Lens Receommendations svp - wide angle zooms

Hi all

I'm after a bit of advice, if possible.

I have the kit 18-55 lens which I'm not a huge fan of, being a bit soft and subject to a lot of flare. I have some decent lenses in the Pentax 28-105 and the Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX but I'd like to add a decent wide-angle to this.

Does anyone have any recommendations for what decent used lenses to keep eyes out for? I'm happy to swap in and out of the current sigma, so no need to go that large a zoom. I love low-light, so wide aperture would be good but happy to forego.

I've seen a Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 EX for £130, would this be worth a go? Pentax wide angles seem a bit pricey. I'd also consider primes of around the 20mm angle.

All comments appreciated.

eta: I have a K10D and *istD, if that makes any odds.

Sigma 10-20,

I got mine for £220 just over a year ago from ebay, well the f4-5.6 tho.

Really depends on budget and how wide you want to go but given the choice I would take a Pentax/Samsung 16-45mm f4 over the Sigma 17-35mm any day.

I rather like the sigma 10-20 as well. It is very good I think around f11-f16. It has a large front element so filters (should you wish to use them) can be more expensive (77mm I think from memory) although if you have other lenses with a 77mm front, or intend to get some, then the investment is more palatable. I know others on here have the sigma 8-16 and are pretty pleased with it- might be worth a search to see some example shots. I also (really) like the pentax 10-17, although it is a fisheye lens and tends to make things look a bit funky, and as such maybe not to everyone's taste; although it does capture a very wide image, can be 'de-fished' in PP, and is pretty sharp - especially at the centre. Can get purple fringing though which often needs a bit of attention in PP.

Having said all that, my absolute current favourite wide lens is the DA 15mm ltd - although it's not a zoom... and I'll have a different favourite next week I expect (lens ownership can make one so fickle - the DA 21 is also up there... I'd better stop now

Regards

The Siggy 10-20mm is excellent, especially for the price. I have the F4-5.6 EX version, and I have always been happy with its performance. There is also the F3.5 version which is more expensive but is faster and has the silent motor, but unless you really need a slightly faster lens at those focal lengths and have a desperate desire to have silent focusing, then the earlier and cheaper model will suit just fine.

I have heard that the Tamron 10-24 is pretty good too, but I have not tried it.

It's all very well recommending the 10-20mm, 10-24mm, 15mm, 8-16mm etc etc but it may be worth noting Matt is currently looking at a £130 17-35mm which should give everyone an idea of budget.

Good point, but the reality is that a budget of £130 will struggle to get superwides for APS-C. The closest will be the Siggy 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC second-hand. There should be plenty about as it has a popular and cult following no matter the mount, so those who bought one and got either bored or changed cameras, will sell them. Other than that the only other choice will be the DA16-45, again second-hand.
Matt might be lucky to get £130 for his 17-35, and then add either around £50 for a second-hand 16-45 or up to £100 extra for the 10-20.
It's the cold reality, but is worth spending an evening trawling the net for one.

First of all he doesn't say he is looking for a super wide ... just something better than the kit lens and wider than the two 28-whatever mm lenses he already owns. Secondly he doesn't own a 17-35mm but is looking at maybe purchasing one to replace said kit lens.

Doh!

Fair enough.

Well in that case a second hand 16-45 will be the best.

A touch of confusion there - yes, I'm after a wide-angle and around the £120-£140 would be my target.

Thanks to all for the recommendations, I'll do the rounds of the usual (it's been a few years since I had a look at SRS, Ffordes etc, I hope they're all still going!).

Cheers, much appreciated!

It just so happens I have a 16-45mm for sale HERE on the forum

It may look like I was suggesting the lens for my own gain but I would still recommend it for the money over anything else in it's range even if I didn't have one to sell.

I'd second a vote for the 16-45,

It's a big upgrade on the 18-55. Constant F4, Close focus , Much better IQ. The difference between 18mm and 16mm is very useful. You have other lenses to cover the 45-55mm area. One of the best value Pentax lenses. You would have to spend a lot more to better the 16-45.

Might be a bit more than £130 but should be less than the sigma 10-20.

I can see almost no difference between my 18-55 and my 16-45 apart from the 16-45 suffering from CA fully wide.

I find it impossible to induce flare on the 18-55 and it certainly isn't soft.

Sounds like you had a good sample of the kit lens Ken. I found my 16-45mm so much better than my kit lens. The chromatic aberration was superficial and easy to sort out in post. The blurry abberations the kit lens creates near the borders of shots at 18mm is harder to combat!

It could be that my kit lens is particularly bad, but it's better than the previous one I sent back to Clifton Cameras, and my previous 18-55mm mk II was very soft at one side. I think that 'good samples' of the kit lens are probably unrepresentative of most experiences of it, certainly mine.

I have a Tamron 17-50mm now which is much better across the board. It's faster, so more versatile too. I've kept the 18-55mm as despite being less than brilliant, it's usable and the WR will come in handy... one day!

Hi all

Big, big bump just to say I didn't manage to find a replacement lens, mostly simply due to prevarication, but recent trips down to Cornwall have suggested a wider angle needed anyway so like-for-like replacement for the 18-55 wouldn't be that useful.

I'll keep an eye out for the Sigma 10-20 on ebay and the like, SRS have got one up now but would prefer a used version for budgetary reasons - now increased but can't quite justify £330

Ta all