Upgrading my 18-55mm.
Posted 01/04/2013 - 18:52 - Helpful Comment
Link
Hi Matty
I have the 16-45 (currently for sale at £140 in this Forum) and also the 17-70. The two are pretty close in IQ, but the 17-70 obviously has a focal length advantage. 17-70 is somewhat heavier (much heavier than the kit lens) and is SDM only (i.e. no screw drive for AF).
I always found the 16-45 to be a reliable performer and much better than the kit lens, particularly so in the corners of the frame and when used wide open (it is sharp from F4). Most of the images in my Gallery Portfolio were shot with it.
The 17-70 is probably marginally sharper, but there is not much in it. Being screw drive for AF, the 16-45 is a lot noisier, but focusses faster and locks on more quickly than the 17-70.
I've never used the Tamron, so can't comment on that one.
Regards
David
I have the 16-45 (currently for sale at £140 in this Forum) and also the 17-70. The two are pretty close in IQ, but the 17-70 obviously has a focal length advantage. 17-70 is somewhat heavier (much heavier than the kit lens) and is SDM only (i.e. no screw drive for AF).
I always found the 16-45 to be a reliable performer and much better than the kit lens, particularly so in the corners of the frame and when used wide open (it is sharp from F4). Most of the images in my Gallery Portfolio were shot with it.
The 17-70 is probably marginally sharper, but there is not much in it. Being screw drive for AF, the 16-45 is a lot noisier, but focusses faster and locks on more quickly than the 17-70.
I've never used the Tamron, so can't comment on that one.
Regards
David
Posted 01/04/2013 - 19:03 - Helpful Comment
Link
I too can recommend the 16-45 Matty, a great lens and David's is very keenly priced.
I also have the Tamron, not yet use it as much as the 16-45 outdoors, but indoors it is superb and it has a lock so you can lock the barrel when out and about.
Of the two, the 16-45 is great for outdoors and I used mine for both landscape and urban shots. The Tamron is great for portraits and low light shooting and at f2.8 is a faster lens than the other two.
Hope this helps.
I also have the Tamron, not yet use it as much as the 16-45 outdoors, but indoors it is superb and it has a lock so you can lock the barrel when out and about.
Of the two, the 16-45 is great for outdoors and I used mine for both landscape and urban shots. The Tamron is great for portraits and low light shooting and at f2.8 is a faster lens than the other two.
Hope this helps.
Posted 01/04/2013 - 19:39 - Helpful Comment
Link
Only the Tamron is faster.
It is very sharp.
I was unimpressed with the 16-45.
Not had the 17-70.
However, get the DA 35mm first as you will see more difference in IQ than with the zooms. I have the Tamron but I'm quite happy going out with just the 35mm on the camera.
If you want a landscape, stitch a couple or three 35mm together.
[IMG]http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx49/df8/Mull_1-Mull_3_zps4969daf7.jpg[/IMG]
100% crops
[IMG]http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx49/df8/crops_da35_zps7b4930cb.jpg[/IMG]
It is very sharp.
I was unimpressed with the 16-45.
Not had the 17-70.
However, get the DA 35mm first as you will see more difference in IQ than with the zooms. I have the Tamron but I'm quite happy going out with just the 35mm on the camera.
If you want a landscape, stitch a couple or three 35mm together.
[IMG]http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx49/df8/Mull_1-Mull_3_zps4969daf7.jpg[/IMG]
100% crops
[IMG]http://i740.photobucket.com/albums/xx49/df8/crops_da35_zps7b4930cb.jpg[/IMG]
Lurking is shirking.!
Posted 01/04/2013 - 19:42 - Helpful Comment
Link
Either the 16-45 or Tamron would suit you Matty. I enjoyed the Pentax for the short time I owned it before it was stolen. I replaced it with the Tamron which is breath-takingly wonderful at ALL apertures. The kit lens is terrific as well, actually, if stopped down a bit!
Best wishes,
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Posted 01/04/2013 - 20:33
Link
davidstorm wrote:
Hi Matty
I have the 16-45 (currently for sale at £140 in this Forum) and also the 17-70. The two are pretty close in IQ, but the 17-70 obviously has a focal length advantage. 17-70 is somewhat heavier (much heavier than the kit lens) and is SDM only (i.e. no screw drive for AF).
I always found the 16-45 to be a reliable performer and much better than the kit lens, particularly so in the corners of the frame and when used wide open (it is sharp from F4). Most of the images in my Gallery Portfolio were shot with it.
The 17-70 is probably marginally sharper, but there is not much in it. Being screw drive for AF, the 16-45 is a lot noisier, but focusses faster and locks on more quickly than the 17-70.
I've never used the Tamron, so can't comment on that one.
Regards
David
Hi,Hi Matty
I have the 16-45 (currently for sale at £140 in this Forum) and also the 17-70. The two are pretty close in IQ, but the 17-70 obviously has a focal length advantage. 17-70 is somewhat heavier (much heavier than the kit lens) and is SDM only (i.e. no screw drive for AF).
I always found the 16-45 to be a reliable performer and much better than the kit lens, particularly so in the corners of the frame and when used wide open (it is sharp from F4). Most of the images in my Gallery Portfolio were shot with it.
The 17-70 is probably marginally sharper, but there is not much in it. Being screw drive for AF, the 16-45 is a lot noisier, but focusses faster and locks on more quickly than the 17-70.
I've never used the Tamron, so can't comment on that one.
Regards
David
Thanks for all your i helpful input, I must admit I was leaning towards the 16-45mm but I had read mixed reports on it, as some have said it does need stopping down abit to get the most out of it and the whole point of upgrading was to use a lens wide open to use when there was not much light as i don't like using a flash, but it did give me the opportunity to buy the 35mm f2.4 as well, as you can't have to many lenses
David, I will have a look at the lens you have listed and may get back to you in the next few days if that's ok...
I did fancy the tamron as it being an extra couple of stops faster and not being able to stretch myself to the Pentax version but those extra stops of light would not of been a deal breaker..
Posted 01/04/2013 - 21:53
Link
The 35mm f2.4 is a cracking little lens - it never seems to be off my k30 lately - I'm sure you will like it too!
Posted 01/04/2013 - 21:54 - Helpful Comment
Link
Hi, I've just returned from a holiday where the only lens I took (K-5) was my DA 17-70 (I haven't used the other lenses listed). For that purpose it was a great choice (perhaps a tad short when I wanted more reach...), as an 'all-round' lens it worked very well.
I find the SDM so much nicer to use than the screw-drive lenses I have (F 50/1.7, FA 28-80 & Sigma 70-300). Some might tolerate the noise of the screw-drive lenses more than I, but once I'd seen (heard) the difference, I think it compliments the K-5 very well. As it's SDM only, if you have other bodies this might be a consideration.
As has been mentioned it is quite bulky, if traveling as an only lens, I'd recommend taking a body/lens cap pair so you can separate them if needed (i.e. to fit in a hotel room safe) - my K-5 (no grip) & 17-70 only just fitted into a safe as a unit.
I find the SDM so much nicer to use than the screw-drive lenses I have (F 50/1.7, FA 28-80 & Sigma 70-300). Some might tolerate the noise of the screw-drive lenses more than I, but once I'd seen (heard) the difference, I think it compliments the K-5 very well. As it's SDM only, if you have other bodies this might be a consideration.
As has been mentioned it is quite bulky, if traveling as an only lens, I'd recommend taking a body/lens cap pair so you can separate them if needed (i.e. to fit in a hotel room safe) - my K-5 (no grip) & 17-70 only just fitted into a safe as a unit.
Posted 01/04/2013 - 22:19
Link
johnha wrote:
Hi, I've just returned from a holiday where the only lens I took (K-5) was my DA 17-70 (I haven't used the other lenses listed). For that purpose it was a great choice (perhaps a tad short when I wanted more reach...), as an 'all-round' lens it worked very well.
I find the SDM so much nicer to use than the screw-drive lenses I have (F 50/1.7, FA 28-80 & Sigma 70-300). Some might tolerate the noise of the screw-drive lenses more than I, but once I'd seen (heard) the difference, I think it compliments the K-5 very well. As it's SDM only, if you have other bodies this might be a consideration.
As has been mentioned it is quite bulky, if traveling as an only lens, I'd recommend taking a body/lens cap pair so you can separate them if needed (i.e. to fit in a hotel room safe) - my K-5 (no grip) & 17-70 only just fitted into a safe as a unit.
Thanks for that input, the lens would be used for candids/street photography sometimes so noise might be an issue,depending on just how loud it is,Hi, I've just returned from a holiday where the only lens I took (K-5) was my DA 17-70 (I haven't used the other lenses listed). For that purpose it was a great choice (perhaps a tad short when I wanted more reach...), as an 'all-round' lens it worked very well.
I find the SDM so much nicer to use than the screw-drive lenses I have (F 50/1.7, FA 28-80 & Sigma 70-300). Some might tolerate the noise of the screw-drive lenses more than I, but once I'd seen (heard) the difference, I think it compliments the K-5 very well. As it's SDM only, if you have other bodies this might be a consideration.
As has been mentioned it is quite bulky, if traveling as an only lens, I'd recommend taking a body/lens cap pair so you can separate them if needed (i.e. to fit in a hotel room safe) - my K-5 (no grip) & 17-70 only just fitted into a safe as a unit.
If I can drop on a good used 17-70mm I might be able to still stretch to the 35mm which could be the lighter/smaller option when needed
Posted 01/04/2013 - 23:49 - Helpful Comment
Link
Although the DA 18-135 was not mentioned it might be worth considering as it is weather resistant, almost silent in operation,focuses quickly and is fairly compact.
It was reviewed unfavourably by Photozone but most users like it very much. John Riley reviewed it and liked it. I believe he uses it professionally. It was very expensive when released but there are some bargains around e.g at Bristol Cameras and SRS.
It was reviewed unfavourably by Photozone but most users like it very much. John Riley reviewed it and liked it. I believe he uses it professionally. It was very expensive when released but there are some bargains around e.g at Bristol Cameras and SRS.
Archie
Posted 02/04/2013 - 01:11 - Helpful Comment
Link
What about the Sigma 17-70? It's got HSM and at f2.8-4, is a bit faster than the Pentax equivalent and the 16-45.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
996 posts
14 years
Staffordshire Moorlands
The only reason for the change is only that funds now allow it and would like something a bit faster, so I have narrowed my choice down to a few lenses in which I have had a play with but still cannot make my mind up so if anyone can point me in one direction or the other or come up with something that I have missed that would be great,
My choices are:
Pentax 17-70mm
Tamron 17-50mm
Pentax 16-45mm + leaving some extra cash for a Pentax 35mm F2.4
The lens would be used as my everyday walk around lens, so any help would be great as I can never seem to make up my mind when it comes to buying kit.