[gatorguy]

I use combination of the the following..
Good weather = Sigma 17-70 F/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM and/or Pentax HD DA 55-300 F/4.5-6.3 ED WR PLM
Bad weather or just heading out and walking around shooting = DA 18-135 F/3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR and/or Pentax HD DA 55-300 F/4.5-6.3 ED WR PLM
I always have my 55-300 PLM with me.

I consider the Sigma 17-50 2.8 to be a far better imaging lens than the Sigma 17-70 if someone currently has neither one, better than the 16-45 for that matter and it's cheaper, but coupled with the HD DA55-300 you suggested for the OP almost every spur of the moment shooting need is covered. The 17-50 on a crop camera is great as a walkaround/portrait/landscape lens, I've used it frequently on portrait work, and the 55-300PLM needs no introduction.

I'm not as worried about WR as I used to be. I rarely find myself needing to shoot in inclement or threatening weather conditions and for that I have other lenses to use anyway. A non-WR lens for walkaround shooting wouldn't concern me at all.

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 06-10-2020 at 10:40 AM.

[normhead]

My every day lens is the DA 55-300 PLM on the K-3, with the 21 ltd in the bag, just in case. Or maybe the 18-135 for just one lens. In this range, just buy the range that appeals to you. You probably aren't going to see stunning differences.

The 16-85 is the modern glass option if you're planning for the future. So many of the discussed lenses were designed for 6 MP or 10 MP cameras. You really stretch their capabilities going to a 24 MP sensor.

[DWS1]

My everyday lens depends upon what day it is and where I'm at. If I'm walking around town, indoors, or some place with big wide open vistas, I'll have the DA 16-85mm. If I'm at the zoo or hiking in the woods, I'll have the DA 55-300 plm. Sometimes I'll carry both and sometimes both on 2 different cameras, a K70 and K50. There really is no such thing as an everyday lens. I select the lens I need based on the subject matter and location I anticipate photographing.

[Dan]

I shoot on APS-C bodies. Until recently my everyday lens was the M 20 f/4, which I used for about 85 percent of my shots (in spite of the fact that I have over 30 lenses). This replaced my DA 21 Ltd, which had been my favorite. Most of my remaining shots were taken with the DA 40 Ltd. But I have recently replaced the above with a newly acquired DA 20-40 zoom, which I absolutely love.

When I want to go wider I use a Samyang (8, 10, 14, or 16mm), unless flare is an issue, in which case I use the DA 15 Ltd.

When I want to go longer I use a Voigtlander APO-Lanthar (90, 125, or 180) or Pentax F*300, unless weight is an issue, in which case I use the DA 55-300 PLM zoom, which is surprisingly good.

When I need a very long lens I use the Tamron 400 f/4 LD-IF, which is quite sharp and has nice bokeh up to f/5.6. At f/8 the bokeh starts to get a bit busy.

I really like the fact that all of the above lenses are stabilized on my Pentax bodies, which makes them MUCH more useful than the same lenses on Nikon or Canon DSLRs. :-)

[photoptimist]

Superzooms have always been my go to "everday lens" and for hectic travel days when switching lenses is impossible. For APS-C, several makers offer 18-250 although some are out of production now.

However, I'm not a big believer in the "everday lens" concept. To me, the entire point of an interchangeable lens camera is be able to pick the lens that suits the picture. Changing lenses doesn't take much time and carrying a couple of extra lenses doesn't take much space. I rarely go anywhere with my camera without at least three lenses (2 in the bag, one on the camera) and usually carry 5-8 lenses for more intentional photographic sessions such as hikes in the wilderness.

[zapp]

Did anyone mention to Iotech that a new version of the 2.8/16-50 will be released soon. More reach OK, but why not the updated lens. If he is really serious about portrait f/2.8 will help a lot.

[Wheatfield]

What is your everyday lens ?

When I think of "everyday lens" I think in terms of if I can only carry one lens, what is it going to be.
I tend to shy away from zoom lenses, my everyday lens is the format's standard lens. Right now, that is the D FA* 50/1.4 as I am using a K1. When I was still shooting APS-C, it was the A35/2, or FA31/1.8, or FA35/2. I do have the DA35/2.8 macro, which I quite liked, but I did find it somewhat slow. I also prefer a faster aperture than 2.8 for the times I like to reduce depth of field. I semi abandoned Pentax for Fuji because they had a very nice 35/1.4 lens for their X system, while Pentax, for reasons unbeknownst to me, never came up with a fast standard for the APS-C format.

---

Last edited by Wheatfield; 06-10-2020 at 11:55 AM.

[ChristianRock]

My "everyday lens" would be a normal or slightly wider than normal prime.

But I also use a "standard zoom" mainly for events and for some landscape pictures, so I think I can relate to your question.

Until recently I was quite satisfied with the DA 16-45 but it has developed optical issues due to severe 'wobbling" of the front barrel. So I've been doing a very similar exercise to what you are doing, and have been spending a lot of time analyzing real-world pictures from the lenses I've been considering. Here's my conclusions... your own mileage may vary...

1. Another 16-45 - I like the 16-45 optically. But if it's going to start falling apart like my current copy... probably not worth the risk, even though they sell cheap.
2. Sigma 17-50 2.8. Build quality is top notch which one of the main reasons I was excited to get one. I was almost sold on it. It has a bit of a "film quality" to the images (in a good way) despite not showing the "Pentax colors". The colors in fact are also not as good as my Sigma 30 1.4 Art - which is one non-Pentax lens that I think shows very beautiful colors. But it's not that bad, so I was looking for one. I still think it's a good lens to anyone considering a standard zoom, if you're ok with the size (77mm filter size).
3. Tamron 17-50 2.8. You can get it quite cheap nowadays and I think it looks sharper than the Sigma 17-50. But I couldn't warm up to the colors - greens in particular just don't seem to look that great to me. And I'm also afraid of the build quality. The positives are, as mentioned, sharpness, and it's quite compact for a f/2.8 zoom.
4. DA 17-70mm f4. I've been looking at this one for a while now, as it's supposed to be the improved version of the 16-45. The pictures look nice enough, and you can get them cheap nowadays (which is important to me...). At one point I was also ready to "buy it now" on one of those. I find the image quality to be slightly inferior to the DA 16-45, despite the fact that it seems to have better colors - but the images look a bit more "flat" if that makes sense.
5. Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary or the older screw-drive version. I kind of like the old screw drive better than the Contemporary, though the Contemporary is no slouch. But its images look a bit "flat" to me, a bit too "kit lens" like.
6. DA 16-85. Very sharp lens. I'm sure its users are happy. I found the images a bit too "flat" and the colors seem to have a slightly "pastel" quality to them that I don't find pleasing - not as "Pentax-like" as I wished. You can see it especially on blue skies.
7. DA 18-135. I actually think its images are less flat and have more pop to them than the 16-85. My main issue is that I don't intend to (and can't really afford to) buy a wider lens than my standard zoom, so I was hoping for a 17 or 16mm wide end. I also think that on the wide end at 18mm and towards the middle of the range the images get a bit generic looking. They do have a really nice quality between 20-30mm which is the range I'd probably use it the most.
8. DA 21mm Limited. Yes a prime, I was considering just leaving zooms altogether. A DA 21, a 35mm and a 50mm lens and maybe a longer tele in the bag, and I'd have basically everything covered with great image quality. I was getting excited about this setup and even told people I'd be getting the 21 next.
9. A lens that wasn't in consideration for the most part of the time I have been evaluating zooms was the DA*16-50mm f/2.8. First because I thought it would be more expensive than other options and second because of the obvious optical issues it has even compared to the 16-45 - not as flare resistant, not good around direct light sources, and not as sharp as people would like at f/2.8. But I started to look at pictures (honestly I'm no pixel peeper so I didn't even try to pixel peep images from it). From f/4 to f11 it has a "pop" to the images that few other lenses can seem to match - even the DA 21 I think can't do what this lens does in terms of pleasing colors, microcontrast and rendering. So many pictures taken with it make me go "wow", from landscapes to portraits (which can look great wide open too).

So in the end I put an ad in the "Wanted" section of our Marketplace here in the forums, and got a few PMs... and was able to buy one in excellent condition from a forum regular, for what I expected to pay for a good copy of the DA 21mm. Mine will be already converted to screw drive so I'm not worried about the AF. The AW will surely be a nice bonus as I currently don't have any weather resistant or all weather lenses.

My younger son's birthday is in about a couple of weeks and that's always one occasion where the zoom lens needs to be on the camera, and I'm excited that I'll have the DA*16-50 by then.

[ChristianRock]

I semi abandoned Pentax for Fuji because they had a very nice 35/1.4 lens for their X system, while Pentax, for reasons unbeknownst to me, never came up with a fast standard for the APS-C format.

I hear you. Thankfully Sigma made the 30 1.4 Art which I'm quite pleased with - I usually find the colors from Sigma lenses to be so-so but I think this one's great.
But Fuji's system is awesome if you are into primes - and can afford getting into the system, as I find it quite a bit pricier than Pentax so to me, not an option. The good thing is you can use the legacy Pentax lenses via an adapter with excellent results, and I think I would also be pleased with the JPEGs from their cameras most of the time.

[ddharriman]

Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.

11 years delivering and still stong.

[stevebrot]

Actually I checked review of both and still inclined to the Pentax version, coz it has full time MF override (does it ?), and some level of weather sealing not widely known.

To directly answer the question posed in the thread title... I have been using the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.0 (C) for over six years on my K-3 and have no regrets. Yes, it is that good.

As for your purchase decision and the question quoted above... The DA 17-70/4.0 has Quick-shift, but no WR.

Now the lecture...While both Quick-shift and WR are desirable, optical performance trumps both in my book. The DA 17-70/4.0 will be a significant step down in both build and performance from your DA* 16-50/2.8. A step up would be Sigma 17-50/2.8 with the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.0 being a decent alternative. Either one would be a significant step up from the DA 17-70/4.0, IMHO.

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 Contemporary Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews


Steve

[stevebrot]

Yes I should go for the newer model to avoid the SDM problem, but I still want to see a review of the lens.

Then you don't want the DA 17-70/4.0.


Steve

[stevebrot]

When I think of "everyday lens" I think in terms of if I can only carry one lens, what is it going to be.

Good point. Before I got the Sigma 17-70, that lens was the Pentax-FA 35/2.0. It is still my go-to choice for a "normal" perspective prime on APS-C.


Steve

[Wasp]

While I am more than happy to go out with one camera and one lens, the lens depends on my mood.

In pre-lockdown days, I usually took my Samsung NX100 with me on my commute. Sometimes I would take my Samsung NX1. The lens was mostly one of these, each has its charms:

• Samsung 20-50mm
• SMC Pentax M 20mm f/4
• SMC Pentax M 28mm f/2.8

Also used, when feeling adventurous, were these:

• SMC Pentax M50mm f/1.4
• Samyang 85mm f/1.4
• Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye

In winter months, when it gets dark earlier, I would take the Samsung NX1 with a Samsung 16-50mm f/2-2.8. The combo works very well in low light. I tried the Samsung 50-150mm f/2.8 but it is just a bit big, heavy and long in reach for the street. Very occasionally, I would take my Pentax K200D or K-x with Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5.

In conclusion, I don't have one single goto lens. My favorites are the 20mm and 28mm, but it would be hard to choose only one of them. These days, I don't go on photo safaris. Maybe again some time before Christmas...

[gatorguy]

While I am more than happy to go out with one camera and one lens, the lens depends on my mood.

In pre-lockdown days, I usually took my Samsung NX100 with me on my commute. Sometimes I would take my Samsung NX1. The lens was mostly one of these, each has its charms:

• Samsung 20-50mm
• SMC Pentax M 20mm f/4
• SMC Pentax M 28mm f/2.8

Also used, when feeling adventurous, were these:

• SMC Pentax M50mm f/1.4
• Samyang 85mm f/1.4
• Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye

In winter months, when it gets dark earlier, I would take the Samsung NX1 with a Samsung 16-50mm f/2-2.8. The combo works very well in low light. I tried the Samsung 50-150mm f/2.8 but it is just a bit big, heavy and long in reach for the street. Very occasionally, I would take my Pentax K200D or K-x with Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5.

In conclusion, I don't have one single goto lens. My favorites are the 20mm and 28mm, but it would be hard to choose only one of them. These days, I don't go on photo safaris. Maybe again some time before Christmas...

That's why I carry two cameras with different lens ranges on planned shoots.