[autumnsbliss]

I have seen great debates on here as well as some other forums about certain group of lenses that a drool worthy but money burning.

First let me say that I am not a pro-level person but I like many here have gotten very engulfed by the photography hobby bug. I love how photography is an always learning, creative hobby/profession that keeps you on the move. I have a few months before I pull a trigger on two lenses but I would like to hear other fellow Pentaxians thoughts on what lens will better suit my area of interest.

The one lens that I KNOW that I want is the fisheye (most likely the 10-17 unless someone has a better alternative ). I just drool at so many pictures posted here and all around (not just Pentax but other DSLR systems) that I just have to get a fisheye. I even was giddy when my best friend's wedding photography put his on for some fun shots. It just seems like a really fun lens to use and it's definitely something I have been patiently saving up for.

The other lens that I am having trouble in deciding is a fast lens that I can use for indoor track, speedskating, and night time baseball. By now many of you probably can guess what lenses I'm about to suggest that is one my undecided list: the Sigma/Tamron 70-200 2.8, Sigma 50-150 2.8, and Pentax 50-135. Now here is my top 3 things that are really important to me: AFspeed>Length>Weathersealing. Just to show my reasoning I will explain a bit more on each.

Number 1 most important thing is focusing speed. Since I'm dealing with not so great light in a fast pace environment I need something that is going to find people on the track quickly and accurately. I know pentax is not the greatest in low light but then again I can always go manual if I have some distance. But preferably some people here who have had experience with Sigma, Pentax, and Tamron may have some knowledge on which of the three have less hunting problems. I have 2 wonderful old 50mm 2f and 35mm 2.8f lenses that are manual and I just find it very hard to be in manual for sports with that short of distance.

Next is length. This isn't a HUGE issue but I just can't make a decision on if it is truly necessary to have 200mm or would I be fine with 135mm or 150mm. The reason why I do have it as important is my cousin is in Center Field position for baseball and it would be nice not having to crop but then again I usually go to his day games bringing my 70-300mm out to catch some very nice shots. Very indecisive I am.

Lastly is weather sealing, this issue isn't really not big for me. This lens will mostly be used for indoor use only besides maybe baseball. I might use it outdoors but probably not a whole lot since I have a 300mm. Sure it would be nice to have weather sealing for that extra warm feeling of your lens being safe from the elements but it's definitely my last priority. Very nice but not all that interested in this case.

I'm very excited and really trying to contain myself to not whipping out some cash to get the fisheye (maybe it will contain me until I make my final decision on the 2nd lens ). Once again any opinions, experiences with the brands, lenses, or relation to my situation would be very much appreciated.

[soccerjoe5]

i read a review on the tamron (dpreview i think) and it didn't look impressive. i would go for the sigma or pentax

[k100d]

if AF Speed is your main priority, then the Sigma is your best choice. The Tamron relies on screw drive motor and the DA* is actually not a very fast focusing lens either. and if you're doing sports, the extra range of the 70-200 will help. as for weather sealing, just get some baggies if you're worried. people have had their cameras out in worse conditions.
i'm assuming you have one of the newer bodies that supports HSM