| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: February, 2013 Location: Canada Posts: 198 | | Review Date: December 22, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $399.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, build quality, Price | | Cons: | not WR | |
Lens produces great images and handles well. I see some negative review so maybe patchy quality control but i have a good one.
| | | | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2015 Location: Paris Posts: 49
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 18, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $320.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, AutoFocus | | Cons: | Sliding Aperture | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K30
Autofocus: 9
New Or Used: Used
| |
This lens is my first walkaround lens I bought after seeing some shots taken with it. I am fully satisfied with it. I have some sample photos in my flickr
https://www.flickr.com/photos/117312932@N02/sets/72157652959725972
The sharpness is excellent, the focus is very precise, no back/front focus (as reported on the tamron 17-50 f2.8). For walkaround, weddings, this lens is near perfect. I said near perfect because if it had a constant aperture then it would be. But for that, you probably need to pay quite a bit to get the same quality. This lens is very good value for money, you will not regret it.
For low light, if you have a good camera that can handle high iso (like the K30), this is not a problem anymore.
Aside of that, this lens is polyvalent and is constantly mounted on my k30  | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: March, 2014 Location: Bolivia, NC Posts: 59 | | Review Date: July 1, 2014 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Build, sharpness, quality | | Cons: | None so far | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
Camera Used: K-3
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: New
| |
Lens is a huge upgrade from the kit lens. The quality of this lens is great and has a nice solid feel to it. I would recommend this lens!!!
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2014 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 5 | | Review Date: February 18, 2014 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | f/2.8, Sharpness, super Quite, Macro | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K5IIs
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: New
| |
This lens is Outstanding on the K5IIs and also i use it on my K3 i am really happy with this lens ..i am think to buy one more just for my wife K3 cause she always want to use it | | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: December, 2007 Location: In the most populated state... state of denial Posts: 1,854 | | Review Date: February 21, 2024 | Recommended | Price: $170.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Versatile, image quality, distortion control | | Cons: | soft in the corners at low end, | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K3-iii
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: Used
| |
Found one used for a decent price as an upgrade to the 18-55.
Very Good upgrade, very versatile for walking around with only 1 lens.
F/2.8 only at 17mm and F/4 in all other focals
AF is fast and handles very well
At wide angle, it is soft outside of the center and color fringing is noticeable in the corners
Above 25mm it is good all around
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2018 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 66
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 20, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $349.99
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Versatile, Good to Great Image Quality, Great AF, Compact | | Cons: | Kinda Soft Wide Open, Huge Filter Thread Size, Zooms "The Wrong Way", No WR | |
I saw this lens on special from B & H for its lowest price ever: $350. I saw the reviews and it was the In Depth Review that compelled me to pull the trigger. I try not to buy things within the same day of finding them but given that this was one day special, I had to take a plunge. I am glad I did. This has become a staple in my kit. I do freelance, event and concert photography; I've been able to use it for all of them. This lens is always in my bag or on my K-70.
The Good:
- Super versatile thanks to the focal length and the relatively fast aperture. On my K-70, it can do just about anything other than fast paced action in low light.
- Image quality on the whole is pretty good. Interestingly enough, it gets noticeably better on the long end. This thing actually takes pretty legit portraits. But it produces admirable results at all focal lengths. Though on the wide end, you're going to need to stop down.
- The Autofocus is amazing and probably it's best selling point. It's fast, rarely hunts, works well in low lighting and it's silent. One of the best AF experiences, I have had yet.
- Build quality is nice. Not like Pentax DA Star nice but it feels solidly built yet it looks sleek.
The Bad:
- Softer on the wide end. I am not sure I would rely on this as my main landscape lens. The resolving power just isn't there. It's not bad but it's definitely not as good as it is on the narrow end.
- It's bit heavy for a lens this size. I agree with the decision of the variable aperture (I'm sure this would have been huge otherwise) but it's still hefty. Not an issue for me but I can see some people not enjoying that.
- Huge 72 mm filter size.Mostly a con because bigger filters = more cost.
- You have to turn it the opposite way of most zooms in order for it to zoom. I'm used to it but depending on how used you are to this, it can be a little jarring in the beginning.
Verdict:
I love this lens. My issues with it are small and almost entirely build and handling related. If it were weather sealed, I'd say it's damn near perfect. Even so, it's a great purchase. It just has some steep competition. Highly recommended, overall.
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2013 Location: Worcestershire, England Posts: 18 | | Review Date: June 5, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $250.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | lightweight, and sharp | | Cons: | Not weatherproof | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K3
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: Used
| |
Great lens!! bought this to use as my carry around lens. Already own a sigma 24-70 2.8 ff but I have to say that this little lens is just great to use. the focusing is fantastic, quick and accurate. Silly price | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Canberra, Australia Posts: 582
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 21, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $350.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Price, Size, Zoom range, Sharpness | | Cons: | No longer comes with bag/pouch | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K5 IIs
Autofocus: 9
New Or Used: New
| |
Great wide-to-(just beyond)-Normal zoom.
Fantastic to have that little more reach than a 17-50 and the slower aperture at the far end is a compromise I'm happy with.
Size and weight suits the K5 perfectly.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: April, 2015 Posts: 9
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: May 11, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $341.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Brilliant All Rounder | | Cons: | Lens Hood | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax KR
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: Used
| |
I'm not into over-analysis of equipment. Sometimes this can be like a group of artists arguing for hours about the relative attributes of their paint brushes. At the end of the day it is the artist/photographer who makes the difference. After all these years of lens development I don't think there are many "bad" lenses, just relative degrees of "good". After all, who amongst us has their prints blown up to poster size or are published or sold on? For the vast majority of photographers, most photographs in this digital age remain on the computer, and if printed, seldom above 4x 5. I have owned many cameras over the years and have mostly used the supplied kit lens as I find the cost of many lenses prohibitive. However having owned a Pentax K-r for 5 years and used only the kit lens I decided this very clever camera deserved something a bit better. So I bought a second hand Sigma 17-70 C off e-bay for £220. All I can say is it is quiet,efficient and very sharp as illustrated by the photographs of other contributors to this thread. For a general purpose, non specialist, all-round useful lens I don't know what else anyone could expect off such a relatively cheap lens. For me it does just about everything I want from a lens except true 1: 1 Macro, super wide or super telephoto. A brilliant every day accompaniment to your Pentax camera.
| | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2012 Posts: 14
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 16, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $300.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Focal range, HSM, size, weight, sharpness | | Cons: | Perfomance at 17mm. Color rendering is not "pentax". | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-5
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: Used
| |
It is always difficult to judge "standard" lenses, and I guess even more difficult to design them. Mainly because of the increasing quality of kit lenses. Pentax (or any other brand) 18-55 gives you a good amount of sharpness, compactness and reliability, as these kit-lenses are the first instrument to introduce newbies to photography.
I've tried to move into using fixed-focal lenses and succeeded in it. But as my daughter was growing up I clearly understood that I need a bright lightning-fast-focus vario-focal lens. I've tried several lenses, including pentax's star 16-50 and 17-70 sdm, and none of them were nearly as good as Sigma. Don't get me wrong those are great lenses, but Sigma is clearly better for me. And those 20 mm on the long end are "must have" for kids photos.
Sharpness. Sigma 17-70 C is not a perfect lens. Performance at 17mm is "meh". But it is usable. From 24 to 70 even wide open it's damn good. Just don't expect it to perform like a prime. The downside is color rendering, a bit yellowish and definitely not "pentax".
HSM. I don't know how in other lenses, but my copy is super fast and very accurate. Throw is short, almost no annoying hunting even in the dark . I wish all Pentax zoom lenses had that kind of auto-focus. Because of this I rate it a 10.
If you want a good all-around vario-focal lens try Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro HSM C and maybe it will fit you as well as it did for me.
All attached photos are post-processed.
70mm f/4
 [/url]
26mm f/3.5
 [/url]
28mm f/3.5
 [/url]
17mm f/7.1
 [/url]
Close focus at 70mm f/4
 [/url]
17mm f/4.5
 [/url]
All of the photos with full size available - https://fotki.yandex.ru/users/sunfog/tags/sigma%2017-70mm%20f2.8-4%20dc%20macro%20hsm%20c
Thank you for reading!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2013 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 1,717
5 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: January 21, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $499.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, Versatility | | Cons: | Filter size | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Autofocus: 10
New Or Used: New
| |
This is my everyday walkaround lens for my K-5 IIs. For that task, it is wonderfully adept, although this lens tends to be more for "picture-taking" than artsy photography, as I describe in the bokeh section.
First, the breakdown of the minimum f stops is:
f/2.8: 17-21mm
f/3.5: 22-45mm
f/4.0: 46-70mm
Sharpness: Fantastic at f/5.6 onward, quite good wide open. You won't be disappointed here. The lens hits its peak at 35mm, where it is stunningly sharp. Keep this lens in the 30-40 range and you'll be very pleased with the results.
Aberrations: There is visible barrel distortion at 17mm that vanishes quickly past the minimum focal length. The issues can be corrected in processing easily but 17mm is definitely more than usable. I recommend staying north of 20mm for the best results, however. Haven't observed CA but I'm not good at looking for them. I haven't personally observed pincushion distortion at high focal lengths, but I don't usually use this lens past 50mm. When I do, it's usually of an object that won't display the distortion.
Bokeh: The bokeh is pleasing when you can get it, but the lens is just not fast enough to allow for those cool creamy bokeh shots in general. You just won't get super blurry backgrounds unless you can make use of its limited macro capability (focus close). You can do bokeh shots for small objects. Anything larger than a stack of books, though, won't be the subject of a super blurry background shot with this lens. But this is not why you buy this lens: it's versatility you want in a zoom. If you want creamy and superb bokeh, find a good prime for that task.
Autofocus: Smooth and super accurate. It's rare that the lens will be thrown every now and then, but it doesn't wander too far. Setting the focus point to center and recomposing usually solves any issue you might have. The HSM motor is so silent that in low light situations when it's hard to see the focus in the viewfinder, I find myself unfocusing the lens in MF mode and then going back to AF to make sure it got it right. It always does! I trust it and the K-5IIs in low light situations. I can't remember coming home disappointed with blurry images!
Handling: The lens is solid and modestly heavy, if you're used to a kit lens or Pentax primes. The weight balances superbly, though, and it's not a burden to carry around. My only complaint here is that the zoom ring has no lock, so if you're standing over something, you need to hang on onto the front of the lens or else gravity will pull the zoom out. If you use a holster bag, the lens can sometimes unwind itself as you take it out of the bag. With that last point, the only thing I worry about is damaging the lens as I do so, but I think I'm being paranoid there.
Value: At $500, this lens is not cheap. But it is not overly expensive either, given that it is $100 less than the issue-prone Pentax 17-70 (which is f/4 throughout its range) and has more reach as the twice as expensive DA*16-50 (f/2.8 across its range, though). In short, this is a great value for its target and blows away its main competition.
The only negative point in its value is that is uses 72mm filters and these can get expensive fast. Pentax prizes compactness (and most lenses have filter sizes 58mm or smaller), so if you're stepping up from a kit lens with a collection of filters, your old filters are probably too small, necessitating replacement. The good point there, though, is that since this is the largest lens you will likely attach most filters to, you can use them on your primes with step-down rings.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: January, 2011 Location: Perth Western Australia Posts: 2,621
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: December 28, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $460.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | well build, perfect everyday lens,value | | Cons: | none | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Autofocus: 9
New Or Used: New
| |
My favourite walk around and traveling lens.
Well build, small, light ,compact , silent.
17mm is very convenient for landscapes, narrow streets architecture and is fast enough for indoors + has great Macro
Incredible value at AU$460
Some of my photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/itrax/sets/72157635025910044/
  | | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2011 Location: Chicago Posts: 126 | | Review Date: November 23, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $499.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | f/2.8, Sharpness, Silent | | Cons: | Can be soft at widest angle. A bit heavy. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Autofocus: 8
New Or Used: New
| |
As someone who has a prime lens on the camera 99% of the time, accepting the fact that I needed a zoom for client work was troubling. I read tons of reviews and after a recommendation here in the forums, I purchased this Sigma.
Out of the box this lens is gorgeous, and looks a bit fabulous on my white K-30. The weight caught me off guard as I am accustomed to the size and weight of my primes... still, not too bad.
The focus motor is truly and wonderfully silent. I focus manually most of the time, but when I do use autofocus, it's usually with my very fast FA 50 f/1.4, so initially, the Sigma's autofocus seemed slow. I've now come to realize that it's actually very good for a zoom with such latitude.
I did find that at the widest angle (17mm), expansive shots were a bit soft when auto focused, but perfectly fine manually.
As the lens arrived today, I've included a few quickies, unprocessed jpegs right outta' the camera. I like to see how lenses perform at their wider apertures, I think that's where their character lies. I've only included one shot (at the river) at f/16, and one (in the backyard) at f/6.3. The rest are between f/2.8 and f/5.6.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2013 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: October 20, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $499.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, color, low vignetting, focal length, aperture, price | | Cons: | Auto-focus (My copy) | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Autofocus: 6
New Or Used: New
| |
I was looking for a lens to replace my 18-55 WR on Pentax K-5, and I initially chose Sigma 17-50 F2.8. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately?) it was out of stock, so I had to buy this cheaper one. I compared it with 18-55 using JPEG, tripod, and manual focus under good light:
The build quality is good enough IMO, though it is just a Contemporary lens, neither an Art nor an EX. One big difference from 18-55 is that the friction of the zoom ring is much more. The size and the weight are both quite acceptable, though not as compact as 18-55.
When it comes to image quality, let's start from the color. I can't find any significant difference between the Sigma and 18-55. The Sigma is a little bit more yellowish (or maybe more saturated?) while Pentax's green is greener, but it is not noticeable unless I switch between these two picture quickly, and a little more saturated isn't bad at all, is it?
Then about the most obvious difference: sharpness. This lens is very sharp throughout the field. The Sigma outperforms by far (easily distinguishable when displayed on 8' screen) the 18-55 at every focal length wide open (That is, Sigma F2.8 vs Pentax F3.5, or Sigma F3.5 vs Pentax F4, etc). Though 18-55 narrows the gap of center sharpness when both lens stopped down to F5.6 at 17mm or F8 at 28mm, the Sigma still leave 18-55 behind in edge sharpness.
The Sigma also has much less vignetting. Distortion is noticeable at wide angles, but not when zoom in.
The only flaw is auto-focus. My copy can't focus well. The adjustment needed to correct the auto-focus at 17mm is about +4 while 28mm and more need about -4. Finally I leave the Fine Adjustment in K-5 to -4, by which I can focus from 28mm to 70mm with acceptable accuracy. I use manual focus now (this one do NOT support full-time manual, which is very inconvenient in this case) when using 17mm. I give it 6 points for a silent and fast auto focus.
In conclusion, this is a very good upgrade to the kit lens, with two things imperfect: auto-focus and distortion.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2013 Location: Texas Posts: 32 | | Review Date: September 9, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, Resistance to Flare, Color rendition, Finish | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Autofocus: 8
New Or Used: New
| |
This lense has an ideal compromise range / aperture / weight (I would like lighter, though, but is it possible?), and is very well built.
I am using it with a Pentax K30.
At full aperture, sharpness and contrast are very good at 17mm and good at 70mm. Optimal sharpness is reached at 5.6.
Near the edges, it is slightly less sharp, but nothing to worry about.
I took a photo with the sun within the frame, no spurious reflexion and still good contrast, amazing.
Vignetting is low, but distortion is a tad too high at 17mm. Superb color rendition (very slightly warm, near neutral, excellent greens)
| | |
;)
;)
