Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 4, 2006, 5:57 PM   #1
Member
 
waynespixels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 48
Default





This will be my first SLR, so I think I've finally decided which lenses I'm going to start out with. I've been researching for a couple weeks here and elsewhere and think these are my best options ( for now! ). I'll get the kit lens DA 18-55, the Sigma AF 70-300 APO Macro DG for my love for birding and I'm seriously looking at the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC AF for mid range stuff. I've seen many say the kit lens is OK for a kitty, not too bad a lens. I haven't seen many images or comments on the Sigma 70-300, however, in that "other" forum, Stev**, many like it as a first or even main zoom. It's gotten some pretty good reviews too, pretty good images, for the price! And lastly, I stumbled over the Sigma 17-70 the other nite and was impressed with the reviews, didn't see any pics tho. Please give me some expert advice and opinions, I want to start out with some decent glass out of the box and then look perhaps for some killer lenses.
Thanks, Wayne
waynespixels is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 4, 2006, 6:11 PM   #2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

not sure of the quality of the sigma 17-70. if it's its as good as are better the i'd not get the redundant 18-55. they are close in range.

roy
  Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 6:15 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
a200user's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Western New York
Posts: 942
Default

Just out of curiosity, as I am a newbie and thinking what I should invest in for my first DSLR, why would you get a kit lens 18-55mm and also the Sigma 17-70mm. Unless the pricing of the body with the kit lensvs. the body alone is so attractive, why would you want two lenses with similar overlapping range? If your budget allows for the Sigma 17-70 f2.8 at the wide end, wouldn't that bethe lens of choice over the 18-55 f3.5 at the wide end?
a200user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 6:24 PM   #4
Member
 
waynespixels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 48
Default

a200user wrote:
Quote:
Just out of curiosity, as I am a newbie and thinking what I should invest in for my first DSLR, why would you get a kit lens 18-55mm and also the Sigma 17-70mm. Unless the pricing of the body with the kit lensvs. the body alone is so attractive, why would you want two lenses with similar overlapping range? If your budget allows for the Sigma 17-70 f2.8 at the wide end, wouldn't that bethe lens of choice over the 18-55 f3.5 at the wide end?
You are right, I was under the assumption that the SigmaF2.8 would be better than the kit lens, but I've heard very good things about the kit lens too! Thats why I'm asking for opinions and suggestions, thanks for the input. Skip the kitty and get something else or better, right?
waynespixels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 7:09 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
a200user's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Western New York
Posts: 942
Default

Thanks, as I said, I'm new to this too and was wondering if I was missing an advantage of having both lenses. These forums are certainly a good place to get good advice before investing hundreds of dollars on something we don't need. Here's an alternative I've been thinking about. Pentax body with 18-55 kit lens, and I've been looking at a Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5 on Cameta Auctions on eBay. With the crop factor, that would give me a range of 27mm to 200mm between the two lenses. With that as an initial set I could then take my time decidingwhat I want in the long zoom range and as a prime like a 50mm F1.8. In fact I had considered just the Sigma 24-135mm alone as my initial investment. What seems to be attractive is that this Sigma 24-135 F2.8-4.5 is only $99 plus shipping. Just seems too good to be true though. Maybe it's not such a great lens?
a200user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 7:17 PM   #6
Member
 
waynespixels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 48
Default

a200user wrote:
Quote:
Thanks, as I said, I'm new to this too and was wondering if I was missing an advantage of having both lenses. These forums are certainly a good place to get good advice before investing hundreds of dollars on something we don't need. Here's an alternative I've been thinking about. Pentax body with 18-55 kit lens, and I've been looking at a Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5 on Cameta Auctions on eBay. With the crop factor, that would give me a range of 27mm to 200mm between the two lenses. With that as an initial set I could then take my time decidingwhat I want in the long zoom range and as a prime like a 50mm F1.8. In fact I had considered just the Sigma 24-135mm alone as my initial investment. What seems to be attractive is that this Sigma 24-135 F2.8-4.5 is only $99 plus shipping. Just seems too good to be true though. Maybe it's not such a great lens?
I've been reading alot on dpreview about the 24-135, some say the best since sliced bread and yet others are not impressed. Some say with Sigma lenses, you need to get lucky, a good copy they say. I may be making a mistake, but I am going to get the Sig 70-300, haven't seen too many bad remarks and many, many praises for that one! Might just make alot of mistakes on lenses, but, hey, it's all new to us and thats what ebay is for ;-) Any experts wanna comment.....please!

Wayne
waynespixels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 7:18 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Black Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford, CT
Posts: 1,309
Default

A200user

Before you purcahse the Sigma24-135. please read this post.

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=80

It appears that the Lense can have Issues With the Ist series. Having said that Many Here a very happily Using the lense. just an FYI

BK



a200user wrote:
Quote:
Thanks, as I said, I'm new to this too and was wondering if I was missing an advantage of having both lenses. These forums are certainly a good place to get good advice before investing hundreds of dollars on something we don't need. Here's an alternative I've been thinking about. Pentax body with 18-55 kit lens, and I've been looking at a Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5 on Cameta Auctions on eBay. With the crop factor, that would give me a range of 27mm to 200mm between the two lenses. With that as an initial set I could then take my time decidingwhat I want in the long zoom range and as a prime like a 50mm F1.8. In fact I had considered just the Sigma 24-135mm alone as my initial investment. What seems to be attractive is that this Sigma 24-135 F2.8-4.5 is only $99 plus shipping. Just seems too good to be true though. Maybe it's not such a great lens?
Black Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 7:45 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
a200user's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Western New York
Posts: 942
Default

Thanks Black Knight -

I guess I was right, $99 sounds too good to be true. The Sigma web site lists the 24-135 at $500. Admittedly, it's not a macro and its not a Digital designed lens either. Maybe that's why it's hit and miss with the ist* series of cameras?

Is thisanother too good to be true deal on Cameta? Sigma 2 lens set $119 + ship. Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 II Macro and Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DL Macro

There's similar Tamron lens sets that are going for $179.95. Are the Tamrons that much better?
a200user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 7:55 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

a200user wrote:
Quote:
Thanks Black Knight -

I guess I was right, $99 sounds too good to be true. The Sigma web site lists the 24-135 at $500. Admittedly, it's not a macro and its not a Digital designed lens either. Maybe that's why it's hit and miss with the ist* series of cameras?

Is thisanother too good to be true deal on Cameta? Sigma 2 lens set $119 + ship. Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 II Macro and Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DL Macro

There's similar Tamron lens sets that are going for $179.95. Are the Tamrons that much better?
Both Sigma and Tamron sell lenses at all price points. The DL macro is a lower cost version of the APO lens. I can say that little 28-80 macro does a pretty nice job as a macro. I have only taken a few "regular" shots with it so I have not really tested it except as a macro.

Tim
NonEntity1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 8:08 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
a200user's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Western New York
Posts: 942
Default

Thanks all for the advice, and sorry Waynespixels for straying away from the original post. Maybe the experts out there can comment on the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC AF for Wayne?
a200user is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 PM.