K-5 with Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250

dr_romix · 10-26-2011, 04:48 PM

Hello all,

Please help me out decide which lens to buy.

I initially had Sigma 17-70 for almost 2 years with my K7. You can find sample photos I took with this lens and my K7:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/42220695@N02/

Since I wasn't happy with f4 at its 70mm for indoor pics while using high ISO on K7, I decided to sell it and get Tamron 28-75 f2.8 which has excellent sharpness and is great for taking indoor pics. I also paired that up with Pentax external flash which was a great addition for low lighting.

Then, I decided to sell my K7 and get K5 as I needed better ISO and image quality sensor. Now, when I look back, I kindda regret why I sold my Sigma17-70.. I would have had no problem with its 70mm f4 in low lighting with K5 and extra wide angle would make it a great walk around lens over Tamron 28-75. Sometime I feel Tamron is too long for some places. In terms of IQ, I have to say my Tamron is way sharper than siggi 17-70.

so here what I wanna do: Keep Tamron 28-75 for portrait. I'm going to also purchase Petax 50-135 to add to my portrait lenses.

Quality is still important factor. Macro would be a Plus... I noticed, extra 20mm becomes handy sometime..

so based on your experience especially on K-5, for general walk around, which one do you recommend? ( IQ is important too )

Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250 vs Tammy 18-200 ?

Thanks,

Last edited by dr_romix; 10-26-2011 at 07:40 PM.

GaryH · 10-26-2011, 05:32 PM

I have had the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 , Pentax 18-135 and a Tamron 18-250. I presently own just the 18-135. I feel it is just as good as the Sigma and a little better than the Tamron with less range of cousrse. I also do not feel that the Sigma 18-250 is as good as the Pentax/Tamron 18-250 optically. It does have OS and HSM though. I have been very pleased with the 18-135 and highly recommend it for a walk around lens. I also own the 16-50 but I like to tote the 18-135 more often because of its size. real life picture quality is fairly close between the two. The 16-50 does have 2.8 though and that can be of use at times.

Bob from Aus · 10-26-2011, 05:56 PM

My Sigma 17-70 collects dust except like last week when it was very wet I needed a zoom and some macro ability and a lens I didn't mind if it was destroyed. i think the 17-70 is a good starting lens or a lens that's OK and and does respectable macro. I wouldn't own a 18-135 because I might be tempted to put it on my K5. I think that's like putting dirty petrol in a racing car.

I think one of the really good 17-50 zooms plus a 50-135 is the magic formula that your magnificent K5 deserves. I use three to five primes instead of a wide to medium zoom. My 50-135 along with my primes are the key lenses I use in my kit. Now I have a 500mm prime I might need a zoom to fill in the gap. I can't carry the 500 and the sigma 50-500

RioRico · 10-26-2011, 06:13 PM

The DA18-250 or its Tamron twin are better than the Sigma 18-250. I can't comment on the others.

pentup · 10-26-2011, 09:18 PM

What about the DA 55-300 (seems very well regarded for the price) and the DA 21 Ltd to cover the wider angles? Leaves a big gap, but you can crop. Or add the DA 40 ltd later.

dr_romix · 10-27-2011, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

The DA18-250 or its Tamron twin are better than the Sigma 18-250. I can't comment on the others.

how much would you pay for DA 18-250 used one? I'm currently bidding on one..

glanglois · 10-27-2011, 09:26 AM

I'm happy with my copy of the older 17-70 (not everyone is) and find it ideal for a "house and garden" lens. It's my default lens during the winter, when I'm nearly always indoors. Mostly because I'm a wimp, I guess.

During the summer, emphasis on travel and things involving airplanes, I default to the Sigma 18-250 on my K-5 and Sigma 10-20 on my K-X, using a Blackrapid Double strap.

I could not deal with a minimum focal length of 28mm on an APS-C camera.

Some will be dismissive of these choices but I like the flexibility of the consumer zooms more than I mind the loss of sharpness. It's a matter of style, I think. There are plenty of photographers here who will not settle for anything less than tack sharp. I'm clearly not one.

dr_romix · 10-27-2011, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by glanglois

I'm happy with my copy of the older 17-70 (not everyone is) and find it ideal for a "house and garden" lens. It's my default lens during the winter, when I'm nearly always indoors. Mostly because I'm a wimp, I guess.

During the summer, emphasis on travel and things involving airplanes, I default to the Sigma 18-250 on my K-5 and Sigma 10-20 on my K-X, using a Blackrapid Double strap.

I could not deal with a minimum focal length of 28mm on an APS-C camera.

Some will be dismissive of these choices but I like the flexibility of the consumer zooms more than I mind the loss of sharpness. It's a matter of style, I think. There are plenty of photographers here who will not settle for anything less than tack sharp. I'm clearly not one.

How do you like the IQ on your sigma 18-250?

RioRico · 10-27-2011, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by dr_romix

how much would you pay for DA 18-250 used one? I'm currently bidding on one..

I paid about US$450 new just 3.4 years ago. I haven't looked at current prices via eBay's COMPLETED LISTINGS, but I think they're going in the US$400 range, which IMHO is fairly reasonable. If that seems stiff for a used AF lens with few guarantees, you might check KEH or the marketplace here. The DA/Tamron consistently are rated higher than the Sigma.

dr_romix · 10-27-2011, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

I paid about US$450 new just 3.4 years ago. I haven't looked at current prices via eBay's COMPLETED LISTINGS, but I think they're going in the US$400 range, which IMHO is fairly reasonable. If that seems stiff for a used AF lens with few guarantees, you might check KEH or the marketplace here. The DA/Tamron consistently are rated higher than the Sigma.

$400 is almost the same price for Pentax 18-135 New one with 1 year warranty also WR.. what do you think of that over P 18-250 with possible lens creep and no warranty in $400 price range?

dr_romix · 10-27-2011, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by pentup

What about the DA 55-300 (seems very well regarded for the price) and the DA 21 Ltd to cover the wider angles? Leaves a big gap, but you can crop. Or add the DA 40 ltd later.

I'd rather have it all in one lens especially if I'm travelling to Europe in winter...I think WR would a great advantage...

RioRico · 10-27-2011, 10:57 AM

I just checked COMPLETED LISTINGS. A few Tamrons just sold BIN for ~US$350. Some DA's sold for US$360-$390-$450. I can't compare the 18-250 with the 18-135 because I haven't used the latter, but it's not rated as high. All I can say is that my DA18-250 is my most-used lens, especially when traveling. It's not WR but it's not real leaky either; I've shot in rain. I haven't seen many complaints about bad used copies. Take it from there, eh?

Bob from Aus · 10-27-2011, 02:44 PM

Ask yourself the big question
Convenience vs best image quality? which are you after
It sounds to me you are wanting image quality. If you are building up you kit to deliver great quality then buy really good lenses not ones that will just do. If you are taking a long term view of your kit and building it over the next say 5 years you have enough lenses to fill the gaps as you progressively replace them with better glass.

glanglois · 10-27-2011, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by dr_romix

How do you like the IQ on your sigma 18-250?

A bit soft - after I dropped the K-5 on the asphalt drive, lens first. Now that I'm indoors, both are going in for repair/checkup.

I didn't exhaustively test it prior to (or after) the accident. I bought it after reviews indicated that IQ was a bit better on the Tamron but AF was faster on the Sigma. I tend to shoot things that move quickly and a lot, choosing AF over sharpness. YMMV.

dr_romix · 08-18-2012, 10:20 PM

Thanks

10-26-2011, 04:48 PM	#1
dr_romix Banned Join Date: May 2011 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 321	K-5 with Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250 Hello all, Please help me out decide which lens to buy. I initially had Sigma 17-70 for almost 2 years with my K7. You can find sample photos I took with this lens and my K7: http://www.flickr.com/photos/42220695@N02/ Since I wasn't happy with f4 at its 70mm for indoor pics while using high ISO on K7, I decided to sell it and get Tamron 28-75 f2.8 which has excellent sharpness and is great for taking indoor pics. I also paired that up with Pentax external flash which was a great addition for low lighting. Then, I decided to sell my K7 and get K5 as I needed better ISO and image quality sensor. Now, when I look back, I kindda regret why I sold my Sigma17-70.. I would have had no problem with its 70mm f4 in low lighting with K5 and extra wide angle would make it a great walk around lens over Tamron 28-75. Sometime I feel Tamron is too long for some places. In terms of IQ, I have to say my Tamron is way sharper than siggi 17-70. so here what I wanna do: Keep Tamron 28-75 for portrait. I'm going to also purchase Petax 50-135 to add to my portrait lenses. Quality is still important factor. Macro would be a Plus... I noticed, extra 20mm becomes handy sometime.. so based on your experience especially on K-5, for general walk around, which one do you recommend? ( IQ is important too ) Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250 vs Tammy 18-200 ? Thanks, Last edited by dr_romix; 10-26-2011 at 07:40 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250	dr_romix	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	10-26-2011 07:37 AM
New Sigma 18-250 Vs Used Tamron/Pentax 18-250 regardless of the price	ishchupak	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	11	09-26-2011 01:45 AM
The other LBA (Lens Buying Advice) Tamron/Sigma 70-200, Pentax 50-135, or 60-250?	JinDesu	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-22-2011 10:42 AM

10-26-2011, 05:32 PM	#2
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	I have had the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 , Pentax 18-135 and a Tamron 18-250. I presently own just the 18-135. I feel it is just as good as the Sigma and a little better than the Tamron with less range of cousrse. I also do not feel that the Sigma 18-250 is as good as the Pentax/Tamron 18-250 optically. It does have OS and HSM though. I have been very pleased with the 18-135 and highly recommend it for a walk around lens. I also own the 16-50 but I like to tote the 18-135 more often because of its size. real life picture quality is fairly close between the two. The 16-50 does have 2.8 though and that can be of use at times.

10-26-2011, 05:56 PM	#3
Bob from Aus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,094	My Sigma 17-70 collects dust except like last week when it was very wet I needed a zoom and some macro ability and a lens I didn't mind if it was destroyed. i think the 17-70 is a good starting lens or a lens that's OK and and does respectable macro. I wouldn't own a 18-135 because I might be tempted to put it on my K5. I think that's like putting dirty petrol in a racing car. I think one of the really good 17-50 zooms plus a 50-135 is the magic formula that your magnificent K5 deserves. I use three to five primes instead of a wide to medium zoom. My 50-135 along with my primes are the key lenses I use in my kit. Now I have a 500mm prime I might need a zoom to fill in the gap. I can't carry the 500 and the sigma 50-500

10-26-2011, 06:13 PM	#4
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	The DA18-250 or its Tamron twin are better than the Sigma 18-250. I can't comment on the others.

10-26-2011, 09:18 PM	#5
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	What about the DA 55-300 (seems very well regarded for the price) and the DA 21 Ltd to cover the wider angles? Leaves a big gap, but you can crop. Or add the DA 40 ltd later.

10-27-2011, 07:35 AM	#6
dr_romix Banned Join Date: May 2011 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 321 Original Poster	Originally posted by RioRico The DA18-250 or its Tamron twin are better than the Sigma 18-250. I can't comment on the others. how much would you pay for DA 18-250 used one? I'm currently bidding on one..

10-27-2011, 09:26 AM	#7
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	I'm happy with my copy of the older 17-70 (not everyone is) and find it ideal for a "house and garden" lens. It's my default lens during the winter, when I'm nearly always indoors. Mostly because I'm a wimp, I guess. During the summer, emphasis on travel and things involving airplanes, I default to the Sigma 18-250 on my K-5 and Sigma 10-20 on my K-X, using a Blackrapid Double strap. I could not deal with a minimum focal length of 28mm on an APS-C camera. Some will be dismissive of these choices but I like the flexibility of the consumer zooms more than I mind the loss of sharpness. It's a matter of style, I think. There are plenty of photographers here who will not settle for anything less than tack sharp. I'm clearly not one.

10-27-2011, 10:06 AM	#8
dr_romix Banned Join Date: May 2011 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 321 Original Poster	Originally posted by glanglois I'm happy with my copy of the older 17-70 (not everyone is) and find it ideal for a "house and garden" lens. It's my default lens during the winter, when I'm nearly always indoors. Mostly because I'm a wimp, I guess. During the summer, emphasis on travel and things involving airplanes, I default to the Sigma 18-250 on my K-5 and Sigma 10-20 on my K-X, using a Blackrapid Double strap. I could not deal with a minimum focal length of 28mm on an APS-C camera. Some will be dismissive of these choices but I like the flexibility of the consumer zooms more than I mind the loss of sharpness. It's a matter of style, I think. There are plenty of photographers here who will not settle for anything less than tack sharp. I'm clearly not one. How do you like the IQ on your sigma 18-250?

10-27-2011, 10:32 AM	#9
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by dr_romix how much would you pay for DA 18-250 used one? I'm currently bidding on one.. I paid about US$450 new just 3.4 years ago. I haven't looked at current prices via eBay's COMPLETED LISTINGS, but I think they're going in the US$400 range, which IMHO is fairly reasonable. If that seems stiff for a used AF lens with few guarantees, you might check KEH or the marketplace here. The DA/Tamron consistently are rated higher than the Sigma.

10-27-2011, 10:35 AM	#10
dr_romix Banned Join Date: May 2011 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 321 Original Poster	Originally posted by RioRico I paid about US$450 new just 3.4 years ago. I haven't looked at current prices via eBay's COMPLETED LISTINGS, but I think they're going in the US$400 range, which IMHO is fairly reasonable. If that seems stiff for a used AF lens with few guarantees, you might check KEH or the marketplace here. The DA/Tamron consistently are rated higher than the Sigma. $400 is almost the same price for Pentax 18-135 New one with 1 year warranty also WR.. what do you think of that over P 18-250 with possible lens creep and no warranty in $400 price range?

10-27-2011, 10:52 AM	#11
dr_romix Banned Join Date: May 2011 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 321 Original Poster	Originally posted by pentup What about the DA 55-300 (seems very well regarded for the price) and the DA 21 Ltd to cover the wider angles? Leaves a big gap, but you can crop. Or add the DA 40 ltd later. I'd rather have it all in one lens especially if I'm travelling to Europe in winter...I think WR would a great advantage...

10-27-2011, 10:57 AM	#12
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I just checked COMPLETED LISTINGS. A few Tamrons just sold BIN for ~US$350. Some DA's sold for US$360-$390-$450. I can't compare the 18-250 with the 18-135 because I haven't used the latter, but it's not rated as high. All I can say is that my DA18-250 is my most-used lens, especially when traveling. It's not WR but it's not real leaky either; I've shot in rain. I haven't seen many complaints about bad used copies. Take it from there, eh?

10-27-2011, 02:44 PM	#13
Bob from Aus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,094	Ask yourself the big question Convenience vs best image quality? which are you after It sounds to me you are wanting image quality. If you are building up you kit to deliver great quality then buy really good lenses not ones that will just do. If you are taking a long term view of your kit and building it over the next say 5 years you have enough lenses to fill the gaps as you progressively replace them with better glass.

10-27-2011, 04:43 PM	#14
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	Originally posted by dr_romix How do you like the IQ on your sigma 18-250? A bit soft - after I dropped the K-5 on the asphalt drive, lens first. Now that I'm indoors, both are going in for repair/checkup. I didn't exhaustively test it prior to (or after) the accident. I bought it after reviews indicated that IQ was a bit better on the Tamron but AF was faster on the Sigma. I tend to shoot things that move quickly and a lot, choosing AF over sharpness. YMMV.

08-18-2012, 10:20 PM	#15
dr_romix Banned Join Date: May 2011 Location: Pittsburgh,PA Posts: 321 Original Poster	Thanks