what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman <bori...@gmail.com> wrote: > One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a > handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as > not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM > lenses, at least the cheaper ones. > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks <pentko...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I >> have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, >> but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don >> t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma >> feature. Decisions decisions. >> >> Dave >> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman <bori...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I >>> did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that >>> heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although >>> indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look >>> that is handy for transportation, obviously. >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta <jlah...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some >>>> responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The >>>> only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes >>>> loose. >>>> I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it >>>> looks and feels extremely compact. >>>> >>>> However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has >>>> one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a >>>> bit expensive. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Jaume >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Mensaje original ----- >>>>> De: Boris Liberman <bori...@gmail.com> >>>>> Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>>>> CC: >>>>> Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 >>>>> Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range >>>>> >>>>> Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses >>>>> can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It >>>>> successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 >>>>> (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM >>>>> (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted >>>>> out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it >>>>> won't break down just because. >>>>> >>>>> Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right >>>>> now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks <pentko...@gmail.com> >>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. >>>>>> www.caughtinmotion.com >>>>>> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> York Region, Ontario, Canada >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>> follow the directions. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Boris >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>> follow >>>>> the directions. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>> follow the directions. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Boris >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> >> -- >> Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. >> www.caughtinmotion.com >> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ >> York Region, Ontario, Canada >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > > -- > Boris > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
