Originally posted by ElJamoquio I just got one, simply for use as a wide-angle lens (minimal zooming), since I was recommended away from the DA14 and didn't particularly care for the DA15 and 21.
It's ok. If I wasn't so into primes, I'd do the Tamron 17-50 and the 70-200. The latter being an extremely high rated lens for IQ, worthy of professional usage.
I work more on the other end, so if I had two lenses, it would be my FA35 and the 70-200 (or Tokina 80-200). However, I'm still left needing something wide from time to time, so the Tamron 17-50 fits that bill. I'd have not a single hesitation of doing these two zooms.
As far as being "easier to sell" if you go with Pentax, I'd not be so sure. Do your research on the SDM issues, which unknown people will claim, for the fourth year in a row, that they are resolved, with zero evidence. Additionally, the pricing scheme is all screwed up so people will likely take a hit, if they bought higher on the retail market or a correspondingly high price on the used market. Couple that with the aversion many have with arguably the two more disastrous lenses in the SDM line (16-50/50-135), and your assertion about ease of sale idea might not hold.
By the way, I just got my 17-50 new for 285 Euros shipped. It sells used (and they almost always sell) for 200-220 on ebay. Sometimes a bit lower, but they are holding their value pretty damn well. Not to mention, over the last 12 months, the 70-200 had jumped about 200 Euros on the used and NOS market since Pentax instituted its MAP pricing in the US which created used and new pricing inflation in Europe, too. When the bottom falls out, then you're going to see that your criteria of resale/retained value/ease of sale should not be a huge factor. Just get what you will use.