Need a walk about Lens

I'm looking for a new Walk-about Lens, trusty Sigma 28-200 given up the ghost, focus ring u/s, had it for about 10 years, options I see for a budget of about £450 are :-

Sigma 17-70 F2.8/F4
Sigma 24-70 F2.8

Pentax 16-45 F4
Pentax 17-70 F4

I liked the reach of the 200, but was the image quality affected by the range ? I do have the 100mm above range covered, but it's big and heavy, generally used for air show stuff.

General subjects are Landscapes, Portraits, Studio Work, Macro, Wildlife and Sports / Air Displays.

Your thoughts and comments on the 4 lenses above would be appreciated, see below for what I currently have.

Cheers

Highly regarded here, was my first walkabout, sold it after 6 months, it always seemed a bit "loose" to me + physically quite long. Great 16mm but a bit short at 45mm.

A cracking lens if you can put up with the weight, used one for around a year, loved the IQ but it can get tiring after a day out.

I now have a Tamron 28-200 as a walkabout, small light and decent IQ, cost £50

Davex.

I think any one of them would be good, depending on what you value most - speed, size, weight, zoom ratio etc.

When I had to make the same decision I went with the Tamron 17-50, which I see is not on your list. I would recommend it & do not regret the decision.

If I was starting my lens range from scratch, I would be looking at the new Pentax 18-135mm as a general purpose lens. £499 from SRS.

So the choice would be:
12-24mm
18-135mm
100mm Macro
55-300mm

The last lens has some degree of overlap, but it's the best option for now.

It does of course depend upon the style of your photography and your requirements might be totally different to mine.

I might be tempted with a 35mm. Maybe the DA Ltd f2.8 macro.

Thank you for your suggestions so far, what about the IQ of the Sigma's compared to the Pentaxes ?

Cheers

I have two main walkabout lenses, a DA 16-45 and an FA 24-90. Both have looseish barrels when extended but they're fine optically and mechanically. On a walk I take the one that makes most sense for the type of country, so the 16-45 wins easily for cities and usually for mountains, 24-90 for coast and rolling uplands.

Starting from scratch I like John's list; my reservation is a suspicion that I might notice a drop in IQ from the two lenses above to the 18-135. Having said that the build quality of both the 18-135 and 17-70 (Pentax) look better than either of mine. No experience with Sigma, I'm afraid.

Thank you, I'm tempted to go for the Pentax 17-70,

Spanner in works time.

I use a Tamron 18-250 when on holiday as a walk about.

It covers everything I need at only a small cost in IQ.

As these are hard to find you could look at the Sigma version HERE, and don't forget that if you order to tell SRS you're a PU member.

I think the kit lens qualifies as the best walkabout lens. To go out and buy something else is an additional expense that has to be justified by spelling out a specific purpose or need.

you have to weigh cost in the event of theft or damage into the equation if you're just walking about taking snaps.

my basic 18-55 and old 28-200 would see very little action in the studio or on a regular assignment, and as such are more expendable if lost/stolen/damaged while on vacation...

on the other hand... if the purpose of the vacation is to acquire stock photography with the intent to sell, then it is a business trip and the need to produce top quality photos necessitates bringing along certain more expensive lenses...

very rare is the situation where you cannot get a decent photo with basic gear....
nike's and patience cost less than super zooms and super tele's...

stiching panaramics costs less than ultrawides...

Dof and a little cropping can do a decent macro lens impersonation...

if you're just walking about why spend/carry more than you'd be prepared to lose?

Costs nothing at all providing you have a computer - see my thread about the Hugin panorama stitching program.

I still keep my eyes open for a cheap FA 28-200mm, as I could use that on my older film bodies too.

My walkabout kit consists of a K7 with the 18-55mm WR and 50-200mm WR kits lenses. They are both good quality if stopped down and are very lightweight and the WR is a bonus, you'll have money to spare too.
The Pentax kit lenses are very underated in my opinion, I have had images taken with these lenses accepted in stock libraries.

My small shoulder bag carries body with lens and 2 other lenses. Not too heavy, camera in hand and lenses in bag.

I seem to have settled carrying

K-7 and Tamron 17-50mm (or WR 18-55mm)
In the bag, 10-20mm Sigma and 58mm f1.4 Nokton MF.

As you have the wide covered just a 17-50mm Tamron(£250).
Maybe with the 35mm f2.4 (£150) to compliment your nifty 50.
You seem to have most things you want to do covered.

As an alternative the 28-75mm tamron f2.8 also gets good reviews and might just give you a bit more reach for portraits.

umm, spanners in the works

Thanks !!

I'm a bit confused as to what's considered a "walkabout" lens.

To me "Studio Work, Macro, Wildlife and Sports / Air Displays." are all specialist shoots where you'd take out appropriate lenses from your collection, and maybe even two bodies when there's a lot of things going on at a fast pace .. Sports / Air Displays. I always take two bodies at events. one has my Sigma 135-400 on for getting up close and the other body will have anything from the DA 10-17 fish eye to the DA* 50-135

My definition of 'walk about' is for those times when photography isn't the primary reason for being somewhere and you want to just ling the camera over the shoulder and cover many bases.

Am I missing something?