Sigma Blowout 2-Day Sale: 17-50mm and 18-300mm

Sigma Blowout 2-Day Sale: 17-50mm and 18-300mm · **1 Like**

B&H has posted some really nice deals on 2 popular Sigma lenses. Both are below Black Friday pricing, and expire in 2 days (December 14th).

$399 (reg $549)
Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO HSM Contemporary Lens 886109

$349 (reg $399)
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM Zoom Lens for Pentax DSLRs 58C109

**Scorpio71GR** · 12-12-2016, 06:22 PM

Man that 18-300 is really tempting at that price.

Ceremonsen · 12-13-2016, 10:52 AM

I was thinking about HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR as a walk-around lens.
How it would be to compare with Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO in terms of image quality?
Thanks!

Adam · 12-13-2016, 12:56 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Ceremonsen

I was thinking about HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR as a walk-around lens.
How it would be to compare with Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO in terms of image quality?
Thanks!

That question might be worth its own thread

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)

PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Mr Bassie · 12-13-2016, 03:07 PM

The sigma 18-300 also includes a screw-on close-up lens that is a dedicated accessory for that lens.

"Increase the maximum magnification from 1:3 to 1:2, the AML72-01 Close-Up Lens from Sigma is a dedicated accessory for the 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM Contemporary lens. This close-up lens mounts to the original lens' 72mm front filter threads and increases the magnification ratio to benefit macro shooting applications. It features an apochromatic design and maintains the original lens' quality throughout the zoom range from 80mm to 300mm focal length positions."

mee · 12-13-2016, 06:47 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Ceremonsen

I was thinking about HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR as a walk-around lens.
How it would be to compare with Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO in terms of image quality?
Thanks!

The 16-85 is a sedan with a large v6 and a sport suspension. Not quite a sports car but not an ordinary grocery getter.

The 18-300 is a utilitarian minivan with a 4cyl but has a spoiler on the back and 20 cup holders. You want to avoid this vehicle unless you absolutely require its form factor.

Ceremonsen · 12-13-2016, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by mee

The 16-85 is a sedan with a large v6 and a sport suspension. Not quite a sports car but not an ordinary grocery getter.

The 18-300 is a utilitarian minivan with a 4cyl but has a spoiler on the back and 20 cup holders. You want to avoid this vehicle unless you absolutely require its form factor.

Clear enough.
Thanks!

rdj92807 · 12-13-2016, 11:15 PM

The Sigma 18-300 is a very sharp lens, and the above comments suggesting otherwise are really not accurate. I have tested the Sigma 18-300 versus many lenses at most settings, including the Pentax 16-85 & 60-250*. It performs surprisingly well against these lenses. For example, at 250, it's almost as sharp as the Pentax 60-250 when examining test pics at very high magnifications. Of course, you have to shoot 6.3 or above vs 4.0 for the Pentax. But this is a pretty darn good performance. The Sigma 18-300 has a very sophisticated optical formula, and it's biggest improvement in sharpness (vs the Sigma 18-250 Macro) is in the 200-300 range. The truth is, these latest superzooms have reached the point where they perform shockingly good for such a versatile lens. Frankly, I was surprised how good when I performed many comparison tests, as I was skeptical like everyone else.

Regarding the Pentax 16-85, it is a pretty good lens, but it's not nearly as good as the new Pentax DFA 28-105 IMO (which I love on my K-1). For full frame, the Pentax 28-105 DFA is a real winner. And FYI, I did not keep my copies of the Pentax 16-85.

mee · 12-14-2016, 07:04 AM

Originally posted by rdj92807

The Sigma 18-300 is a very sharp lens, and the above comments suggesting otherwise are really not accurate. I have tested the Sigma 18-300 versus many lenses at most settings, including the Pentax 16-85 & 60-250*. It performs surprisingly well against these lenses. For example, at 250, it's almost as sharp as the Pentax 60-250 when examining test pics at very high magnifications. Of course, you have to shoot 6.3 or above vs 4.0 for the Pentax. But this is a pretty darn good performance. The Sigma 18-300 has a very sophisticated optical formula, and it's biggest improvement in sharpness (vs the Sigma 18-250 Macro) is in the 200-300 range. The truth is, these latest superzooms have reached the point where they perform shockingly good for such a versatile lens. Frankly, I was surprised how good when I performed many comparison tests, as I was skeptical like everyone else.

Regarding the Pentax 16-85, it is a pretty good lens, but it's not nearly as good as the new Pentax DFA 28-105 IMO (which I love on my K-1). For full frame, the Pentax 28-105 DFA is a real winner. And FYI, I did not keep my copies of the Pentax 16-85.

Compared to the 16-85 it is soft. Compared to the 60-250 (esp at the long end) it is very soft.

Sigma C 18-300 mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM review - Image resolution - LensTip.com

Besides only the center is sharp, and only stopped down to f/8. Once you get out of the center, the resolution drops off dramatically. Once you get to the long end, the resolution drops off the map. And this is only detailing resolution.

If it could rival the 16-85 or the 60-250 then why do you think those lenses exist and for high dollar pricing? They wouldn't warrant their costs, as no one would buy, if an 18-300 megazoom could satisfy the requirements of both lenses.

If you only care to share 1080p snapshots on facebook or twitter, then its fine. But then I'd question why are you using a DSLR? Just get a superzoom bridge camera. It will be much cheaper and none of that 'annoying' lens changing nonsense.

We won't even discuss the 28-105mm on the K-1 because that camera is using larger sensor with a much higher resolution. Apples and Oranges to a K-3 with a 16-85.

rdj92807 · 12-14-2016, 12:28 PM

mee, your comments are disinformation because you do not own and/or have tested the lenses you are talking about. That is why I had to post a comment in disagreement. To say that the Sigma 18-300 is "very soft" at the long end is absurd and not true.

Below are three identical pics, from a K-1 on a tripod in crop mode of course. Try to guess the lenses, all at 5.6 or 6.3.

---------- Post added 12-14-16 at 02:05 PM ----------

Here is the answer:

First pic, Sigma 18-300 at it's extreme....300 f6.3. Really nice performance.

Second pic, Sigma 18-250 Macro at 250, f6.3. The new Sigma 18-300 really improved over this in the 200-300 range.

Third pic, Pentax 60-250 at 250, 5.6. Yes, it's a great lens and is faster. Is a bit sharper of course with a bit more contrast, but the difference between this lens and the Sigma 18-300 is not as great as people think. And to call the Sigma 18-300 "very soft" at the long end is, of course, absolutely NOT TRUE.

mee · 12-14-2016, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by rdj92807

mee, your comments are disinformation because you do not own and/or have tested the lenses you are talking about. That is why I had to post a comment in disagreement. To say that the Sigma 18-300 is "very soft" at the long end is absurd and not true.

Below are three identical pics, from a K-1 on a tripod in crop mode of course. Try to guess the lenses, all at 5.6 or 6.3.

---------- Post added 12-14-16 at 02:05 PM ----------

Here is the answer:

First pic, Sigma 18-300 at it's extreme....300 f6.3. Really nice performance.

Second pic, Sigma 18-250 Macro at 250, f6.3. The new Sigma 18-300 really improved over this in the 200-300 range.

Third pic, Pentax 60-250 at 250, 5.6. Yes, it's a great lens and is faster. Is a bit sharper of course with a bit more contrast, but the difference between this lens and the Sigma 18-300 is not as great as people think. And to call the Sigma 18-300 "very soft" at the long end is, of course, absolutely NOT TRUE.

Your facebook sized snapshots aren't the best test. Yet I still see a difference between the two -- look at the brick work around the tree, there is a ton more detail in the 60-250 image, despite it being 50mm less (and thus further away in the image) and ~a third stop faster.

Yet I was looking at full sized images from a professional review. Plus their lab testing. I see a big difference in the 18-300 and the 60-250, especially noticeable the further out from the very center you travel. Their testing confirms what I see with my own eyes.

If you think the 18-300 compares well with the 60-250, then by all means sell the 60-250mm. But I see big differences between the two, and I'm not going to lie to people and say there aren't differences when I see differences. Strong differences.

rdj92807 · 12-14-2016, 05:22 PM

Mee, you don't even own the Sigma 18-300 lens so your opinion is worthless. These pics were FULL CROP SIZE 15mb from a K-1, but the website only uploads the compressed versions as you should know. Duh. Even these compressed photos show how well the Sigma 18-300 performed at 300, not equal to but darn close to the Pentax 60-250. This is clearly visible and is FACT. So you can blither on forever, but I have presented the real facts with the real lenses. I like all my Pentax lenses, including the 60-250, but you should not talk about "soft" lenses when you haven't even shot with them.

mee · 12-14-2016, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by rdj92807

Mee, you don't even own the Sigma 18-300 lens so your opinion is worthless. These pics were FULL CROP SIZE 15mb from a K-1, but the website only uploads the compressed versions as you should know. Duh. Even these compressed photos show how well the Sigma 18-300 performed at 300, not equal to but darn close to the Pentax 60-250. This is clearly visible and is FACT. So you can blither on forever, but I have presented the real facts with the real lenses. I like all my Pentax lenses, including the 60-250, but you should not talk about "soft" lenses when you haven't even shot with them.

Ok, friend. Peace to you.

Adam
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by Adam
	Find threads started by Adam
	Find threads in which Adam has posted

12-13-2016, 11:15 PM	#8
rdj92807 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 97	The Sigma 18-300 is a very sharp lens, and the above comments suggesting otherwise are really not accurate. I have tested the Sigma 18-300 versus many lenses at most settings, including the Pentax 16-85 & 60-250. It performs surprisingly well against these lenses. For example, at 250, it's almost as sharp as the Pentax 60-250 when examining test pics at very high magnifications. Of course, you have to shoot 6.3 or above vs 4.0 for the Pentax. But this is a pretty darn good performance. The Sigma 18-300 has a very sophisticated optical formula, and it's biggest improvement in sharpness (vs the Sigma 18-250 Macro) is in the 200-300 range. The truth is, these latest superzooms have reached the point where they perform shockingly good for such a versatile lens. Frankly, I was surprised how good when I performed many comparison tests, as I was skeptical like everyone else. Regarding the Pentax 16-85, it is a pretty good lens, but it's not nearly as good as the new Pentax DFA 28-105 IMO (which I love on my K-1). For full frame, the Pentax 28-105 DFA is a real winner. And FYI, I did not keep my copies of the Pentax 16-85. Last edited by rdj92807; 12-13-2016 at 11:26 PM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: K3 body, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 18-250, DA 35mm f/2.4 AL, Grip and more	borysr	Sold Items	2	04-22-2016 03:44 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K01 and lenses: DA 18-55mm AL; M 50mm 1.7; A 28mm 2.8; Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5	crossroads	Sold Items	12	05-11-2014 10:33 AM
Experiences with Tamron 17-50mm or Sigma 18-50mm 2.8 Macro on K-5?	Lampo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	10-08-2011 09:36 AM
Sigma 18-50mm 2.8 vs Tamron 17-50mm 2.8	platinum	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	6	06-13-2008 12:09 PM

12-12-2016, 06:22 PM	#2
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,014	Man that 18-300 is really tempting at that price.

12-13-2016, 10:52 AM	#3
Ceremonsen Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: CA, US Photos: Gallery Posts: 28	I was thinking about HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR as a walk-around lens. How it would be to compare with Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO in terms of image quality? Thanks!

12-13-2016, 12:56 PM - 1 Like	#4
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,597 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ceremonsen I was thinking about HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR as a walk-around lens. How it would be to compare with Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO in terms of image quality? Thanks! That question might be worth its own thread Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

12-13-2016, 03:07 PM	#5
Mr Bassie Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,258	The sigma 18-300 also includes a screw-on close-up lens that is a dedicated accessory for that lens. "Increase the maximum magnification from 1:3 to 1:2, the AML72-01 Close-Up Lens from Sigma is a dedicated accessory for the 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM Contemporary lens. This close-up lens mounts to the original lens' 72mm front filter threads and increases the magnification ratio to benefit macro shooting applications. It features an apochromatic design and maintains the original lens' quality throughout the zoom range from 80mm to 300mm focal length positions."

12-13-2016, 06:47 PM - 1 Like	#6
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by Ceremonsen I was thinking about HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR as a walk-around lens. How it would be to compare with Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO in terms of image quality? Thanks! The 16-85 is a sedan with a large v6 and a sport suspension. Not quite a sports car but not an ordinary grocery getter. The 18-300 is a utilitarian minivan with a 4cyl but has a spoiler on the back and 20 cup holders. You want to avoid this vehicle unless you absolutely require its form factor.

12-13-2016, 09:56 PM	#7
Ceremonsen Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: CA, US Photos: Gallery Posts: 28	Originally posted by mee The 16-85 is a sedan with a large v6 and a sport suspension. Not quite a sports car but not an ordinary grocery getter. The 18-300 is a utilitarian minivan with a 4cyl but has a spoiler on the back and 20 cup holders. You want to avoid this vehicle unless you absolutely require its form factor. Clear enough. Thanks!

12-14-2016, 07:04 AM	#9
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by rdj92807 The Sigma 18-300 is a very sharp lens, and the above comments suggesting otherwise are really not accurate. I have tested the Sigma 18-300 versus many lenses at most settings, including the Pentax 16-85 & 60-250*. It performs surprisingly well against these lenses. For example, at 250, it's almost as sharp as the Pentax 60-250 when examining test pics at very high magnifications. Of course, you have to shoot 6.3 or above vs 4.0 for the Pentax. But this is a pretty darn good performance. The Sigma 18-300 has a very sophisticated optical formula, and it's biggest improvement in sharpness (vs the Sigma 18-250 Macro) is in the 200-300 range. The truth is, these latest superzooms have reached the point where they perform shockingly good for such a versatile lens. Frankly, I was surprised how good when I performed many comparison tests, as I was skeptical like everyone else. Regarding the Pentax 16-85, it is a pretty good lens, but it's not nearly as good as the new Pentax DFA 28-105 IMO (which I love on my K-1). For full frame, the Pentax 28-105 DFA is a real winner. And FYI, I did not keep my copies of the Pentax 16-85. Compared to the 16-85 it is soft. Compared to the 60-250 (esp at the long end) it is very soft. Sigma C 18-300 mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM review - Image resolution - LensTip.com Besides only the center is sharp, and only stopped down to f/8. Once you get out of the center, the resolution drops off dramatically. Once you get to the long end, the resolution drops off the map. And this is only detailing resolution. If it could rival the 16-85 or the 60-250 then why do you think those lenses exist and for high dollar pricing? They wouldn't warrant their costs, as no one would buy, if an 18-300 megazoom could satisfy the requirements of both lenses. If you only care to share 1080p snapshots on facebook or twitter, then its fine. But then I'd question why are you using a DSLR? Just get a superzoom bridge camera. It will be much cheaper and none of that 'annoying' lens changing nonsense. We won't even discuss the 28-105mm on the K-1 because that camera is using larger sensor with a much higher resolution. Apples and Oranges to a K-3 with a 16-85.

12-14-2016, 05:03 PM	#11
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by rdj92807 mee, your comments are disinformation because you do not own and/or have tested the lenses you are talking about. That is why I had to post a comment in disagreement. To say that the Sigma 18-300 is "very soft" at the long end is absurd and not true. Below are three identical pics, from a K-1 on a tripod in crop mode of course. Try to guess the lenses, all at 5.6 or 6.3. ---------- Post added 12-14-16 at 02:05 PM ---------- Here is the answer: First pic, Sigma 18-300 at it's extreme....300 f6.3. Really nice performance. Second pic, Sigma 18-250 Macro at 250, f6.3. The new Sigma 18-300 really improved over this in the 200-300 range. Third pic, Pentax 60-250 at 250, 5.6. Yes, it's a great lens and is faster. Is a bit sharper of course with a bit more contrast, but the difference between this lens and the Sigma 18-300 is not as great as people think. And to call the Sigma 18-300 "very soft" at the long end is, of course, absolutely NOT TRUE. Your facebook sized snapshots aren't the best test. Yet I still see a difference between the two -- look at the brick work around the tree, there is a *ton* more detail in the 60-250 image, despite it being 50mm less (and thus further away in the image) and ~a third stop faster. Yet I was looking at full sized images from a professional review. Plus their lab testing. I see a big difference in the 18-300 and the 60-250, especially noticeable the further out from the very center you travel. Their testing confirms what I see with my own eyes. If you think the 18-300 compares well with the 60-250, then by all means sell the 60-250mm. But I see big differences between the two, and I'm not going to lie to people and say there aren't differences when I see differences. Strong differences.

12-14-2016, 05:22 PM	#12
rdj92807 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 97	Mee, you don't even own the Sigma 18-300 lens so your opinion is worthless. These pics were FULL CROP SIZE 15mb from a K-1, but the website only uploads the compressed versions as you should know. Duh. Even these compressed photos show how well the Sigma 18-300 performed at 300, not equal to but darn close to the Pentax 60-250. This is clearly visible and is FACT. So you can blither on forever, but I have presented the real facts with the real lenses. I like all my Pentax lenses, including the 60-250, but you should not talk about "soft" lenses when you haven't even shot with them.

12-14-2016, 05:48 PM	#13
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by rdj92807 Mee, you don't even own the Sigma 18-300 lens so your opinion is worthless. These pics were FULL CROP SIZE 15mb from a K-1, but the website only uploads the compressed versions as you should know. Duh. Even these compressed photos show how well the Sigma 18-300 performed at 300, not equal to but darn close to the Pentax 60-250. This is clearly visible and is FACT. So you can blither on forever, but I have presented the real facts with the real lenses. I like all my Pentax lenses, including the 60-250, but you should not talk about "soft" lenses when you haven't even shot with them. Ok, friend. Peace to you.