On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Mark Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > Larry Colen wrote: > >>I keep finding myself "needing" a lens that is wide, fast and >>preferably reasonably sharp. Pretty much all I have wider than 31 are >>my 18-55 and my 18-250. I'm thinking of diverting some of the money >>from selling my racecar to buying glass. >> >>I think that the ideal lens would be a 16-50, and I keep bumming that >>I never went for the one on craigslist just before I got laid off. >> >>Poking around on ebay, I've found a few options. >> >>Pentax 16-50 seems to go for $750-800 >>A Zenitar K MC 2.8 16mm for $180 >>A couple of Pentax SMC DA 14mm f2.8 ED for around $590 >>SIGMA 17-35mm f2.8-4 DG EX $300 >>Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC $370 > > How about the Pentax 16-45? Slower than the 16-50 but smaller and > cheaper. >
Owned both that and the Sigma 17-70. The Sigma's as fast or faster, better built, at least as good optically and locks at its most compact at 17mm (rather than being fully extended as the 16-45 is at 16mm). The 16-45's got QSF as its sole advantage. Note I did like the results from the 16-45. But I had zero regrets when I purchased the 17-70 over the 16-45 after getting my K10D. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
