| Author: | | Junior Member Registered: December, 2012 Location: Dobrich Posts: 27
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 1, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Easy to use, well built, nice balance on my k10d, sharp | | Cons: | focus ring rotates during focusing, zoom ring turns in the other direction | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 9
| |
Got this lens a few weeks ago and it has been on my body since then. Really well built lens. No zoom creep issues yet. The hood fits nice and tight and does a great job. The focus is nice and sort of fast, hunts a bit in low light and contrast but then again most lenses do. Defocus is rendered nice and soft like most Sigma lenses. Here are some samples on my K10d:
Flowers by the window by nickodim, on Flickr
The Lake by nickodim, on Flickr
Before the fight by nickodim, on Flickr
A Way Of Life by nickodim, on Flickr
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2008 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 1,549
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 10, 2012 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, nice image tone | | Cons: | A bit large, slow to focus | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 7
Value: 10
| |
I've neglected this lens and the reason comes down to handling- it's fairly large and has no quick shift focus. Plus it's very front heavy.
However, when I do use it and review the photos, ALL IS FORGIVEN.
Awesome image quality. Totally kills the kit lens and is as good as any of my primes.
Other notes - a little weak when compared with a prime if the sun is in shot - tends to loose contrast, but no worse than other zooms.
VERY close focusing, will focus on a subject touching the front element - leading to having your shadow in the photo... Really brutally sharp at close distances also.
Can only use camera's pop up flash if subject is about 1m away - otherwise you get the lens shadow - this is made worse by adding filters as they tend to stick out quite a bit. But this problem is actually due to the fact it's so versatile - if it didn't focus so close, you wouldn't notice the problem of getting shadows in shot.
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2012 Posts: 8
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 11, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Does everything you need until telephoto takes over | | Cons: | Not constant f2.8 (but a 17-70 never would be) | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
First let me just say, there is literally no such thing as the perfect lens. Think about it: there can't be. Some people say "the perfect lens would be 18-300 at f2.8".
Well, OK, EVEN if that could exist, which it couldn't, it'd be far from perfect. It'd be huge, it would weigh 20kg, it'd be soft, it'd cost $50,000 and EVEN then, it's not really perfect is it - 18mm is not wide enough for everything, and 300mm is not long enough for everything - and f2.8 isn't as fast as primes can be.
SO - why am I talking about this when reviewing this lens?
Well it is my opinion, that this lens does the MOST things the BEST way, and is thus the closest a lens gets to perfect.
We've got zoom range:
Over 4 times. 17 is useful. 70 is useful. So full marks there.
Speed:
f2.8 at the short end, f4.5 at the long end. Pretty good.
Sharpness:
This is the real kicker for me, because it could be faster - but it is SHARP, at all apertures.
Handling:
Excellent - small and light.
Other stuff (colour, aberations, barrel distortion):
All very very well contained.
Cost:
If you handed me this lens and told me to use it for 2 months, and didn't tell me how much it was - I'd offer you $1000 for it. So at under $500, it's a steal.
Here endeth the review.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: December, 2010 Location: Suffolk, UK Posts: 49 | | Review Date: August 10, 2012 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | Sharpness | | Cons: | Loose zoom after some use, fails to stay where set. | | Sharpness: 8
| |
Much better on the K-5 than it was on the K-7, where it proved to be quite soft. This may have been a back focus issue though. Very versatile zoom range and good close up.
| | | | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Gwynedd Posts: 93 | | Review Date: May 30, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Price and value | | Cons: | little bit of fringing,slow long end | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
(Note this is the original DC version, not HSM or OS)
As a walkabout lens this is incredibly tough to beat. Really useful zoom range and the pseudo macro focusing is a bonus (at the long end you can touch stuff with the front element and still focus on them!)
Sharpness is excellent really, not up to the best of the best but for it's price you're unlikely to find better - suffice to say you won't complain about it being soft anyway.
It's very good in backlighting, it does flare but it has a nice cinematic feel to it rather than being intrusive. Contrast doesn't suffer too much either, just enough to notice but not enough to ruin a shot by any stretch.
The only real weakness I've found is it's fringing, but although I say weakness you need an incredibly bright light to cause it to happen.
Handling is good, it's smooth and solid feeling despite it's plastic exterior. It's front heavy so may be a bit uncomfortable around the neck depending on body.
AF is accurate, not especially fast or quiet but a lot of that is down to my body.
Mine is actually in use on a Fuji S3 (Nikon F mount, DX sized sensor same as Pentax) but the Pentax version is no different.
Samples (taken on the S3)
Mid day sun, 70mm f4.5:
Olympic Torch Relay by R. Alan Jones, on Flickr
Incredibly harsh sun showing worst case fringing:
Olympic relay train in action by R. Alan Jones, on Flickr
More mid day sun, slight backlighting, excellent contrast and sharpness:
Merddin Emrys by R. Alan Jones, on Flickr
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2011 Posts: 274 | | Review Date: April 30, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $280.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | cheap, sharp, good zoom range, fast focusing, and close focusing for Macro | | Cons: | discontinued | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
I mainly use Pentax prime lens due to image quality and large aperture. However, it is a little inconvenience to use prime inside of the house. Moreover, I rarely have good shots without flash at night or in house. So I decided to buy this lens for all purposes and using it with bounce flash. It focuses fast and accurate, providing greatly sharp pictures. I also like its very wide angle, taking group shots without any problems. If you can find one with a price lens than $270, I highly recommend you buy one for yourself.
     | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: January, 2010 Posts: 5
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 2, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | Macro, Fast 2.8 at wide end | | Cons: | poor quality control resulting in frequent bad copies | | Sharpness: 3
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 4
| |
I'm told there are good copies of this lense in existence. Mine is certainly not one of them.
It is very soft on the right hand side, and at the top of the frame (the left hand side is OK). It also back focuses. And as I by habit rotated the camera anti-clockwise when taking portraits, I consequently always ended up with blurry, out of focus faces (I since been rotating clockwise with better results).
For nearly 2 years I have struggled with this lense, assuming there was something very wrong with my technique. But after purchasing the Pentax 55-300 and seeing the massive difference, I finally obtained some charts and gave this lense a solid test. Just awful.
Sadly I live some distance from any dealers or repairers, so I will have to live with it. But I would strongly urge anyone considering buying this lense to test the lense before purchase, or at lease ensure they are able to easily return the lense.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2011 Location: Near Sydney, NSW Posts: 331 | | Review Date: November 26, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $240.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Wide, long enough for most things, sharp at all stops, compact enough, sturdy build, zoom lock | | Cons: | Not REALLY cheap. | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
This is just a really really nice, useful lens.
What I love about it is that it doesn't get softer at any aperture - so you just choose your stop and shoot.
Not much more to say really - I overpaid for this and I'm still happy with it!
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: April, 2010 Location: Wellington Posts: 969 | | Review Date: September 29, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $400.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Speed, Range, Sharpness, Macro ability | | Cons: | Big, 72mm filter, cool colours, no SMC like coating. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
This was my first lens I purchased with my K7 instead of the kit lens.
Main reason I bought it was the greater focal length coverage for faster speed. I would have got the Pentax 17-70 but was almost twice the price for litle benefit.
Later I would find that a few features made it extra handy: 2.8 speed at 17mm was handy for indoor shots, 17mm also abit better than 18mm of kit lens. Macro ability is great and min focus distance is effectively zero!
Sometimes 70mm is a tad too short but I feel you always get that no matter what tele you get.
+vs, This is exceptionally priced for a new, AF faster than kit that covers 17-70. Basically as fast as the Pentax 17-70, till you hit 70mm.
-vs Pretty chunky and ugly lens, no SMC like coating, in retrospect maybe would have gone with a faster 28-75 Tamron with the K7 and a cheap 18-55 for the wide stuff.
If one lens is needed to do it all however this lens is highly recommended and pretty unique it its offering.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: Jakarta Posts: 96
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 13, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Faster autofocus than kit, also bigger so looks like serious piece of lens, good range, good aperture, sharp enough | | Cons: | heavy, zoom creep | |
Sharper, better bokeh, faster autofocus, better for low light and better build than the 18-55 DA kit. Good macro too (better put some protective filter for macro works, it can get very close to the subject). If you want a better lens, you'd have to use a shorter zoom range (like the 17-50s) or primes, both will cost more.
For the price, an excellent wide zoom lens.
edit:
Come to think of it, if you want a longer range you'd have to give up some image qualities, and still have to pay more. So I guess this is kinda the jack-of-all-trade, the optimum point, of lenses.  | | | | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2011 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 123
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 16, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $275.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Wider, longer, macro | | Cons: | Heavy and kinda slow | |
This was the first lens I bought to replace my kit lens and it was a really good choice. It adds in some important areas.
- A bit wider
- A big longer. If you feel like 55mm is "just a tad short" then 70mm is just right.
- A bit sharper
- A bit faster. Not a LOT faster but faster.
All in all an excellent upgrade without breaking the bank. On the down side it's quite heavy and loud to focus. If you have a small-ish K-x or K-r then this Sigma feels big and heavy.
You have to live with these trade-offs with this lens but, for the money they got a lot right with this one.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: June, 2010 Location: Fremont, CA Posts: 36 | | Review Date: March 3, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good IQ, useful focal length range | | Cons: | | |
I bought a used copy of this lens, as a replacement for my 18-55 kit lens. The lens is well built and feels and looks solid. While it is much bigger than the kit lens, the extra weight has not been a problem at all.
IQ is excellent, particularly for outdoor shots. Some of the indoor images I have taken with this lens are slightly soft at the wide end at f/2.8 but are sharp beyond f/4.0.
Overall, I would say this is an excellent lens with good IQ, a convenient focal length range and an acceptable price point.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: August, 2008 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 141
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 28, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $240.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Speed, bokeh, construction and flexibility | | Cons: | None stand out | |
I'm not sure I have ever rated a lens a 10 before, but I decided to in this instance because while it's a very good lens, it's truly incredible for what it cost. I bought my copy used about 2 years ago. It has been my walk around lens which stays on the camera most of the time since I got it.
It's much more satisfying than the kit lens. It does a really nice job in a wide variety of situations. I strongly considered the Sigma 18-50 2.8 and the Tamron 17-50 2.8, but ended up going with this lens for the extra reach. In a perfect world it would have the extra reach and the speed as you zoom, but if it did, the cost would be much much higher.
One of the things that impresses me so much with this lens is how versatile it is. It has good range, good speed, and while it's not a true macro lens it has the ability to take good close ups, it's well made and while not tiny, it's not massive either. It's a lens that in my opinion gives the photographer more than he or she actually paid. I'm consistently pleased with the the photos this lens takes.  | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: December, 2009 Location: Christchurch, New Zealand Posts: 2,437 | | Review Date: December 3, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $295.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Great range, Good IQ, Faster than 18-55 kit lens, Good value | | Cons: | Quality (focus) issues | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 8
| |
I bought this lens while on holiday in Australia and after getting back to NZ, I was disappointed with the results. A large number of images were blurry and not sharp. Focus tests showed up a lot of back focus (and sometimes even front focus) at different focal lengths. I sent the lens back to the NZ support agent (who, to their credit, honored the "Australia Only" warranty). It ended up away for 4 weeks, leaving me stewing about it!
If this was the end of the story then the rating would be maybe a 2, however...
Upon getting it back (apparently after recalibrating the autofocus) I immediately noticed a big difference in performance. I now had a very usable, flexible lens that rendered nice colors! Sure at some focal lengths it is still less sharp than others (around 50mm is not its strong point) but never less than acceptable for a zoom IMO. My copy is actually quite sharp at 70mm which is a focal length I use quite a lot. I also use it a lot at the other end (around 20mm) which is also very good.
Having f2.8 available (even if only at wide end) is really quite useful and has allowed me to capture shots that I think would have been more of a struggle with only f4 available.
I also have the Pentax 18-55 kit lense and in comparison the Sigma has:- Similar centre sharpness
- Somewhat better on average across frame
- Faster across the range (useful)
- Much better focal range (for me anyway - far less lens swaps)
Now it stays on my camera most of the time! Without the initial quality issues I would have rated it a 8 to 9 based on sheer value for money. However factoring in the initial issues I have settled on a 7. Perhaps it should have averaged lower but the bottom line is I like it.
UPDATE: Since getting a Pentax 18-135, this lens is no longer used. Quite frankly I find the Pentax to be better all round and in addition has very useful WR!
Examples:
Water Lily
Crown Range
Skippers Canyon | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2007 Location: California, USA Posts: 12 | | Review Date: December 3, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Great "walk around lens" Sharp,contrasty, macro handy , useful range. | | Cons: | slt barrel at wide, minor creep pointd down slight-block of flash wide angle | |
The lens is much better than the "kit" lens. The price was reasonable and the range covers strong wide to moderate telephoto. I have been really pleased. The macro is good enough that I seldom need my 50mm macro. It's not tiny, but it's a lot smaller than L lenses and constant 2.8 lenses. The macro's of my jewelry and portraits and pictures of children have been outstanding. Stop down a stop or two and the lens is quite sharp edge to edge. With good technique, I get great pictures. Sometimes I use primes for critical tripod use, but frankly, I cannot tell the difference from the pictures with primes a lot of the time. I've never regretted the lens a minute since I get it.
| | |
