Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-25-2009, 10:47 AM   #1
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 7
Tamron 17-50 2.8 or sigma 17-70 ? for k200d

I've been shooting with my k200d for about a year now, and I feel I want to upgrade my kit lens to something else.. ( I allready got a 70-300 for those longer range photos)

I've been reading this forum up and down and have come to one of theese two lenses,
please tell me if there are any other lenses in the same focal length/ f-stop.

What I want is.

- A lens that is sharper than the 18-55 II kit lens. ( It seems a bit soft for closeups)
- A lens that delivers great quality images. / not sure if it's the lens or the camera itself, but the quality aint that good when zoomed in.
- I wish to keep the wideangle from about 17-18mm for landscapes
- I really don't wanna go lower than 50mm at the long end.

Witch of theese two lenses will help me the most? The sigma offers 20mm more than the Tamron, but I don't want it so much if the Tamron has sharper/better image quality.

And is it worth the 300-400$ to replace the kit lens? Hope someone can help me with theese questions..

Thanks alot! Great forum btw.

And offcourse, all other tips are welcome!

06-25-2009, 09:44 PM   #2
Veteran Member
Reportage's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 739
try stepping down to adjust the DOF. It will affect the sharpness.

wait for the 10-20 if going for wide angle.
06-25-2009, 10:08 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
I personally think expanding range is more of a priority than upgrading the kit lens. Since you asked whether it's worth it, my 2c is to get a fast fifty / thirtyfive / macro options first before upgrading the kit itself. although to be fair a 2.8 is a range upgrade since you'll be able to shoot at lower light than before.

All of those lenses you mentioned, as well as the DA 16-45 and 17-70 are all good choices if you want to upgrade the kit lens with your criteria. I'd personally go with the Tamron 2.8 for the speed.

To second what reportage said... have you tried shooting at golden hour, f8, 2 second mirror lockup, on tripod, shake reduction off? The kit lens performs best in the 21-45mm, 6.3-8 aperture range, and is pretty sharp within that window, which is the reason I'm still using it for general jobs that doesnt need speed or wider/longer focal range.
06-26-2009, 03:39 AM   #4
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 7
Original Poster
The reason I want to replace the kit lens, is mainly because of a better lens in low light and off course it would be great with 20mm more.

Its men't to be a walkaround lens, I can use most of the time, I really don't want to carry severeal fixed focal lengths with me when im out shooting.. The macro fuction on the sigma is just a bonus, but will the sigma lens give me a better image quality?

Will it be a ok lens for simple portrait work?.. Ive heard alot about CA on both theese lenses, someone says the Sigma is worse and vice versa.

06-26-2009, 04:28 AM   #5
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
You're after a fast walk around lens with good wide angle and good telephoto range.
Tough one.
The Sigma 17-70 is your closest fit, but is f/4.5 at the long end - not the best for portraits.
The Pentax 16-45 and 17-70 are not fast either, but have exceptional sharpness for their price.
Superzooms are out of the question for you as they're neither fast nor the best in sharpness or IQ.
The Tamron 28-75, however, as mentioned is fast, has good telephoto range, but is simply too long at the wide end.

You need to decide what compromise you can make to get the lens that best suits you.
06-26-2009, 05:05 AM   #6
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,611
I'd say the tamron is probably a bit better, IQ wise. I don't own it but I have borrowed a friend's and I feel it's sharper than my sigma. The sigma isn't bad tho. As far as I'm concerned it's a tossup. With the sigma you get 20mm further reach, which is a pretty big deal when you consider that the tamron is only 50mm to begin with, that's a 40% increase.
On the other hand, the tamron is faster, at a constant F2.8 than most of the range of the sigma, and I personally prefer constant aperture lenses. And the IQ is marginally better to my eyes (at least when my copy of the sigma is compared to my friend's copy of the tamron; there can be significant variation between lenses)
Sorry I couldn't help more, but look at it this way, both lenses are pretty damn good. There is also the new Pentax 17-70, but I know nothing about that one.

NaCl(toss a coin, or throw a dart)H2O
06-26-2009, 05:14 AM   #7
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 7
Original Poster
I know Ash

Im turning towards the Sigma, it's more important to get 20mm extra, than the constant 2.8, though it would be nice, it's mostly used with portraits, witch I don't do many of, if portraits becomes a priority, I think a fixed focal would be better.. I do more landscapes and abstract shots...

Thanks for the help so far, if anyone else has something to say, please do
06-26-2009, 05:43 AM   #8
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
OK, then for landscapes and abstract, you probably don't need the speed so much - I'd hazard to say the Pentax 17-70 would be a great choice.

Have a browse through this forum's lens review database for more in depth comments from users of all these lenses.

06-26-2009, 08:00 AM   #9
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 4,361
You could get a 17-50 ish lens & augment it with something longer or a 28-75 lens & augment it with a dedicated wide angle lens. But to get something good to cover 18 to 75 range is not easy... (I know, I want the same thing & am thinking Tamron & keeping the kit lens for wider angles, replacing it with a wide angle lens when I can afford it.)
06-26-2009, 12:03 PM   #10
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 7
Original Poster
What lenses are you looking at? Why don't you consider the Sigma?
06-26-2009, 01:27 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 478
I just bought my first lens for the K200D. I chose the Sigma 24-70 EX F2.8 Macro. I wanted a constant aperture and the 4 year warranty is attractive. If the Pentax 17-70 was more reasonable, I probably would have chosen that - I don't think it's worth it's going rate at F4.0. I did consider the 18-50, but I tend to be on the long end while shooting, so preferred the added reach of the 24-70. Aside from a possible front focus issue (more testing is needed), I really like the lens. Great build, fast focus in low light, and accurate (maybe). I need to spend some more time with it, but it may be another choice if you're willing to give up on the wide end.
06-27-2009, 10:29 AM   #12
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
ToON: Witch of theese two lenses will help me the most? The sigma offers 20mm more than the Tamron, but I don't want it so much if the Tamron has sharper/better image quality.

I can only speak for the Tammy 17-50, which I have shot with for a year and a half on the K20. It is a great lens with many nice features:

6 Year Warranty
Great wide open
Close focusing throughout the zoom range
Nice color & contrast
Vermont Cheddar SHHHAAAAAAAAARP!


I'm sure the Signa is great too--you will not go wrong with either choice.
06-27-2009, 02:37 PM   #13
Veteran Member
GLXLR's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 686
QuoteOriginally posted by toON Quote
I've been shooting with my k200d for about a year now, and I feel I want to upgrade my kit lens to something else.. ( I allready got a 70-300 for those longer range photos)

I've been reading this forum up and down and have come to one of theese two lenses,
please tell me if there are any other lenses in the same focal length/ f-stop.

What I want is.

- A lens that is sharper than the 18-55 II kit lens. ( It seems a bit soft for closeups)
- A lens that delivers great quality images. / not sure if it's the lens or the camera itself, but the quality aint that good when zoomed in.
- I wish to keep the wideangle from about 17-18mm for landscapes
- I really don't wanna go lower than 50mm at the long end.

Witch of theese two lenses will help me the most? The sigma offers 20mm more than the Tamron, but I don't want it so much if the Tamron has sharper/better image quality.

And is it worth the 300-400$ to replace the kit lens? Hope someone can help me with theese questions..

Thanks alot! Great forum btw.

And offcourse, all other tips are welcome!
Looks like someone needs to make a 16-70mm f/2.8 huh?

XD

But since there isn't one, this will be a difficult question to answer.
However, to make it easier, think of the lens roadmap for the lens you pick.

For the 17-50mm, it would make sense that you would want the DA* 50-135mm (great lens btw) so you would have the greatness of f/2.8 from 17-135mm.

On the other hand, the 17-70mm would probably require (you could always get the 50-135mm but there is FL overlap) Sigma/ Tamron 70-200mm. So you get f/2.8 from 17-28(or something)mm and 70-200mm.

So my answer is a question (). If you won't be able to buy another lens in a while, I'd suggest go for the convenience of the Sigma/ Pentax 17-70mm. If you might be able to upgrade lenses soon, then I'd suggest the 16/17-50mm and pick up another lens to compliment it.

HOPE THIS HELPED

Last edited by GLXLR; 06-27-2009 at 02:43 PM.
06-28-2009, 03:30 PM   #14
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 7
Original Poster
Thanks, it helped alot, I'm not planning to buy another lens in a while soon, so the reason I'm changing now is because I have the money, and if it gives me a bit better image quality, 20mm more zoom, and better light efficient. I hope this is the way to go.. I think I'm going to upgrade the camera before buying another lens.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
forum, k-mount, k200d, kit, lens, lenses, pentax lens, quality, sigma, slr lens, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamron 17-50mm, Tamron 28-75mm, Sigma 17-70mm, which lens for my trip to Greece? macky112 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 11-20-2011 03:08 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 (K mount) and Tamron Adaptall 24mm F2.5 with Tamron P/K ada pxpaulx Sold Items 4 08-27-2010 08:47 PM
Help! K200D + Tamron 17-50 rkt Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 53 11-16-2009 10:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:18 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top