| Author: | | Site Supporter Registered: August, 2016 Location: Leura NSW Posts: 502 | | Review Date: January 1, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good focal range, cheap. Looks like a pro lens(almost) | | Cons: | can't complain for the price | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: K1 and MZ5n
Autofocus: 8
| |
I have the red rim 72mm version without the zoom lock. Fixed this with a rubber band around the barrel
If you are looking for HD DFA quality dig deeper into your pocket.
Great on film as a holiday walk around but I did take a couple of other lenses for that "special" shot.
Did manage to take some fabulous shots that still please.
Works excellently on my MZ5n in reasonable light.
Took a shot with the K1 (so happy with this camera) set to iso 51200 f32 1/30 in overcast conditions and printed it out straight from camera jpeg on 6x4 and it looks as good as your local camera shop print. Even the wife thought it was a clear print
I would presume that on the K70 with it's excellent high iso resolution (not quite as good as the K1 ?) you could set it to use more of the "sweet spot" f settings to keep the images sharper.
For the price it is worth picking up just to play with and sell on if it does not suit your style.
For the pixel peepers look elswhere
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2016 Posts: 1
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 4, 2016 | Not Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Small, lightweight, wide range | | Cons: | Sharpness | | Sharpness: 4
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 5
Camera Used: K1
Autofocus: 8
| |
That's the reasons why I got a K1, the relict of my analog SLR time. It didn't survive a comparision between different lenses, some of them two decades older and one brand new.
It's small for the focal range and a good walk around zoom. Or, rather it would be it on a APS-C sensor. It's only use at FF is for portraits because it's already messing up the edges and this don't matter if the messed up area is covered by the bokeh.
With this lens I got nearly the worst image quality of all my old and new lenses. The sharpness at the center look good at the first glance but it mix all up in the edges! A horrible slush appear when you look there, there's not a lot to recognize. The SMC Pentax FA 80-320mm is at the same focal lengths not great but still perform a good deal better than this lens.
IQ isn't great either but not to noticable, I would say pretty acceptable.
Handling is the best thing, it's made of plastic but it's nice to handle and nothing is rattling.
AF is pretty good, it hit the most time and is comparable fast.
I'm not recommend this lens for FF, if you can get it cheap for an APS-C sensor you could try it. Just don't expect to much from it.
I'm still wondering how I got my good photos on the analog camera or if my standards have increased since I've have some more lenses to compare on a modern digital camera.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: September 19, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | sharp 50-135 mm | | Cons: | very strong CA's at 28 and 200mm | | Sharpness: 4
Aberrations: 2
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 8
Value: 4
Autofocus: 8
| |
 my item shows some problems:
it is really good sharp from 50-135mm at aperture f11-16
28 mm terrible CA'S on the right side can not be eliminated by PhSh. and doubble contoures (decentric lens)
I think it could be a production failure .
colours are not so good as tamron 28-200
some visible flare wide open
I can use 50-200 without big problems within this range 6--7 points, wide angle only 2-3 points - medium therefore only 4-5 points. weakly recommended by me
ps.I've discovered that f13 gives much more sharpness in the corners. after eliminating CA's by Phsh better results unsharp corner remains, unfortunately
it is a poorly good lens, but you need curgenty PHSH to eleminate CA's and to improve sharpness for big posters. I prfer F11-16 with this lens and prefer f13 in order to get pictures good ennough.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: October, 2014 Location: Washington Posts: 2,176 | | Review Date: November 1, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $38.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, decent range | | Cons: | zoom creep, slow | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K5 and K10D
Autofocus: 9
| |
Years ago I gave my daughter my K100D with a 28-200 Tamron. Just recently I was visiting her and shot some pics with it. Realizing how much I missed the lens, I bought a Pentax 28-200 on eBay. Not being satisfied with the Pentax lens, I resold it and bought this Sigma. Picked it up for $38 with a Hoya filter, lens hood and both covers on eBay. The af does hunt in low light and close distances. The zoom creep can be annoying. The Sigma is so much sharper than the Pentax. Maybe I just go a good one, but I love it.
BTW...the model is 72mm and has a red ring and IF.
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2008 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 650 | | Review Date: September 25, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $38.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | relatively small for FF | | Cons: | a little bit of glare and ghosting | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K10D, K-x
Autofocus: 10
| |
I picked this up as part of a bag of Pentax stuff with a friend who paid for the other things but this was the "big" expense in the purchase I have not tested this lens with charts and of really careful observations. If it was a Prime focal length I would be that concerned about it's performance. But this is a walk around lens that allows a zoom to 200 that is good and sharp. I also experience no problems with it changing focal lengths on it's own, No zoom drift. The cap is normal for this Sigma era and I know how to get a more modern pinch cap if I want. I saw no aberrations in images under sunny conditions nor indoors under challenging lighting. Color was correct, no problems with vignetting probably due to using a crop sensor however I did mount it on two different film bodies and still had good results.
The only aberrations were caused by light source glare and ghosting. My copy came with a polarizing filter which eliminated the problem. I believe this is a problem with the focal range of the lens limiting the hood that can be used with the lens. At 28 mm it must a small hood and the hood can't zoom (yet) with the lens so you get stray light. When I was shooting close to the sun, 5-10 degrees, it appeared as beams through the viewfinder image. A little bit further from the sun,10-20 degrees it was circles at around 25 degrees off the sun the problem was gone. With the polarizer mounted I got a few circles a 5 degrees off the sun and none at all carter off the sun. The polarizer was the old type that takes away 1 to 1.5 stops so I am going to get a modern one for the lens and report those results.
In conclusion I really like this lens!! Of course it was what I was shopping for but I had reservations and so paid as little as possible for the lens. I think I would still be happy with it if I had paid 4 times as much. I recommend this lens to those who do a lot of walking around and shooting nature, objects, or people. I also recommend it for night use however I think I would use my other FF Sigma which is the rare 24-135 f2.8-f4 but not everyone can find one of those in KAF mount.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: August, 2012 Posts: 12 | | Review Date: July 29, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Versatility/range, quick to focus, sharpness, price | | Cons: | zoom creep, no hood, non-WR | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-5
| |
Picked this up on CL with a couple other lenses for $75.00 total for the set (screaming deal!) I wasn't expecting much, but as a walkaround/travel lens.. this is a wonderful lens! Sufficiently sharp across the versatile range. Not a lens I would use indoors per say, but at f6 or f7 and on I was very happy with my results on this budget all around lens.
Here are some examples found on my flickr: (for some reason it registers as the F35-105mm, feel free to browse around in album for others listed as well)
https://flic.kr/p/oe2zpr
https://flic.kr/p/ovjCFb
https://flic.kr/p/oe16fq
https://flic.kr/p/ovtfsL
https://flic.kr/p/ovvkx4 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: April, 2013 Location: Norwich, Connecticut Posts: 440
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 2, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Economy, Feel, Fit and Function | | Cons: | Contrast, Lens Flare and Color | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K2000
| |
I picked up a Pentax ZX-10 35mm film camera with this lens attached to it for $75.00. That makes the real price paid, about $35.00 (minus the $40.00 value for the ZX or the other way around). But that’s why I troll pawn shops for camera equipment. (They rarely know what they are buying and after they look to E-bay for their pricing, they are so easy to beat up because it sits on the shelf forever.)
I have to agree with many here who say the zoom ring is very tight. Only, I find, it is tight between 28 and 35 mm range (breaking the inertia to zoom), and it really gets loose at 135 to 200mm. I also noticed, the harder I pinch the ring the more impossible it is to turn... So, my conclusion is, the ring is very thin and subject to distortion.
With regard to the primary lens, (I have the 72mm filter ring,) I think Sigma wanted to produce an amateur lens that "looked" robust and would have the look of a “Pro” lens, so they put a very thick focus and zoom rings on it, then fitted a larger than necessary filter ring over the 60(ish)mm, primary lens. Unfortunately, even with the lens hood that I have, and the Crystal-Optics UV filter, there is still a lot of unwanted light gathering in this lens… (They could have done just as well with straight 62mm optical system all the way through…) and eliminated a lot of ambient light, which effects contrast.
In a side-by-side comparison with my 50-200mm Pentax DA, this lens can hold its own to the untrained eye… (My wife says she cannot tell the difference in sharpness, but I can…) The DA is sharper at full distance, better color at full distance, but… gathers less light at full distance. While they are both rated at F5.6, I think the light gathering of the Sigma’s 62mm primary lens (verses the DA’s 50mm opening makes a big difference.) From 28 to 135, the Sigma’s sharpness and contrast are the same as the DA. The difference in light gathering at full zoom (200mm) will only be a factor at low light situations, so decide accordingly…
Personally, I like this lens enough to use it for a “walk-around”. I am not going to worry about knocking into things (or people), or laying it down on concrete, grass or asphalt, as I would with my DA. The minor differences in color, contrast and light gathering (or for that matter sharpness), can all be compensated for in post-production.
So, if you are fortunate enough to get this lens on the cheap, ($75.00 or less) I would say go for it! Bang it around until it no longer works for you and throw it away when it’s done. I’ll be using mine when I go out kayaking (it’s going to get wet..) and when I’m by the sea (it’s going to get sandy and salty too,) and when I’m in crowded situations as well (so, it will get knocked around a little.) When I’m finished, I’ll find another and my Pentax DA will always be available if I need to do any “critical” work. (Or, when I find a body K-3 or K-5 body.)
Here's a sample...
DA 50-200 Zoom @ 200mm (1/4 mile) F8@350 (ISO 100)
Sigma Zoom 28-200mm (35-250mm cropped) @200mm (1/4 Mi.) F8@350 (ISO 100)
Sigma 28-200mm @ 200mm (100 Yds.) F8@350 (ISO 100)
 | | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2013 Location: Essen / North Rhine-Westphalia Posts: 8 | | Review Date: October 16, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Good value, Zoom Range, build Quality, sharp enought | | Cons: | Noisy AF, Zoom creep, Zoom Ring a bit tight, AF hunts indoor | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 9
| |
Bought it in a Bundle with Pentax MZ-7 and some other Stuff via ebay Kleinanzeigen.
It's the version with 72mm filter thread and red Ring, without Zoom Lock.
It works on my K20D....very well.
Wide open sharpness is good enough for it's Class, not very sharp, but enough for it's Price and better than my 18-55 AL WR. Decent Sharp @ f8.
The Zoom Ring is a bit tight between 50 and 135mm.
Screwdriver AF is a bit noisy an hunts often in indoor and lowlight Situations.
Overall a good Deal, nice Walkaround Lens.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: March, 2012 Location: Western Mass Posts: 4 | | Review Date: October 13, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $55.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Good value | | Cons: | Slight creep, sometimes autofocus is off | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 8
Value: 9
| |
I bought this lens to replace a Tamron of the same type that stopped autofocusing properly. I just got this and have only made a few test shots but so far I am impressed with the results. When I bought my K-r I got the standard 18-55 kit lens and got a Sigma 70-300 lens at a discount as a bundle. That lens was so nice that when the Tamron started giving me headaches I hunted down the Sigma. It was used but in VG condition. The focusing is a lot better with little hunting to get the right range. I made some shots under various conditions and found at the 28mm and 200mm setting things aren't as sharp as I would like them, but everything in between is very good.
This is a good all-purpose lens to have on your camera all the time, right out of the bag. Since they are used (you can find some new examples in the $120 range) if you get one in decent shape you should be pleased with the results.
| | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2011 Location: Ohio Posts: 11 | | Review Date: July 10, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $49.99
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Value, Wide zoom range | | Cons: | Zoom Creep | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
Saw this lens at a pawn shop and thought it was worth the minimal risk for the price...Boy was I right, this has become my 'walking around' lens for the outdoors.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: kuhmpawapi Thailand Posts: 28 | | Review Date: January 11, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $78.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | good zoom range, good build quality | | Cons: | zoom ring a bit tight, focus tend to hunt in low light | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
I have the the version with the 72mm filter thread, It is a good walk around lens not perfect but for the price it is a good value. I have gotten some very good results with it.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: July, 2009 Location: High Desert, California Posts: 231 | | Review Date: November 18, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $180.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Decent Build, Wide Range | | Cons: | Not Very Sharp | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 5
Handling: 5
Value: 5
| |
This was the first lens I bought after the kit lens (18-55) for my K100D. I initially liked the wide range and thought the quality was OK but it didn't take too long to discover all the lens's short comings. The wide end was not quite wide enough (28mm was the standard WA for film but for the APS-C sensor approx 18mm is the correct equivalent). And the images were simply not that sharp. Colors were OK but just not sharp. In short it was a lens I quickly became dissatisfied with and outgrew. I see where this lens still shows up frequently on e-bay for fairly low prices but IMHO it is NOT a hidden gem and newbies or anyone would be well advised to save your dollars for better glass or for the same money better quality buys are found in many of the old manual lenses (for example many of the Sears lenses were made by Ricoh - almost as good as the Pentax lenses from the same era). I wouldn't go so far as to say the lens is garbage but unless someone gave you the lens, with so many other options available there is simply no compelling reason at any price to own it.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: January, 2011 Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi) Posts: 586
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 8, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Tough build. Reasonable priced. "Marcro" close focus. Sharp, not razor sharp, but enough. | | Cons: | Zoom creeps. | |
ADDED: Doing a little research, I found that it seems there is several version of this lens, there's f/3.8-5.6 and the other being f/3.5-5.6. There's also differences in the filter diameter, 62mm and 72mm. it is possible that each version gives different result, hence the mixed-feeling review of this lens.
Mine is the f/3.5-5.6 with 72mm filter thread.
I needed a walk-around lens, almost get the Tamron, but settle for this one instead because it feels tougher and well-built (and it is really). Some review championed the Tamron, something that make it priced higher than this Sigma, and for me that is the reason to consider this lens better. No disappointment at all, I sold my DA 50-200mm to get this, and didn't really regret. Sharpness for my untrained eye is good. No dedicated macro, but focus close enough to capture detailed images.
Here's a shot:
 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: December, 2009 Location: East Yorkshire Posts: 120
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 11, 2010 | Not Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | Good zoom range for film | | Cons: | Soft at all settings | |
There is very little that I can say is good about this lens apart from its zoom range for film. It is soft at all settings and very soft wide open. You always had to be aware of were the sun was as lens flare was a constant problem.
I just remembered something good about this lens, Sigma do not make it any more.
| | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 3 | | Review Date: July 22, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Compact, feels solid, works with DSLR | | Cons: | Lens cap a little too loose and cheap. Diaphragm ring button tough to reach. Zoom rotates in opposite direction. | |
First impressions. Just the lens I was looking for. Needed something between the K100D Super's kit DA 18-55 and the FA J 75-300, specially for situations where I won't have time to switch out lenses.
The zoom ring feels a bit tight; would have appreciated a little less fight on the rotation. But you have to appreciate the locking mechanism. Also the counter-clockwise direction of the zoom from the short to the long end, caught me by surprise, as I am used to a clockwise rotation to zoom in.
Still, considering the price (hey, 36% off some listings here), it's a steal. | | |
