Dave, Here is what I wrote previously about my experience with Pentax 17-70/4:
(2 years ago:) Also, albeit very subjectively (i.e. without quantitative and systematic tests), I found that 17-70/4 tends to produce somewhat sharper images of the dancers than 16-50/2.8 even at f/4 or f/5.6. The only way I can explain this is by different quality (or speed?) of focusing. I've been puzzled by that myself, and that why I chose to keep 17-70/4 last year. [I am not sure if I had a bad sample of 16-50/2.8/] (and more recently): I like Da 17-70/4 for its versatility (for the dance photography, for taking pictures of my little kid, and some other occasions). The image is not exceptional but very reasonable. (And somewhat better than from the one DA* 16-50/2.8 that I tried, - maybe that one was a bad samples.) I wish it were sharper on the longer end. To that, I would add that it gives me that longer reach (45-70 or 50-70) that neither 16-45 nor 16-50 give, but the quality in that range is inferior to that of 50-135/2.8. On my recent trips, if I am not planning to use long focal length, I've been taking 17-70/4 instead of the 18-250 that I used to take as the most universal travel lens. I haven't had a chance to compare 17-70/4 to the 17-70/2.8-4.0 from Sigma, which is a bit faster (I assume at the wide end, right Boris?). Hope this helps, Igor On 7/23/2013 7:40 AM, David J Brooks wrote: > Hey all. > > This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short > zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 > VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer > shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the > 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get > what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. > > So > > > Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish > lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? > > I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. > > Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at > Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming > on that one. > > Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, > > Dave > -- 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.
