Sigma 17-50mm EX f2.8 or Sigma 24-70mm EX f2.8

Skipper74 · 02-14-2013, 04:37 PM

Trying to decide on which one of these to get. I am going to get the Sigma 10-20mm also as I want something for landscapes but i can't decide on which one of these lens to get. I want a lens with a f2.8 that is sharp and be able to use as a walk around lens for most of my pictures. Going to Paris and Greece soon and want a nice everyday lens. But I also like taking pictures of food and would like a lens with good bokeh in the future for our baby. I may be asking a lot but I considered the Pentax 16-50mm f2.8 but I am kinda scared after most reviews. Not to mention with Sigma its a 10 year warranty vs Pentax 2 yr. Any suggestions would be great.

jpaulb · 02-14-2013, 04:45 PM

I bought a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 a couple weeks ago. In the reviews it fared quite well against the Pentax and the Sigma

BethC · 02-14-2013, 06:13 PM

I'll be watching this thread closely because I'm looking to replace a cheap Sigma 28 - 70 that I bought a few years ago. I'm not happy with it, but you get what you pay for. I'm considering the Pentax 16 - 50, but also considered the Tamron that Jpaulb posted about.

You can read what others said on my thread because quite a few chimed in and offered suggestions on lenses in this range.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/215237-not-hap...-what-get.html

mlatour · 02-14-2013, 06:45 PM

I had a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 (pre-HSM version) for a while,

after getting used to having a 18-50mm as a walk-around lens,
I quickly realised that 24mm was just not wide enough for me.

I also tried a couple of Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 over the last few years,
front/back focus issues in both, zoom ring failure in one and overall
lower build quality/fit/handling than what I was used too.

Gave up on that model lens,
too bad because it seems like very good optics but not packaged properly,
it's too 'hit or miss' hoping to get a good copy I find.

Last edited by mlatour; 02-14-2013 at 09:53 PM.

DSims · 02-14-2013, 06:51 PM

I would be considering either the Tamron 28-75/2.8 or the DA17-70/4. I currently have the DA*16-50 which is better than either of those (although the Tamron is pretty good).

As far as SDM failure, I won't be happy if it occurs, but honestly I have other risks in life which are not only much more serious, but also more probable to occur, so I've decided to just get the lenses I need and make good use of them.

stormtech · 02-14-2013, 07:03 PM

Why is this discussion in the K-5 section and not the lens section?

Bob from Aus · 02-14-2013, 07:54 PM

I have an excellent copy of the sigma 17-50 and it is much much better than I had expected. My sigma 10-20 is gathering dust. My favorite landscape lens is the pentax 50-135. I would only have a handful of landscapes I have taken with the 10-20 that I think is any good. I use my fisheye quite a bit within closed spaces, forests or up close. I find I can manage curved lines better than distorted corners.from a ultra wide angle.

SpecialK · 02-14-2013, 08:23 PM

For a single-lens option, I found 50mm too short and 24mm not wide enough, so I went with a 17-70. Not quite the IQ of the two your are considering. Of course, it depends what you shoot.

peos99 · 02-14-2013, 11:29 PM

I bought the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 to replace My 18-55 kit lens, but i must spy that i am not happy with it.
Poor build quality, different results all the time, no sharpness, strange shadows. But maybe i have to calibrate it or something?
I later bought the Pentax 18-135 and i must say that i am more happy with that lens. Good pictures all the time. Guess the Tamron is better in dark conditions but otherwise i don't see any benefits with the Tamron.

Now i am aiming for a Sigma 70mm f2.8 Macro :-)

jpaulb · 02-22-2013, 06:38 PM

Here is a picture I took as a JPEG with the 400$ Tamron 17-50 & the *ist DL. I wonder if that picture would be twice as good if I used the 800$ Sigma?

_IGP4833 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

jpaulb · 02-22-2013, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by BethC

I'll be watching this thread closely because I'm looking to replace a cheap Sigma 28 - 70 that I bought a few years ago. I'm not happy with it, but you get what you pay for. I'm considering the Pentax 16 - 50, but also considered the Tamron that Jpaulb posted about.

You can read what others said on my thread because quite a few chimed in and offered suggestions on lenses in this range.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/215237-not-hap...-what-get.html

These threads remind me of the oil threads in the motorcycle forms or the archery forums, which equipment is better.
When I was living in Germany I had a business selling hunting & fishing trips to Canada. Due to the bureaucracy in Germany I never bothered to get a fishing or hunting licence. A large number of my customer were wild about bow hunting so I hung around an archery club and got totally confused with what was better. During a business trip to Canada I went to LaBaron in Ottawa and explained to a salesman what I wanted to do and that I had absolutely no idea about archery. What would you suggest? 30 minute later after measuring how long my pull was and many questions, he put together a complete setup which cost about 400$, He said, if you didn't like the sport then I was not out a lot of money.
Back in Germany everyone except my teacher Bertram ( 7 times Bavarian champion) joked about my toy archery set. While many of the member were in the club house comparing equipment and drinking bier I was out trying to hit the target. Bertram talked finally me into entering a 3D competition, as usual he won the gold medal, I blew it came home with silver.
He told me "It is not the equipment, it is the person behind the equipment."

mlatour · 02-22-2013, 08:25 PM

Both my Tamron 17-50mm were actually decent / very good when I first got them,
problems arose after a few days/weeks/months of using them almost everyday
in some moderate/rough environments.
Loose/worn internals?, ff-bf focus/sharpness became inconsistent thru the range etc.

My Sigma 18-50mm (see sig) is still going strong after 2.5 years in the same conditions.
Sent in for minor calibration once while I had one of the Tamron's as a back-up
and still shows no sign of wear after all this time in rough service.

In this case what did the extra $ get me:

much better pics = no
better build quality and performance consistency over time = yes

As mentionned, it's too bad because I think the optics of the Tamron lens
are very good, it's just the mechanical package surrounding it seems cheaply done.

**sergysergy** · 02-23-2013, 03:23 AM

+1 for the Sigma (17-50). Not sure why but I prefer Sigmas over Tamrons.

simico · 02-27-2013, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by jpaulb

Here is a picture I took as a JPEG with the 400$ Tamron 17-50 & the *ist DL. I wonder if that picture would be twice as good if I used the 800$ Sigma?

Of course!! And it would be 5x as good if captured with K5IIs! Didn't you know??
See, your toy archery set was only good for silver, with more expensive set than your master you could have won gold

jpaulb · 02-27-2013, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by simico

Of course!! And it would be 5x as good if captured with K5IIs! Didn't you know??
See, your toy archery set was only good for silver, with more expensive set than your master you could have won gold

You are right about the *ist DL vs K5iis; but if I believe that when I would be looking for one of them instead of better suction cups for my toy bow.

02-14-2013, 04:37 PM	#1
Skipper74 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 34	Sigma 17-50mm EX f2.8 or Sigma 24-70mm EX f2.8 Trying to decide on which one of these to get. I am going to get the Sigma 10-20mm also as I want something for landscapes but i can't decide on which one of these lens to get. I want a lens with a f2.8 that is sharp and be able to use as a walk around lens for most of my pictures. Going to Paris and Greece soon and want a nice everyday lens. But I also like taking pictures of food and would like a lens with good bokeh in the future for our baby. I may be asking a lot but I considered the Pentax 16-50mm f2.8 but I am kinda scared after most reviews. Not to mention with Sigma its a 10 year warranty vs Pentax 2 yr. Any suggestions would be great.

02-22-2013, 07:32 PM	#11
jpaulb Forum Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Antigonish, Co. NS, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 62	Originally posted by BethC I'll be watching this thread closely because I'm looking to replace a cheap Sigma 28 - 70 that I bought a few years ago. I'm not happy with it, but you get what you pay for. I'm considering the Pentax 16 - 50, but also considered the Tamron that Jpaulb posted about. You can read what others said on my thread because quite a few chimed in and offered suggestions on lenses in this range. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/215237-not-hap...-what-get.html These threads remind me of the oil threads in the motorcycle forms or the archery forums, which equipment is better. When I was living in Germany I had a business selling hunting & fishing trips to Canada. Due to the bureaucracy in Germany I never bothered to get a fishing or hunting licence. A large number of my customer were wild about bow hunting so I hung around an archery club and got totally confused with what was better. During a business trip to Canada I went to LaBaron in Ottawa and explained to a salesman what I wanted to do and that I had absolutely no idea about archery. What would you suggest? 30 minute later after measuring how long my pull was and many questions, he put together a complete setup which cost about 400$, He said, if you didn't like the sport then I was not out a lot of money. Back in Germany everyone except my teacher Bertram ( 7 times Bavarian champion) joked about my toy archery set. While many of the member were in the club house comparing equipment and drinking bier I was out trying to hit the target. Bertram talked finally me into entering a 3D competition, as usual he won the gold medal, I blew it came home with silver. He told me "It is not the equipment, it is the person behind the equipment." Last edited by jpaulb; 02-22-2013 at 07:42 PM.

02-22-2013, 08:25 PM	#12
mlatour Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Montreal Posts: 197	Both my Tamron 17-50mm were actually decent / very good when I first got them, problems arose after a few days/weeks/months of using them almost everyday in some moderate/rough environments. Loose/worn internals?, ff-bf focus/sharpness became inconsistent thru the range etc. My Sigma 18-50mm (see sig) is still going strong after 2.5 years in the same conditions. Sent in for minor calibration once while I had one of the Tamron's as a back-up and still shows no sign of wear after all this time in rough service. In this case what did the extra $ get me: much better pics = no better build quality and performance consistency over time = yes As mentionned, it's too bad because I think the optics of the Tamron lens are very good, it's just the mechanical package surrounding it seems cheaply done. Last edited by mlatour; 02-22-2013 at 10:03 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro or Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 AF XR Di LD Macro for KR ?	ajaya	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	12-05-2012 11:30 PM
SMC Pentax-D FA 50mm F2.8--VS.--Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG, on Macro and Portrait	ndhonghai	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	6	10-02-2012 01:12 AM
Wanted - Acquired: Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC HSM -or- 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG HSM	AirBoss	Sold Items	8	05-20-2012 06:52 AM
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

02-14-2013, 04:45 PM	#2
jpaulb Forum Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Antigonish, Co. NS, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 62	I bought a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 a couple weeks ago. In the reviews it fared quite well against the Pentax and the Sigma

02-14-2013, 06:13 PM	#3
BethC Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Pennsylvannia Photos: Albums Posts: 377	I'll be watching this thread closely because I'm looking to replace a cheap Sigma 28 - 70 that I bought a few years ago. I'm not happy with it, but you get what you pay for. I'm considering the Pentax 16 - 50, but also considered the Tamron that Jpaulb posted about. You can read what others said on my thread because quite a few chimed in and offered suggestions on lenses in this range. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/215237-not-hap...-what-get.html

02-14-2013, 06:45 PM	#4
mlatour Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Montreal Posts: 197	I had a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 (pre-HSM version) for a while, after getting used to having a 18-50mm as a walk-around lens, I quickly realised that 24mm was just not wide enough for me. I also tried a couple of Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 over the last few years, front/back focus issues in both, zoom ring failure in one and overall lower build quality/fit/handling than what I was used too. Gave up on that model lens, too bad because it seems like very good optics but not packaged properly, it's too 'hit or miss' hoping to get a good copy I find. Last edited by mlatour; 02-14-2013 at 09:53 PM.

02-14-2013, 06:51 PM	#5
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	I would be considering either the Tamron 28-75/2.8 or the DA17-70/4. I currently have the DA*16-50 which is better than either of those (although the Tamron is pretty good). As far as SDM failure, I won't be happy if it occurs, but honestly I have other risks in life which are not only much more serious, but also more probable to occur, so I've decided to just get the lenses I need and make good use of them.

02-14-2013, 07:03 PM	#6
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	Why is this discussion in the K-5 section and not the lens section?

02-14-2013, 07:54 PM	#7
Bob from Aus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,094	I have an excellent copy of the sigma 17-50 and it is much much better than I had expected. My sigma 10-20 is gathering dust. My favorite landscape lens is the pentax 50-135. I would only have a handful of landscapes I have taken with the 10-20 that I think is any good. I use my fisheye quite a bit within closed spaces, forests or up close. I find I can manage curved lines better than distorted corners.from a ultra wide angle.

02-14-2013, 08:23 PM	#8
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	For a single-lens option, I found 50mm too short and 24mm not wide enough, so I went with a 17-70. Not quite the IQ of the two your are considering. Of course, it depends what you shoot.

02-14-2013, 11:29 PM	#9
peos99 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 53	I bought the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 to replace My 18-55 kit lens, but i must spy that i am not happy with it. Poor build quality, different results all the time, no sharpness, strange shadows. But maybe i have to calibrate it or something? I later bought the Pentax 18-135 and i must say that i am more happy with that lens. Good pictures all the time. Guess the Tamron is better in dark conditions but otherwise i don't see any benefits with the Tamron. Now i am aiming for a Sigma 70mm f2.8 Macro :-)

02-22-2013, 06:38 PM	#10
jpaulb Forum Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Antigonish, Co. NS, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 62	Here is a picture I took as a JPEG with the 400$ Tamron 17-50 & the *ist DL. I wonder if that picture would be twice as good if I used the 800$ Sigma? _IGP4833 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing!

02-23-2013, 03:23 AM	#13
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,168	+1 for the Sigma (17-50). Not sure why but I prefer Sigmas over Tamrons.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-27-2013, 04:14 AM	#14
simico Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Budapest Posts: 821	Originally posted by jpaulb Here is a picture I took as a JPEG with the 400$ Tamron 17-50 & the *ist DL. I wonder if that picture would be twice as good if I used the 800$ Sigma? Of course!! And it would be 5x as good if captured with K5IIs! Didn't you know?? See, your toy archery set was only good for silver, with more expensive set than your master you could have won gold

02-27-2013, 04:26 AM	#15
jpaulb Forum Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Antigonish, Co. NS, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 62	Originally posted by simico Of course!! And it would be 5x as good if captured with K5IIs! Didn't you know?? See, your toy archery set was only good for silver, with more expensive set than your master you could have won gold You are right about the *ist DL vs K5iis; but if I believe that when I would be looking for one of them instead of better suction cups for my toy bow.