Pentax DA 17-70 Vs Tamron SP 17-50

Post prompted by missing the SP 17-50 recently offered at a bargain price on the forum.

I have slowly come to the conclusion that after a year and a half of owning a Pentax DA 17-70, I simply do not like the lens. Nothing I can really put my finger on, unlike some, it focuses OK and IQ is acceptable.

Prior to this - I had the DA 16-45 and did not like that one either and also owned the older Sigma 17-70.

One of the lenses I had been considering was the Tamron SP 17-50. Not a lens I had considered in the past but due to being extremely happy with the Tamron 70-200 I purchased earlier this year, and the fact that the price is very attractive for an f/2.8 lens, decided it was worth a look.

Anyone have any real world experience of how this lens performs and particularly how it compares to the DA 17-70?

Any thoughts?

Carl

---

No matter how many lenses I have owned - I have always needed just one more

Both the 17-70mm and 16-45mm Pentax lenses are generally considered to be very fine, so is it possible that the focusing of the camera body is out? Or, if they were bought second hand, are the lenses both damaged or out of alignment in some way?

Perhaps that could be looked at, because if I had either of those lenses, and I do have the 16-45mm, I wouldn't be thinking of a Tamron to replace them.

---

Best regards, John

Wow, I own the Pentax 17-70mm f4 and for IQ it blows most of my other lenses out of the water, I have also owned the Tamron 17-50mm both the VC and non VC, fantastic lens for the money but the Pentax is in another league.

The only gripe I have with the Pentax is the low light AF isn't the best, I also have the Pentax 16-45mm which is my go to landscape lens which I will never sell as I have found nothing yet on the market for the price to touch it.

Like John said, it might be worth getting yours checked out, because i would never think about swapping mine for the ones you've mentioned.

I had both Carl and like you didn't gel with the Pentax. I went for the Sigma 17-70 in the end but the Tampon was a superb lens and I can highly recommend it.

---

Andrew

"I'm here because the whiskey is free" - Tyla

PPG link
Flickr link

Oops... do you use it on a monthly basis, Andrew?

Agree with most of the comments - the Tamron is a very nice lens, easily sharp enough at f2.8. I liked the old 16-45, but it needed stopping down for best performance, which doesn't really suit my needs.

---

[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

Too old now!

---

Andrew

"I'm here because the whiskey is free" - Tyla

PPG link
Flickr link

Previously I have had the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (atm I have the VC version for my 7D) and there is no way I would swap my DA 17-70mm for it.

Fabulous lens ... so much so I presently own 2 (don't ask)

---

. My Flickr

Strange isn't it - I know several members who share my view of the 17-70, one has bought and sold 3 for the same reason - whilst others rate it very highly - which in fact is why I bought it in the first place.

John - Both my 16-45 and 17-70 have been owned from new. Both used on at least 3 different bodies - no notable difference between any of them.

As for adjusting the focus - perhaps worth a try but will have to learn how to do it first.


Carl

---

No matter how many lenses I have owned - I have always needed just one more

I never liked my 17-70 either. I tried comparing it to the K28/3.5 and the K55/1.8 and it didn't come out very well. Besides the fact that it cost more than twice what I paid for those 2 lenses.

But then people are different.

---

This space deliberately left blank.

I got shot of my DA17-70 because it was driving me up the wall.

I'm trying Sigma's 17-50 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8. Early days yet but so far the 24-70 is ahead.

---

Barrie
Too Old To Die Young

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/barrieforbes
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189482630@N03/

I had a 17-70, but sold it after purchasing AndrewA's Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 HSM OS. Here are my thoughts after using both lenses extensively:

- The Pentax 17-70 is a fine lens but has focus issues with some camera bodies. By this I mean inconsistent focus, sometimes it's spot on, other times it is way out, this happened on my K-5 mk1, less so on the K-5IIs

- The Pentax is superior to the Sigma for colour and contrast rendition; the Siggy has a very strange way of rendering greens, which need adjustment in post processing to get them looking natural

- The Sigma is better in every other way, focus, sharpness (except between 60 and 70mm where the Pentax is better), bokeh, wider max aperture, better build quality

I haven't used the Tamron 17-50 but I would recommend the Sigma 17-70 (later version), with the caveat of the rendition of greens which is not a problem if you know how to deal with it in PP.

Regards
David

---

Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

I bought a 16-45mm and a Tamron 17-50 a while back.

The Tamron was used and I couldn't set the right amount of adjustment to correct the focus issues. That being said I still found it a lot better than the Pentax 16-45. The construction to my mind was better, and images were cleaner and sharper.

On the back of pictures I saw from David Trout and Cabstar, I bought the Pentax 16-50, and don't regret it.

Doesn't see as much use as my 12-24 though

---

Alan


PPG
Flickr