Sell Sigma 17-70 and FA 50 to fund DA* 16-50?

hinman · 01-09-2009, 08:17 PM

Does it make sense to consolidate 2/3 lens to a DA* zoom

From:

1 My favorite Pentax FA 50 f/1.4 since I have Cosina 55mm f/1.2 to back up the normal lens need with MF on a very dependable Cosina 55mm with super fast f/1.2 aperture
2 Very usable Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 1:2.3 Macro
3 Vivitar 24mm f/2.8 with 'A' from Cosina -- My best secret with a plastic lens that is my 2007/2008 favorite primes before I get DA 21mm limited

To:

Pentax DA* 16-50 f/2.8 since I already have
Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8

I don't seem to be loosing much in the selling the two or even 3 lens and replace it with DA* 16-50 f/2.8. I like everything in 50-135mm except the weight but it is understandable for fast lens and a great zoom worth keeping. Of course, I worry about lemons in DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 like everyone does but the good pictures of 16-50 can't be ignored. And the 16-50 is a great wide to normal, better in quality than the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 but double the price and with high risk of disappointment with lemons.

What do you think along my thinking? I love the Sigma with the extra 50 to 70mm and that fit me way better than the 16-50mm range. But I am a guy with constant changes to try out every lens of good choices.

And I don't lose much in missing my FA 50 f/1.4 as I do have the Cosina 55mm f/1.2 to cover except the autofocus and A metering which I already suck it up when I decide to pursue happiness in mix use of Manual Focusing and AF.

Last edited by hinman; 01-20-2009 at 05:24 PM.

leeak · 01-09-2009, 10:33 PM

Hi Hin, if I were you, I would trade the FA50/1.4 and S17-70 for a DA16-50/2.8. I love my DA16-50/2.8 and the only think to watch out for is distortion at 16mm. Otherwise it's on my camera 90%+ of the time. With both DA* you are covered from 16-135mm and with rain, wind, or shine you are ready to go. I definitely think it's an upgrade for you and I guess you know that already.

BTW you said from before that you were thinking of adding a Nikon system, is that still the plan?

hinman · 01-09-2009, 11:46 PM

Originally posted by leeak

Hi Hin, if I were you, I would trade the FA50/1.4 and S17-70 for a DA16-50/2.8. I love my DA16-50/2.8 and the only think to watch out for is distortion at 16mm. Otherwise it's on my camera 90%+ of the time. With both DA* you are covered from 16-135mm and with rain, wind, or shine you are ready to go. I definitely think it's an upgrade for you and I guess you know that already.

That is my current thinking. I hope to be the lucky one to get the good copy of DA* 16-50 f/2.8 in one single purchase. What are the chances if I buy it from a known place that have less lemon? Any taker for what that shop is like? Some place that store the good batch of DA* 16-50 with good statistics with no return on L version of Pentax L-DA 16-50mm f/2.8. By the way L-DA is the Lemon designated version. And I have no idea of the % of L-DA in the overall population of current production of DA 16-50. My bad to start out the totally unscientific rumor mill with buzz phrase of empty thinking out of the blues.

Quote:

BTW you said from before that you were thinking of adding a Nikon system, is that still the plan?

Yes, the plan is permanently on hold after I find myself beaten up with LBA in M42 and Zeiss glasses along with limited and DA* zoom. I tried every good lens people mention about so that I know a big part of the Pentax story. And I decided to stay focus on Pentax in 2009. It is the year NOT to run into Nikon. My 2nd body is the upcoming Pentax White Camera with my recently built Pentax limited trio in 21/35/77 limited lens series.

And if fund is allowed, I have my Panasonic LX3 for the movie to make up what is in Nikon D90 with 720p movie. So my travel and backup system go like this

HinTheMan: Pentax White Camera K2000 SE
+++++
Sweetie: Panasonic LX3 with Leica 24-60mm lens and 720p movie

[/list]

roentarre · 01-10-2009, 01:16 AM

This option would be really easy for me.

Da* 16-50 has been a good companion when I am outdoor doing landscape. Especially with a longer trip, this zoom is very reliable. Without this zoom, I would find it very difficult to take waterfalls photographs...

heatherslightbox · 01-10-2009, 09:43 AM

Hin,
From a practical standpoint, consolidating 3 very good lenses into 1 excellent (if you get a good copy) lens is a no-brainer--go for it.

As long as you order from somewhere that has a good return policy (ie--Adorama or B&H), you don't need to worry so much about getting a bad copy, aside from the aggravation of having to pack it back up and return it.

BTW, I like your travel kit.

I may be going on an outing with a local photography club next Saturday and I'm thinking of taking my small kit--K200, 21, 43, and 100 just to see how I like shooting with an all-prime kit.

Heather

dan aron · 01-14-2009, 07:29 PM

Sorry, about squeezing here but I need advices too.
I have a little bit different setup. Sigma 10-20mm and 35mm f2 to DA*16-50mm? Is it worth it? I know this one is really hard one and depends on preferred style. What's your choice?

hinman · 01-14-2009, 10:45 PM

Originally posted by dan aron

Sorry, about squeezing here but I need advices too.
I have a little bit different setup. Sigma 10-20mm and 35mm f2 to DA*16-50mm? Is it worth it? I know this one is really hard one and depends on preferred style. What's your choice?

I can't say what the other will say. But if I were you, I won't consider the DA* 16-50 f/2.8 as it is way too expensive to have and you have the risk in bad copy and it will be a bad idea to lose your Sigma 10-20mm. Your 35mm f/2.0, I assume FA is top notch for the 35mm with faster speed. If I were you, I will keep 10-20mm, keep 35mm f/2.0 unless you are ready to swap the FA 35mm to FA 31mm or DA 35mm f/2.8. The path to DA 35mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro is questionable as the two lens are different with one good for speed and the DA good for close up.

Again, if I were you and with a budget, I rather keep the two good lens and think of cheaper but good alternative to cover the range -- Sigma 17-70 OR Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. The later is a better choice if you ask me. But Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0 should not be ignored as the extra 50mm to 70mm is very versatile and it makes the Sigma 17-70mm ideal as a wide-normal-portrait walk around. IMO, any 17-70mm range will beat 16-50mm for versatility. In terms of optical IQ, the Tamron 17-50mm is a better lens and of course, the best is the good copy of DA* 16-50.

Don't sell the good lens that you really love just to get to greener pasture with better lens people rave about. Sell only the loser or gear that has bored you after lengthly period of use.

Hin

dan aron · 01-15-2009, 04:35 AM

Originally posted by hinman

.......

Thanks, for the answer. I'm new in Pentax and I'm just building my arsenal. I'm now leaning towards 10-20mm and 35mm. I really like to get one good copy of 16-50mm but I think you're right, it might be little frustrating try to get one and I'm also ordering from another country. So, I'm now pretty convinced I should get those two and not try my luck.

But hey I need one more shout to the 35mm because also Sigma's 18-50 f2.8 might be possibility.

leadbelly · 01-15-2009, 04:50 AM

Go for it Hin... the 16-50 is on my camera 95% of the time! From paid shoots to family snapshots... this lens is great!

platinum · 01-15-2009, 07:15 AM

Hi hinman,

about me you can sell Sigma 17-70 and Vivitar 24mm, but you must keep FA 50 f/1.4 !

deuces · 01-15-2009, 08:14 AM

Have you considered size/weight issues? I think the sigma 17-70 is 16oz to the DA16-50's 20oz. And 72mm filter size vs that huge 77mm.

Mechan1k · 01-15-2009, 03:37 PM

I might be interested in your 17-70mm if/when it comes time to sell it.

Toshi · 01-16-2009, 02:07 AM

I've also been thinking of getting a DA*16-50 by selling one of my lenses, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Macro. The Sigma is a great lens, but I tend to shoot at wide angles with it and the 16mm would be nice. I've been spoiled my DA*300 quality (image and build) and would love to have the same in a wide zoom with the 16-50. Not that the Sigma is bad quality! I love the lens but something about the DA* has the extra punch in images. But I think for now, I'll hold off on it since I'm planning on picking up the DA*50-135 first in a couple weeks

hinman · 01-17-2009, 09:33 PM

After some debate with myself, I postpone my 16-50 purchase and keep my Sigma 17-70 for much longer than anticipated. I love the lens and I see lesser a reason not to keep it. I know! I change my mind way too often. I may go for 16-50 when I find a known source like prodigal for cheaper price but with a return policy for lemon

Hin

**Hannican** · 01-17-2009, 11:39 PM

I upgraded from a Sigma 17-70mm to the DA* 16-50 and I'm damn glad that I made that switch. Here's why:

1. I hate twisting the barrel the "wrong" way to zoom in or out (on the Sigma, vs the Pentax)
2. I need weather sealing and splash proofing because I often shoot in rain/fog/mist/forest/ocean type environments
3. I like the look of the DA* better than the 17-70, and the weight of the camera feels more balanced this way
4. COLOR redition is far superior on the DA* than the Sigma- the Sigma was good, but ocassionally I'd get some weird overbearing yellow tints, the Pentax lens never has this issue
5. Quick-shift focusing mode- has helped me overcome some tough AF hunting issues in failing light
6. IT SAYS PENTAX!

Anyway- the Sigma is a great lens, and that added 20mm length definitley helped- plus the Macro capabilities. If that thing turned the other direction and had the color rendition of the Pentax, I'd have kept it and used both. But I don't have that kind of cash laying around!!

01-09-2009, 08:17 PM	#1
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473	*Sell Sigma 17-70 and FA 50 to fund DA 16-50?** Does it make sense to consolidate 2/3 lens to a DA* zoom From: 1 My favorite Pentax FA 50 f/1.4 since I have Cosina 55mm f/1.2 to back up the normal lens need with MF on a very dependable Cosina 55mm with super fast f/1.2 aperture 2 Very usable Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 1:2.3 Macro 3 Vivitar 24mm f/2.8 with 'A' from Cosina -- My best secret with a plastic lens that is my 2007/2008 favorite primes before I get DA 21mm limited To: *Pentax DA 16-50 f/2.8 since I already have Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8** I don't seem to be loosing much in the selling the two or even 3 lens and replace it with DA* 16-50 f/2.8. I like everything in 50-135mm except the weight but it is understandable for fast lens and a great zoom worth keeping. Of course, *I worry about lemons in DA 16-50mm f/2.8** like everyone does but the good pictures of 16-50 can't be ignored. And the 16-50 is a great wide to normal, better in quality than the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 but double the price and with high risk of disappointment with lemons. What do you think along my thinking? I love the Sigma with the extra 50 to 70mm and that fit me way better than the 16-50mm range. But I am a guy with constant changes to try out every lens of good choices. And I don't lose much in missing my FA 50 f/1.4 as I do have the Cosina 55mm f/1.2 to cover except the autofocus and A metering which I already suck it up when I decide to pursue happiness in mix use of Manual Focusing and AF. Last edited by hinman; 01-20-2009 at 05:24 PM.

01-09-2009, 11:46 PM	#3
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473 Original Poster	Originally posted by leeak Hi Hin, if I were you, I would trade the FA50/1.4 and S17-70 for a DA16-50/2.8. I love my DA16-50/2.8 and the only think to watch out for is distortion at 16mm. Otherwise it's on my camera 90%+ of the time. With both DA* you are covered from 16-135mm and with rain, wind, or shine you are ready to go. I definitely think it's an upgrade for you and I guess you know that already. That is my current thinking. I hope to be the lucky one to get the good copy of DA* 16-50 f/2.8 in one single purchase. What are the chances if I buy it from a known place that have less lemon? Any taker for what that shop is like? Some place that store the good batch of DA* 16-50 with good statistics with no return on L version of Pentax L-DA 16-50mm f/2.8. By the way L-DA is the Lemon designated version. And I have no idea of the % of L-DA in the overall population of current production of DA 16-50. My bad to start out the totally unscientific rumor mill with buzz phrase of empty thinking out of the blues. Quote: BTW you said from before that you were thinking of adding a Nikon system, is that still the plan? Yes, the plan is permanently on hold after I find myself beaten up with LBA in M42 and Zeiss glasses along with limited and DA* zoom. I tried every good lens people mention about so that I know a big part of the Pentax story. And I decided to stay focus on Pentax in 2009. It is the year NOT to run into Nikon. My 2nd body is the upcoming Pentax White Camera with my recently built Pentax limited trio in 21/35/77 limited lens series. And if fund is allowed, I have my Panasonic LX3 for the movie to make up what is in Nikon D90 with 720p movie. So my travel and backup system go like this HinTheMan: Pentax White Camera K2000 SE +++++ Sweetie: Panasonic LX3 with Leica 24-60mm lens and 720p movie [/list]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Should I sell these lenses to fund a DA70mm?	Chillibones	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	10-03-2010 09:22 AM
Re-Fund America	Driver3	General Talk	2	06-18-2010 07:00 AM
just got a manual sigma 75-300 - what to do keep or sell ?	simons-photography	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	08-02-2009 10:49 PM
Sell K10D to fund K20D....	Buddha Jones	Pentax DSLR Discussion	30	01-12-2009 09:55 PM

01-09-2009, 10:33 PM	#2
leeak Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 245	Hi Hin, if I were you, I would trade the FA50/1.4 and S17-70 for a DA16-50/2.8. I love my DA16-50/2.8 and the only think to watch out for is distortion at 16mm. Otherwise it's on my camera 90%+ of the time. With both DA* you are covered from 16-135mm and with rain, wind, or shine you are ready to go. I definitely think it's an upgrade for you and I guess you know that already. BTW you said from before that you were thinking of adding a Nikon system, is that still the plan?

01-10-2009, 01:16 AM	#4
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	This option would be really easy for me. Da* 16-50 has been a good companion when I am outdoor doing landscape. Especially with a longer trip, this zoom is very reliable. Without this zoom, I would find it very difficult to take waterfalls photographs...

01-10-2009, 09:43 AM	#5
heatherslightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,599	Hin, From a practical standpoint, consolidating 3 very good lenses into 1 excellent (if you get a good copy) lens is a no-brainer--go for it. As long as you order from somewhere that has a good return policy (ie--Adorama or B&H), you don't need to worry so much about getting a bad copy, aside from the aggravation of having to pack it back up and return it. BTW, I like your travel kit. I may be going on an outing with a local photography club next Saturday and I'm thinking of taking my small kit--K200, 21, 43, and 100 just to see how I like shooting with an all-prime kit. Heather

01-14-2009, 07:29 PM	#6
dan aron Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Finland Posts: 55	Sorry, about squeezing here but I need advices too. I have a little bit different setup. Sigma 10-20mm and 35mm f2 to DA*16-50mm? Is it worth it? I know this one is really hard one and depends on preferred style. What's your choice?

01-14-2009, 10:45 PM	#7
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473 Original Poster	Originally posted by dan aron Sorry, about squeezing here but I need advices too. I have a little bit different setup. Sigma 10-20mm and 35mm f2 to DA16-50mm? Is it worth it? I know this one is really hard one and depends on preferred style. What's your choice? I can't say what the other will say. But if I were you, I won't consider the DA 16-50 f/2.8 as it is way too expensive to have and you have the risk in bad copy and it will be a bad idea to lose your Sigma 10-20mm. Your 35mm f/2.0, I assume FA is top notch for the 35mm with faster speed. If I were you, I will keep 10-20mm, keep 35mm f/2.0 unless you are ready to swap the FA 35mm to FA 31mm or DA 35mm f/2.8. The path to DA 35mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro is questionable as the two lens are different with one good for speed and the DA good for close up. Again, if I were you and with a budget, I rather keep the two good lens and think of cheaper but good alternative to cover the range -- Sigma 17-70 OR Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. The later is a better choice if you ask me. But Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0 should not be ignored as the extra 50mm to 70mm is very versatile and it makes the Sigma 17-70mm ideal as a wide-normal-portrait walk around. IMO, any 17-70mm range will beat 16-50mm for versatility. In terms of optical IQ, the Tamron 17-50mm is a better lens and of course, the best is the good copy of DA* 16-50. Don't sell the good lens that you really love just to get to greener pasture with better lens people rave about. Sell only the loser or gear that has bored you after lengthly period of use. Hin

01-15-2009, 04:35 AM	#8
dan aron Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Finland Posts: 55	Originally posted by hinman ....... Thanks, for the answer. I'm new in Pentax and I'm just building my arsenal. I'm now leaning towards 10-20mm and 35mm. I really like to get one good copy of 16-50mm but I think you're right, it might be little frustrating try to get one and I'm also ordering from another country. So, I'm now pretty convinced I should get those two and not try my luck. But hey I need one more shout to the 35mm because also Sigma's 18-50 f2.8 might be possibility.

01-15-2009, 04:50 AM	#9
leadbelly Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 597	Go for it Hin... the 16-50 is on my camera 95% of the time! From paid shoots to family snapshots... this lens is great!

01-15-2009, 07:15 AM	#10
platinum Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 269	Hi hinman, about me you can sell Sigma 17-70 and Vivitar 24mm, but you must keep FA 50 f/1.4 !

01-15-2009, 08:14 AM	#11
deuces Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 168	Have you considered size/weight issues? I think the sigma 17-70 is 16oz to the DA16-50's 20oz. And 72mm filter size vs that huge 77mm.

01-15-2009, 03:37 PM	#12
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	I might be interested in your 17-70mm if/when it comes time to sell it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-16-2009, 02:07 AM	#13
Toshi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 431	I've also been thinking of getting a DA16-50 by selling one of my lenses, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Macro. The Sigma is a great lens, but I tend to shoot at wide angles with it and the 16mm would be nice. I've been spoiled my DA300 quality (image and build) and would love to have the same in a wide zoom with the 16-50. Not that the Sigma is bad quality! I love the lens but something about the DA* has the extra punch in images. But I think for now, I'll hold off on it since I'm planning on picking up the DA*50-135 first in a couple weeks

01-17-2009, 09:33 PM	#14
hinman Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fremont, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,473 Original Poster	After some debate with myself, I postpone my 16-50 purchase and keep my Sigma 17-70 for much longer than anticipated. I love the lens and I see lesser a reason not to keep it. I know! I change my mind way too often. I may go for 16-50 when I find a known source like prodigal for cheaper price but with a return policy for lemon Hin

01-17-2009, 11:39 PM	#15
Hannican Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Irvine, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 485	I upgraded from a Sigma 17-70mm to the DA* 16-50 and I'm damn glad that I made that switch. Here's why: 1. I hate twisting the barrel the "wrong" way to zoom in or out (on the Sigma, vs the Pentax) 2. I need weather sealing and splash proofing because I often shoot in rain/fog/mist/forest/ocean type environments 3. I like the look of the DA* better than the 17-70, and the weight of the camera feels more balanced this way 4. COLOR redition is far superior on the DA* than the Sigma- the Sigma was good, but ocassionally I'd get some weird overbearing yellow tints, the Pentax lens never has this issue 5. Quick-shift focusing mode- has helped me overcome some tough AF hunting issues in failing light 6. IT SAYS PENTAX! Anyway- the Sigma is a great lens, and that added 20mm length definitley helped- plus the Macro capabilities. If that thing turned the other direction and had the color rendition of the Pentax, I'd have kept it and used both. But I don't have that kind of cash laying around!!