Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-12-2009, 01:53 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,738
Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 Vs Sigma 17-70mm

I have both lenses and can't keep both. I like the constant F/2.8 of the 28-70mm but I miss the wide angle of the 17-70mm.
I want a walk around lens. What is you opinion on this.
Those who have both witch one do you prefer? I would like the opinion since some days I talk myself to sell the 17-70mm and another days I want to keep it. Any advice.
Thanks in advance.

08-12-2009, 03:04 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
I haven't used either lens but I think you need to decide on your priorities to help you choose. If you need the wide angle, or if you need constant f/2.8 it's an easy choice. Higher image quality (I'm guessing the 28-70 has higher IQ?) might be more important than having 17mm, but if you really want to take photos at the wide end then all the image quality in the world at 28mm isn't going to help. It really depends on your photography.
08-13-2009, 09:20 AM   #3
Veteran Member
GLXLR's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 686
I thought the 28-70mm was "extremely" soft, wide open or not. Anyways, from the reviews I have seen, it doesn't seem to be a desirable lens. For a bit more money, you can get the 24-70mm f/2.8. more range and good optical quality. If not the 28-75mm Tamron is also a good bet.
08-13-2009, 10:28 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,738
Original Poster
Thanks CWyatt and GLXLR for your input.
The 24-70mm f/2.8 is a lot more expensive. The Tamron 28-75mm is another choice. My 28-70mm is not as soft as they said at least in my AP-C sensor K10D. I have not try it in my film cameras.

08-13-2009, 12:03 PM   #5
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
I'd say, ask yourself which attribute you can most easily replace with another lens. For instance, consider keeping 17-70 for its focal length range advantage, but a faster prime (perhaps a cheap used manual one, like a 28/2.8 or a 35/2) to replace the advantage the 28-70 gives you in low light. Or keep the 28-70 for general use but add the DA21, M20, or another wide angle prime for the situations whern you need it.

I'd probably going with the first of these options myself if I had those two lenses.
08-13-2009, 02:41 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 384
I have a Sigma 17-70mm and it's actually my most used lens. I'm not sure if I got a better copy than usual, but the images it produces are very sharp! I cannot do without wide angle so the choice was easy for me.
08-13-2009, 03:32 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
17-70mm is an extremely useful range (for me anyway), and I considered the 17-70 when I was looking at Sigma lenses recently, but went with the (still cheap) discontinued 24-60 f/2.8 for speed, and the great reviews it's had. I figure I'll fill the wide-angle gap with a 10-20mm or similar.

Last edited by CWyatt; 08-13-2009 at 11:32 PM.
08-13-2009, 07:17 PM   #8
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,654
QuoteOriginally posted by systemA Quote
I have a Sigma 17-70mm and it's actually my most used lens. I'm not sure if I got a better copy than usual, but the images it produces are very sharp! I cannot do without wide angle so the choice was easy for me.
Everyone' Siggys 17-70 are extremely sharp and venerally very good.

08-15-2009, 10:47 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Mechan1k's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,883
I have been lucky enough to shoot with a 17-70 quickly to test a body ... and it was very sharp ... and colour contrast was awesome.

I have an earlier version of the 28-70 f/2.8 Sigma .. and it can be a little soft wide open at the extreme ends of the zoom range ... and I think the resolution isn't as good at the 17-70 either.

In hindsight now ... I should have gotten a 17-70 and be done with it ... as I really don't shoot wide-open at the 70 end of the 28-70 due to softness. So i doubt I'll miss it if i sell it.

To cover the 17-70mm range I use 2 lenses .... not that I need them ... but eventually if i find a nice 17-70mm ... I'll sell my Sigmas (17-35 and 28-70) as they are huge lenses as well and take up a hell of a room in my bag.

After all that ... my conclusion would be swaying to keep the 17-70
08-16-2009, 12:28 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Prince George, BC Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 644
QuoteOriginally posted by jjdgti Quote
I have both lenses and can't keep both. I like the constant F/2.8 of the 28-70mm but I miss the wide angle of the 17-70mm.
I want a walk around lens. What is you opinion on this.
Those who have both witch one do you prefer? I would like the opinion since some days I talk myself to sell the 17-70mm and another days I want to keep it. Any advice.
Thanks in advance.
I came to the DSLR game a bit late (when the K10D was introduced) and had used my MZ-S and Sigma EX lenses up till then. I did not like the field of view provided by my Sigma 28-70 and other lenses designed for the 35mm format. So, my first priority became the replacement of my lenses with those who's focal length had been designed for the APS sized format. First were the DA*16-50 and 50-135 as they cover the most used focal lengths and some others since, but still waiting out the wide angle choice to see what becomes available. The 14mm is not sufficiently wider than the wide end of my 16-50 and I think the 12-24 is a bit overpriced (should have bought it before the price increase).

Rather long winded preamble, but my point is to suggest that one needs to look at the focal lengths you use, and the 28-70 is simply wrong for this size sensor ...would you have bought a 43-108 for your 35mm?
08-16-2009, 01:50 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
QuoteOriginally posted by MikePerham Quote
my point is to suggest that one needs to look at the focal lengths you use, and the 28-70 is simply wrong for this size sensor ...would you have bought a 43-108 for your 35mm?
Useful focal lengths are pretty much up to the photographers' preferences aren't they? Without knowing what they shoot, their approach and focal length people prefer I wouldn't write off the 28-70 just because it wouldn't be right for me.
08-19-2009, 01:00 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,738
Original Poster
Thank you all for your input. I am planning to keep my 17-70mm since I do not have the budget to buy a wide angle AF prime and do not want to buy a kit lens and go back to square one when I was looking to replace the kit lens.

I put the 28-70mm 2.8 for sale in the marketplace.
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!
17-70mm, 28-70mm, days, f/2.8, k-mount, opinion, pentax lens, sigma, sigma 28-70mm f/2.8, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 IF EX DG HSM - VS - Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Braciola Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-15-2010 04:54 AM
Pentax 17-70mm f/4 or Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 or sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4? shang Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-24-2010 05:30 AM
Sigma 24-70mm, Sigma 28-70mm, or Tamron 28-75mm? gkreth Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 05-23-2010 01:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:38 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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