about same size and weight and grip is a must IMO. I´d pick 16-85 most likely.. or Sigma 17-50 (love it).

jddwoods · 08-10-2018, 10:35 AM - **1 Like**

This is an apples to oranges comparison but unless you absolutely need f1.8 I would think the DA 16-85 would be a much better choice. I bought a used 16-85 for the few times (so I thought) when a zoom would be a little more versatile than primes. A year later the 16-85 has turned into, by far, my most used lens. There are very few times when I really felt limited by the f3.5 to f5.6 aperture. In those instance adding the FA 50mm f1.7 in my bag filled that gap perfectly.

alamo5000 · 08-10-2018, 11:59 AM - **1 Like**

I have no experience with the Sigma. I can tell you all about the 16-85 though. I bought that lens after a long stint of shooting almost exclusively primes. It was sharp and a very very good lens. I actually carried a camera and a single lens (the 16-85) around the world more than one time. I had that camera knee deep in a rice paddy taking pictures of a local with his water buffalo, to hanging off the side of a sail boat, to driving all over the place in the Kenyan outback chasing down wildabeest in a 4wd.

The only weaknesses I found in my lens/camera combo were

1. It does not have constant aperture, which is something I personally prefer.

2. When it gets to low light shooting (and I mean really low) I bumped my head a few times on the K3/16-85 combo.

Everything else about the lens and camera combo is great. If you are shooting in the daytime you will be hard pressed to find a better more durable zoom lens.

For a dynamic 'running around lens' where those scenes just aren't going to stop while you are getting set up the 16-85 is a very good choice.

That said it just depends on your personal use. This is only able to be defined by you.

Cthulhugan · 08-11-2018, 12:10 PM - **1 Like**

I have both. I find it takes more work to get good results with the Sigma than with the Pentax. In low light, though, the Sigma at f/1.8 or 2.0 will get shots you can’t get with any other zoom. Mine got quite a workout in Lewis and Clark Caverns last summer. I think I’ve used it maybe once since then. The 16-85 is my go-to day-to-day lens. If you “feel the need for speed”, get the Sigma. If f/4 is good enough, get the Pentax.

Deedee · 08-13-2018, 02:12 AM

Thank you all for the answers.

They all have been helpful. :-)

There is no other place like Pentax Forums and the members here. Your experience itself is a great knowledge base for fellow Pentaxians.

Cheers!

**Digitalis** · 08-13-2018, 02:44 AM - **1 Like**

The sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 ART is a big lens, it is also rather heavy.

The Pentax lens will be lighter, and cover longer focal lengths: for daylight photography f/1.8 is not particularly useful - stopped down to f/8 both lenses would perform identically across the same FL range. Though at wider apertures, the Sigma ART lens definitely has an advantage.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Help me choose - Pentax FA 100m f2.8 vs.Tamron 90mm f2.8 272Ep vs. Sigma EX 105 f2.8	DonovanJM	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	67	04-28-2018 03:45 PM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Deciding on new Primary Lens [Pentax 16-85 vs Sigma 17-50 vs Tamron 17-50]	Marcus_H	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	38	12-31-2016 07:22 PM
Lens opinion: 18-35 vs 12-24 vs 20-40 vs 16-50	Greinerstudio	Pentax DSLR Discussion	38	06-25-2016 11:05 PM
K-5 with Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250	dr_romix	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	20	08-25-2012 07:19 AM

08-10-2018, 09:22 AM	#16
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by donpjt Sigma 18-35 would be my recommendation. You can get a lot of cheap glass in the 50-100 range, but the 18-35 at 1.8 is great for low light, astrophotography. The lens is very sharp, great bokeh, can't go wrong with it. If you definitely shoot a lot of landscape or night/street photography, don't even think twice about the sigma. disclaimer, I don't own either of them, sorry! Is astrophotography an intended use? The Five Best Lenses For Astrophotography On The Market - Personally I like astrophotography, but not enough to buy a lens just for astrophotography, and it's rare I want to stay up all night getting images. I would never think of an 18-35 for landscape, ƒ 8 us necessary for landscape, not ƒ1.8. If you buy a 1.8 lens for landscape you are going to pay a lot more than you need to. The 16-85 is probably better in any case. Last edited by normhead; 08-10-2018 at 10:02 AM.

08-10-2018, 09:34 AM - 2 Likes	#17
Pen-A Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 675	I agree that it´s a hopeless choice.. you need both, maybe . Are you using a battery grip or willing to buy one? I think it´s mandatory with the Sigma.. I don´t have either lens but I´ve tried 18-35 with Canon 70d without one and it was agony. I also have Sigma 50-150/2.8 for crop which is about same size and weight and grip is a must IMO. I´d pick 16-85 most likely.. or Sigma 17-50 (love it).

08-10-2018, 10:35 AM - 1 Like	#18
jddwoods Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Newark, Delaware Posts: 1,035	This is an apples to oranges comparison but unless you absolutely need f1.8 I would think the DA 16-85 would be a much better choice. I bought a used 16-85 for the few times (so I thought) when a zoom would be a little more versatile than primes. A year later the 16-85 has turned into, by far, my most used lens. There are very few times when I really felt limited by the f3.5 to f5.6 aperture. In those instance adding the FA 50mm f1.7 in my bag filled that gap perfectly.

08-10-2018, 11:59 AM - 1 Like	#19
alamo5000 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,962	I have no experience with the Sigma. I can tell you all about the 16-85 though. I bought that lens after a long stint of shooting almost exclusively primes. It was sharp and a very very good lens. I actually carried a camera and a single lens (the 16-85) around the world more than one time. I had that camera knee deep in a rice paddy taking pictures of a local with his water buffalo, to hanging off the side of a sail boat, to driving all over the place in the Kenyan outback chasing down wildabeest in a 4wd. The only weaknesses I found in my lens/camera combo were 1. It does not have constant aperture, which is something I personally prefer. 2. When it gets to low light shooting (and I mean really low) I bumped my head a few times on the K3/16-85 combo. Everything else about the lens and camera combo is great. If you are shooting in the daytime you will be hard pressed to find a better more durable zoom lens. For a dynamic 'running around lens' where those scenes just aren't going to stop while you are getting set up the 16-85 is a very good choice. That said it just depends on your personal use. This is only able to be defined by you.

08-11-2018, 12:10 PM - 1 Like	#20
Cthulhugan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Calgary Alberta Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 227	I have both. I find it takes more work to get good results with the Sigma than with the Pentax. In low light, though, the Sigma at f/1.8 or 2.0 will get shots you can’t get with any other zoom. Mine got quite a workout in Lewis and Clark Caverns last summer. I think I’ve used it maybe once since then. The 16-85 is my go-to day-to-day lens. If you “feel the need for speed”, get the Sigma. If f/4 is good enough, get the Pentax.

08-13-2018, 02:12 AM	#21
Deedee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 307 Original Poster	Thank you all for the answers. They all have been helpful. :-) There is no other place like Pentax Forums and the members here. Your experience itself is a great knowledge base for fellow Pentaxians. Cheers!

08-13-2018, 02:44 AM - 1 Like	#22
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	The sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 ART is a big lens, it is also rather heavy. The Pentax lens will be lighter, and cover longer focal lengths: for daylight photography f/1.8 is not particularly useful - stopped down to f/8 both lenses would perform identically across the same FL range. Though at wider apertures, the Sigma ART lens definitely has an advantage.