DA*16-50 vs Sigma 17-50

Your thoughts about the DA*16-50 and Sigma 17-50 please

I found myself shooting with the 18-55 far to often while I've some stunning lenses in the slightly longer focal length I find it really pity I don't have something slightly better.
Since I've the DA*50-135 the DA*16-50 should compliment that lens very well I believe.

I'm open to other options but I need to have quick-shift so that means Tamron 17-50 is sadly out of the question and f/2.8 is also pretty much a must.
As far as I know that would leave only the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 OS HSM as an option.

A tough choice. Although I like Sigma EX series lenses these days, they are well built and reliable - not like the none EX Sigmas - they are also relatively well priced for what they can do.
The 16-50 however is a different matter. Early examples were hit and miss on their quality, but having said that, in the last 2 years I have not heard of a faulty one at all, maybe Pentax have ironed out the faults with the increase in production.

The three big advantages of the Pentax over the Sigma are the extra 1mm, and at that wide angle does make a difference, The fact that it still has the screw drive for none SDM equipped bodies (so you can use it with the ist series) and thirdly, probably the most important, it is weather-sealed, and this is a boon, as you will know, having the 50-135.

So for me, I would go for the Pentax, but the Sigma would be a fine alternative.

Seems you have been thinking about the DA*16-50 for some while Stefan

I liked mine despite it's slight shortcomings, a nice lens to use and in the sweet spot really very good.
I didn't own the Sigma 17-50 so can't comment there. I would only add that I would prefer to have the 16mm verses 17mm

Thank you for your comments, I needed to recheck if the Sigma was an EX

My heart also goes to the DA*16-50 but it never got stunning reviews and that's what's keeping me a bit away and the price of course but I think it's still worth it since the Sigma is also not cheap.
Sigma 17-50 OS HSM EX €599
Pentax DA*16-50 €758 (€159 for SMC and WR is worth it I believe)

Is the feel of the DA*16-50 the same as the DA*50-135?


Has somebody have seen a review about the Sigma, I can't find any?

Yes and no actually, I have always considered it as a good companion lens besides the DA*50-135 but never thought I would really find the need or have the pressure so to say.
All of a sudden almost 80% of my photos of last 2 months are taken with the 18-55, mostly at parties indoors that's why I want f/2.8

Also bear in mind the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (about EUR 350), which is supposedly (I don't own either lens) competitive in wideopen sharpness to the Pentax 16-50.

I know but the biggest problem with that lens is that it doesn't have quick-shift and my way of working and using the camera relies on the lens having quick-shift so that means I need to learn a new style. If it had the AF/MF focus ring like the tamron 90mm macro I would have considered it. Now I'm to afraid I'm going to dislike using the lens and I probably going to blame myself for that and find it a waste to sell the lens since it does preform very well, so it would be a personal hell. Disliking to use the lens but finding it too good to sell

btw I just looked at my bank account and I've the cash for the DA*16-50 and the store that has it cheap €758 (649 GBP) and is known to has good service is on the route to the holiday we have planned for the weekend.
You've till Friday to change my mind

Bad news I'm afraid Stefan, Sigma don't do a 17-50mm

They have, according to their web site, the following

17-70 DC F2.8-4 Macro
17-70 DC F2.8-4.5 OS Macro HSM
18-50 DC F2.8-4.5 OS HSM
18-50 DC F2.8 EX Macro

Reading the specs, I think the DA* 16-50mm is looking more and more the option.

Hi Stefan,
I would also consider the old DA16-45 if I were you. Okay its f/4 and not the f/2.8 you want, but it is a really capable lens and you can pick up second hand examples quite easily for a lot lot less than the DA16-50.

A good comparison of the two here:

link

Cheers,

/Ian

Looks like they forgot to update the site
Look at the .com site link
Here is one in the store for Pentax link
Also SRS has it listed link
So believe it or not it's coming

Not light strong enough, most of my indoor shots are with flash gun and with the 18-55 it was struggling to keep the flash charged so the extra stop of light would mean half the flash power that equals twice the amount of flash burst that would mean 2 flashes continues or 4.

I agree it's a stunning lens but not for the use I'm looking for sadly

I didn't want to mention the 16-45mm as Stefan wanted F2.8, but is indeed an excellent lens and hardly off my camera.

Nice one Stefan. It's an EX too.

Oh boy what a choice......

Mhmm but I haven't seen it in any store though.
I already have set my mind on the DA 16-50 also, it's a better match with the DA*50-135 I think and the WR is quite nice.
If the DA*16-50 give me any doubts in the shop I'll probably wait till the Sigma to see which one is better.

I wish I could say the same Iain, unfortunately my 16-50 is currently back with JPSS for repair for the 2nd time in the 8 months since i bought it new.
It seems to be the same problem that a lot of the early models suffered from with regards to the AF not finding focus or not working at all....

Having said that it is a fantastic lens, albeit a very expensive MF one for me at present.
I can't wait to have it back working correctly, it will be like having a new lens.....and that's always good...!

I have to say that although I really like my 16-50DA I am not very impressed with it at 16mm, the distortion is quite noticable, though this wont be a problem for you Stefan as you shoot RAW

I also find the focus is off with my K10D, I've not investigated whether its front or back as I have no intention of messing with the K10 body, but it works fine on the K20D without any adjustments so its not really a problem.

I did consider the Pentax 17-70 at the time as I thought the longer length would be a bit more versatile, and I found my 18-35 kit lens quite wide enough anyway so doubted I need the 16mm (though I have used it wide on occasion)
In the end "Nathan" (not seen him around for a while) convinced me the 16-50 was the way to go, I think the Weather sealing and larger aperture won over the extra focal length, and I was getting the 50-135DA anyway