Help selecting the lens Please!

Mystic · 05-15-2009, 02:37 PM

Hi, i'll tell you my short story.
Camera body K20d next to it I bought Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5
it served me pretty well i even could shoot all weddings only with this one lens.
I also bought a cheap sigma 70-300mm APO but recenlty decided to invest into better glass.
so I bought pentax 50-135mm and use it for outdoor portraits.
later decided that i need something valuable in wide angle section, so bought Pentax 12-24mm.. and now I'm in dilemma.

whether to buy Tamron 28-75mm and sell Sigma 17-70mm

since i have pentax 12-24mm for my wide anlge shots..
will tamron be significantly better for indoor portraits? with its constant aperture than sigma..?

do any of you have experience with both of these lenses? what about tamron's AF in low light?
sigma's low light AF is pretty slow..
would you recommend to switch sigma into Tamron?

appreciate your time and advices..

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 05-15-2009, 03:05 PM

I think it is time you get a good prime.

asdf · 05-16-2009, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by Mystic

sigma's low light AF is pretty slow..

Try a flash unit with an AF assist beam.

arjen · 05-17-2009, 01:44 PM

It really is time for a good prime lens. I don't think that you will have that much benefit from trading your Sigma for the Tamron. So a fast Prime could be a better trade. So you're pretty covered and for that special shot, you will have that Prime lens.

I think that most ' cheap' zoomlenses will fail on low light AF, but I can't really help you here.

**NaClH2O** · 05-17-2009, 02:01 PM

Mystic:

I own both lenses and there is really no comparison. After working with it for a while, I use the Sigma 17-70 primarily as a "travel" lens, the Tamron is a much much better lens. It focuses rather quickly in low light, tho to be truthful, I usually use MF for low light shots with all lenses. It's IQ is better than the sigma, and color rendition is better. Besides it simply is much sharper throughout the common ranges of the two. The only thing the Sigma has over the Tamron is the 17-28 focal length. But you now have the 12-24 for that.

To arjen: Neither the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 nor the Tamron 28-75 2.8 are "cheap zoomlenses" The Tamron especially is a stellar lens, and while not in the class of the Tamron, the Sigma is a very good lens.

NaCl( if I had to have only one lens it would be the Tamron 28-75, and I own a bunch of excellent primes)H2O

res3567 · 05-17-2009, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by NaClH2O

Mystic:

I own both lenses and there is really no comparison. After working with it for a while, I use the Sigma 17-70 primarily as a "travel" lens, the Tamron is a much much better lens. It focuses rather quickly in low light, tho to be truthful, I usually use MF for low light shots with all lenses. It's IQ is better than the sigma, and color rendition is better. Besides it simply is much sharper throughout the common ranges of the two. The only thing the Sigma has over the Tamron is the 17-28 focal length. But you now have the 12-24 for that.

To arjen: Neither the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 nor the Tamron 28-75 2.8 are "cheap zoomlenses" The Tamron especially is a stellar lens, and while not in the class of the Tamron, the Sigma is a very good lens.

NaCl( if I had to have only one lens it would be the Tamron 28-75, and I own a bunch of excellent primes)H2O

What about a good copy of the Pentax 16-50?

Jewelltrail · 05-17-2009, 10:34 PM

You may want to consider the Tamron 17-50 2.8, if you haven't already.

Venturi · 05-17-2009, 10:59 PM

I own the DA12-24, Tam17-50 & DA*50-135. I absolutely love all three of them.

And as soon as I can work it in I will have the Tamron 28-75. There are too many times I'm bumping up against the wide end of the 50-135 or the narrow end of the 17-50 and because of the situation sneaker zoom isn't a "good" option and/or I don't have time to switch lenses and get the exposure I want.

robjmitchell · 05-18-2009, 01:47 AM

There is not a lot of room left between the 12-24 and 50-135. Do you use the close focus of the sigma 17-70? you might like a da35 macro, If you want fast for low light you could go 31ltd, 43 ltd, 501.4 or 35/2 if you can find one. There is also a fast 30 (probably weather sealed & sdm) expected within the next few years

The best zoom series for me would be 12-24, tam 28-75, DA*60-250.

soccerjoe5 · 05-18-2009, 01:58 AM

The Tamron 17-50 would seem a great choice if you want a zoom. The 16-50 too.

For a prime, you've got the FA50, 35/2, 43/1.9 and more

05-15-2009, 02:37 PM	#1
Mystic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 490	Help selecting the lens Please! Hi, i'll tell you my short story. Camera body K20d next to it I bought Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 it served me pretty well i even could shoot all weddings only with this one lens. I also bought a cheap sigma 70-300mm APO but recenlty decided to invest into better glass. so I bought pentax 50-135mm and use it for outdoor portraits. later decided that i need something valuable in wide angle section, so bought Pentax 12-24mm.. and now I'm in dilemma. whether to buy Tamron 28-75mm and sell Sigma 17-70mm since i have pentax 12-24mm for my wide anlge shots.. will tamron be significantly better for indoor portraits? with its constant aperture than sigma..? do any of you have experience with both of these lenses? what about tamron's AF in low light? sigma's low light AF is pretty slow.. would you recommend to switch sigma into Tamron? appreciate your time and advices..

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
selecting first prime	olenl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	06-03-2010 08:19 AM
Sports Help Selecting ONE	ajtour	Post Your Photos!	6	03-15-2010 05:08 AM
Help selecting...	rmtagg	Photographic Technique	17	05-30-2008 09:34 PM
Help with selecting a portrait lens	MSM	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	01-14-2008 10:06 PM
Help selecting first lenses	Chilichoco	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	05-14-2007 01:11 PM

05-15-2009, 03:05 PM	#2
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	I think it is time you get a good prime.

05-16-2009, 01:30 PM	#3
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	Originally posted by Mystic sigma's low light AF is pretty slow.. Try a flash unit with an AF assist beam.

05-17-2009, 01:44 PM	#4
arjen Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands Posts: 31	It really is time for a good prime lens. I don't think that you will have that much benefit from trading your Sigma for the Tamron. So a fast Prime could be a better trade. So you're pretty covered and for that special shot, you will have that Prime lens. I think that most ' cheap' zoomlenses will fail on low light AF, but I can't really help you here.

05-17-2009, 02:01 PM	#5
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	Mystic: I own both lenses and there is really no comparison. After working with it for a while, I use the Sigma 17-70 primarily as a "travel" lens, the Tamron is a much much better lens. It focuses rather quickly in low light, tho to be truthful, I usually use MF for low light shots with all lenses. It's IQ is better than the sigma, and color rendition is better. Besides it simply is much sharper throughout the common ranges of the two. The only thing the Sigma has over the Tamron is the 17-28 focal length. But you now have the 12-24 for that. To arjen: Neither the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 nor the Tamron 28-75 2.8 are "cheap zoomlenses" The Tamron especially is a stellar lens, and while not in the class of the Tamron, the Sigma is a very good lens. NaCl( if I had to have only one lens it would be the Tamron 28-75, and I own a bunch of excellent primes)H2O

05-17-2009, 09:43 PM	#6
res3567 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Houston Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,876	Originally posted by NaClH2O Mystic: I own both lenses and there is really no comparison. After working with it for a while, I use the Sigma 17-70 primarily as a "travel" lens, the Tamron is a much much better lens. It focuses rather quickly in low light, tho to be truthful, I usually use MF for low light shots with all lenses. It's IQ is better than the sigma, and color rendition is better. Besides it simply is much sharper throughout the common ranges of the two. The only thing the Sigma has over the Tamron is the 17-28 focal length. But you now have the 12-24 for that. To arjen: Neither the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 nor the Tamron 28-75 2.8 are "cheap zoomlenses" The Tamron especially is a stellar lens, and while not in the class of the Tamron, the Sigma is a very good lens. NaCl( if I had to have only one lens it would be the Tamron 28-75, and I own a bunch of excellent primes)H2O What about a good copy of the Pentax 16-50?

05-17-2009, 10:34 PM	#7
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180	You may want to consider the Tamron 17-50 2.8, if you haven't already.

05-17-2009, 10:59 PM	#8
Venturi Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Tulsa, OK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,636	I own the DA12-24, Tam17-50 & DA*50-135. I absolutely love all three of them. And as soon as I can work it in I will have the Tamron 28-75. There are too many times I'm bumping up against the wide end of the 50-135 or the narrow end of the 17-50 and because of the situation sneaker zoom isn't a "good" option and/or I don't have time to switch lenses and get the exposure I want.

05-18-2009, 01:47 AM	#9
robjmitchell Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne Aus Posts: 1,776	There is not a lot of room left between the 12-24 and 50-135. Do you use the close focus of the sigma 17-70? you might like a da35 macro, If you want fast for low light you could go 31ltd, 43 ltd, 501.4 or 35/2 if you can find one. There is also a fast 30 (probably weather sealed & sdm) expected within the next few years The best zoom series for me would be 12-24, tam 28-75, DA*60-250.

05-18-2009, 01:58 AM	#10
soccerjoe5 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,343	The Tamron 17-50 would seem a great choice if you want a zoom. The 16-50 too. For a prime, you've got the FA50, 35/2, 43/1.9 and more