Originally posted by Bertrand3000 I considered for a while an used DA* 16-50 for a very low price, with broken SDM, repaired many times then converted to screw-drive. But they said that the lens got dismantled so many time that they could not guarantee it was still WR (let alone AW).
Even new, this lens is according to review, DA* 16-50 said to be subpar compared to the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50. The latter is supposed to be sharper and lighter, but many people reports front/back focus and needing different adjustment for different focal length, and I am mostly an OVF user, depending on quality of PDAF autofocus. So, Sigma was still the best choice, but I know that a true Pentax lens will give me the warmer colors. I can see that when I use my Sigma 10-20 F3.5, then my Pentax lenses.
Besides, the front element of my Sigma is always dirty, while the front element of my Pentax lenses are always clean. Thanks SP coating!
Indeed, as I was saying, if the most important thing is test results in a lab, the Sigma (and the Tamron) 17-50 wins. But for real world pictures, I know I'm very pleased with the Pentax lens. They're pretty easy to find for a good price right now.
But if you have a 24MP camera and you're a pixel peeper you should probably get the Sigma...
Originally posted by bdery I've acquired a Sony A7C compact FF camera, and its "kit lens" (which sells, alone, for 600 bucks) is retractable, slow aperture, and optically superb.
Indeed, one of the things that keeps me away from Sony, is the price of the lenses and what you get for it... Their 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 sells for $1,173 at the moment. And it's not even a new lens...