I don't suppose you'd like to sell it

Anyone any thoughts on the Sigma 17-70? Might consider this although it isn't really long enough for me it may do especially as it gets good reviews.

Donut

Currently I have a K100D with kit 18-55 plus a Tamron 70-300, Old Pentax 50mm (MF) and 1.4 and 2x.
I'm looking to get a mid/wide zoom. I wanted a Sigma 18-125 but they no longer seem to exist. So instead looking at 24-135 (Sigma or Tamron) any views on these and prices I'd xpect to pay in UK. What other lenses should I consider. I don't really want to spend more than £250. Are there any other lenses starting at around 18mm with at least 90mm at the top end? - Also I would consider something around the 24-90 or 24-105 mark.
These type of lenses don't seem to get reviews in the mags so any advice gratefully received.
Cheers
Donut

Current kit is: -
K100D with kit 18-55
Tamron 70-300
Pentax 50mm 1.7
2x macro/teleconverter
1.4x teleconverter

I would like a better "everyday lense" but don't want a full range 18-250 type lense as I have the tamron already. Ideally I'd like to get a sigma 10-20mm eventually but not a priority now.

Question is - does anyone have any experiences or opinions on the following two lense options: -
Get Pentax 28-105 (£240) and keep the 18-55 kit lense for now.
Get Sigma 18-125 (£185) and get rid/part ex the 18-55 - I am leaning towards this option at the moment.

Just to confuse things there is also a Tamron 24-135 for about £330 - this would really be pushing the finances though and I can't really see the advantage over the sigma re focal lengths - not sure about quality thou.

Cheers
Donut

I have a x2 macro converter that I use with a 50mm prime. You undoubltedly get a reduction in quality with these as there is a large amount of additional glass. I however do not possess a dedicated macro lense and find that the x2 convertoer gives me OK results as does my new Tamron 70-300 (even though only to 1:2). The advantage of my macro convertor is that it also is a x2 convertor.
The other option is a decent +4 filter - worth a try - what thread size do you have - I may have a spare knocking about that you could try.
Donut

Actually a reversing ring or extension tube would be identical regarding quality as neither has any additional glass so the results would be down to the quality of the original lense. The extension tube is likely to give more reliable/consistent results due to convenience/auto exposure and as such overall you could argue would produce the better results .
Donut

Personally I'd use an extension tube. The problem with reversing rings is that you have none of the auto exposure/aperture controls so have to experiment with each shot.
Can pick up auto extension tubes or macro converters pretty cheap secondhand.
Donut

Is it me or is the wood background sharper than the bird....may just be th enature of the plumage.
Donut

Oh by the way Chirpy - did you manaul focus or use the autofocus for those shots?
Donut

I've just bought the Tamron equivalent which is supposed to performwell. Those dragonfly macros are really impressive. I didn't expect a lens tof this price to be able to produce that quality of result - I piced up the Tamron for a £99 so hopefully I've got a decent buy. I think I'm going to have to spend some more time with it
Donut

Hi, I have a nice Tokina 70-210 Auto Focus that I'm selling. This is a really nice lense and I've used it succefully with my K100D. As will most AF lenses it can be used in manual mode, but I found the Autofocus and auto appature really useful.
Yours for the bargain price of £30 if you're interested.
Donut