Rnd227
Active member
It's there ...
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/408-pentax_1770_4
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/408-pentax_1770_4
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
17-70mm test by photozone.de
- Thread starter Rnd227
- Start date
sfa1966
Senior Member
Fair, thorough, dry and technical: all as per usual for photozone. Seems to be a good job done by Klaus (again). Hopefully he'll take a little less flak this time than he normally has to!
--
Cheers,
sfa
A very limited photographer ...
--
Cheers,
sfa
A very limited photographer ...
paulkienitz
Veteran Member
Based on some of the negative things people were saying I wasn't expecting this strong a showing. It sounds very decent.
--
K10D, Sig 17-70, DA 55-300, FA 50/1.4 "Billy Bass", M 400/5.6 "the Great Truncheon"
--
K10D, Sig 17-70, DA 55-300, FA 50/1.4 "Billy Bass", M 400/5.6 "the Great Truncheon"
tombell1
Senior Member
Given comments here .. this is a very positive result. I am happy with my Sigma ... BUT if i did not have this lens already i would i think buy this lens ... love having Pentax lenses .. love the feel and everything about them ... and positive reviews from this source are an icing on the cake ..
Thanks Klaus and well done Pentax .... I wish i could justify it ... and i wouldeven now in the UK if it was weatherproof!!!
--
Tom Bell
Dartmoor
Devon
http://flickr.com/photos/tombell1
Thanks Klaus and well done Pentax .... I wish i could justify it ... and i wouldeven now in the UK if it was weatherproof!!!
--
Tom Bell
Dartmoor
Devon
http://flickr.com/photos/tombell1
hanhait
Senior Member
Small comparison with Sigma 17-70 at f/4
Distortion: Pentax 3.1%, Sigma 3.0% at 17 mm
Vignetting: at 17-35-70 mm
Pentax 1.08 0.66 0.74
Sigma 0.98 0.6 0.8
Center Resolution at 17 -35 - 70 mm
Pentax 2244 2028 1952
Sigma 2054 1888 1970
Border Resolution at 17-35-70 mm
Pentax 1849 1885 1702
Sigma 1860 1825 1878
CA at 17-35-70 mm
Pentax 2.2 0.5 0.5
Sigma 1.5 0.8 0.9
Pentax appears to win in extreme borders but these are hard to compare.
On the other hand the Sigma has closer focussing and 2.8 at 17 mm.
All in all it's close, certainly the difference is not enough to make me sell my K100D, where the Pentax does not fit on.
Distortion: Pentax 3.1%, Sigma 3.0% at 17 mm
Vignetting: at 17-35-70 mm
Pentax 1.08 0.66 0.74
Sigma 0.98 0.6 0.8
Center Resolution at 17 -35 - 70 mm
Pentax 2244 2028 1952
Sigma 2054 1888 1970
Border Resolution at 17-35-70 mm
Pentax 1849 1885 1702
Sigma 1860 1825 1878
CA at 17-35-70 mm
Pentax 2.2 0.5 0.5
Sigma 1.5 0.8 0.9
Pentax appears to win in extreme borders but these are hard to compare.
On the other hand the Sigma has closer focussing and 2.8 at 17 mm.
All in all it's close, certainly the difference is not enough to make me sell my K100D, where the Pentax does not fit on.
Extreme borders @17mm f4 - f5.6 - f8
Pentax 1637 1912 1877
Sigma 1038 1245 1418
Pretty abysmall on Sigma side if you ask me especially with all the fury against extreme border performance on DA* 16-50 (a lot better though).
I maintain my opinion that most Pentax modern lenses fringe a lot less on a K20D due to different sensor.
Yes, but also has a huge vignette of 1.31 at that range/f stop.
Radu
Hi,
I bought a sigma 17-70 before the Pentax was announced, but anyway, I'd choose the sigma anyway. Optical quality seems to be on the same level, but the sigma is faster up to 35, and slower by 1/3 stop only after 65mm. But the greater aspect is the price, in Italy at least the sigma is almost half price of the Pentax. SDM doesn't seems anought to justify the huge price step.
P17-70 it's a very nice lense, but price related is too much in the league of 16-50 or tammy 17-50 , from my point of view.
what you think?
bye
I bought a sigma 17-70 before the Pentax was announced, but anyway, I'd choose the sigma anyway. Optical quality seems to be on the same level, but the sigma is faster up to 35, and slower by 1/3 stop only after 65mm. But the greater aspect is the price, in Italy at least the sigma is almost half price of the Pentax. SDM doesn't seems anought to justify the huge price step.
P17-70 it's a very nice lense, but price related is too much in the league of 16-50 or tammy 17-50 , from my point of view.
what you think?
bye
hanhait
Senior Member
Sorry, Sigma is a bit better in comparison as you compared f2.8 to f4:
Extreme borders @17mm f4 - f5.6 - f8
Pentax 1637 1912 1877
Sigma 1245 1418 1814
Brett St Pierre
Veteran Member
tombell1 wrote:
. I wish i could justify it ...
I had high hopes for this lens but my early example was very poor at the long end, the wide to mid range was excellent but otherwise I really liked the lens and it's handling. If i could have been guaranteed a good example on exchange I would have taken it but another forum member tried 3 examples of the DA17-70 (early production) and they were duds too. Hopefully Pentax has them right now because this lens otherwise has many of the Pentax qualities we all have come to love.
Regards
--
Brett
http://www.pbase.com/shreder
The Journey is the Thing
. I wish i could justify it ...
Well Tom, even though it isn't a sealed lens it does have the same sealing around mount as the DA* lenses so at least the camera body is protected from ingress at that point.
I had high hopes for this lens but my early example was very poor at the long end, the wide to mid range was excellent but otherwise I really liked the lens and it's handling. If i could have been guaranteed a good example on exchange I would have taken it but another forum member tried 3 examples of the DA17-70 (early production) and they were duds too. Hopefully Pentax has them right now because this lens otherwise has many of the Pentax qualities we all have come to love.
Regards
--
Brett
http://www.pbase.com/shreder
The Journey is the Thing
The 17mm setting is Sigma's weakest part. I used to have a Sigma 17-70mm and I was very happy with its IQ. On my K100D Super I see little difference in IQ between the DA18-250mm and the Sigma 17-70mm, in the range 18-70mm of the DA18-250mm. The advantage of the DA16-45mm lies in its 16mm setting.
The DA17-70mm seems quite OK and of the same lquality as the DA16-45mm and the Sigma 17-70mm.
On 6Mp sensor a lot of lenses perform ok but as the Mp (and especially the Mp/cm2 density) rise some will perform better and others won't keep the pace. IMO DA17-70 is very future proof.
Radu
The price depends on the country. In The Netherlands it is too pricy, but in Germany the same lens is nearly 20% cheaper. A price range of 450-475 euros seems ok for this type of lens. The Sigma 17-70mm is cheaper, of course. Some people prefer own brand lenses whereas others have a liking for lenses made by independant lens manufacturers.
Many tests are purely technical but don't take other things, such as colour rendition into account.
Quite right. The Sigma 17-70mm is a worse performer on cameras with more MPs. It performs better on a Nikon D200 than on a Nikon D300.
rationalroot
Forum Enthusiast
With Sterling in the toilet (ha ha)
srs micro systems dot co dot uk
£328 with £50 cash back from pentax or €60 cash back for Ireland.
Include shipping £15 and Convert that to Euros
£343 => €382
Less €60 cashback = €322
That's not shabby.
Just pulled the trigger.
srs micro systems dot co dot uk
£328 with £50 cash back from pentax or €60 cash back for Ireland.
Include shipping £15 and Convert that to Euros
£343 => €382
Less €60 cashback = €322
That's not shabby.
Just pulled the trigger.
Roland Mabo
Forum Pro
I am interrested in this lens myself. I would choose it over Sigma 17-70 because of SDM, QuickShift-focus, nice feel and the special contrast and colour rendition - the look to the images - that Pentax lenses gives and I prefer this to Sigma. Sigma is not bad, but it is different. A matter of taste IMHO.
Price difference - yes, no surprises. Sigma has always been less expensive than Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus etc. They are the worlds biggerst third party maker of lenses and produce millons of lenses each year, so they can afford to have lower margins than others + they don't have to develop so much of their own technology. They uses copies the lens mounts.
I am not against Sigma, I currently have the Sigma AF 24 f/2.8 which is a fine performer and I used to have the Sigma A 70-210 f/4-5.6. I also have a Sigma flash.
But I buy Sigma when I can't afford the Pentax original, it feels better for me to buy Pentax original.
--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo
Price difference - yes, no surprises. Sigma has always been less expensive than Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus etc. They are the worlds biggerst third party maker of lenses and produce millons of lenses each year, so they can afford to have lower margins than others + they don't have to develop so much of their own technology. They uses copies the lens mounts.
I am not against Sigma, I currently have the Sigma AF 24 f/2.8 which is a fine performer and I used to have the Sigma A 70-210 f/4-5.6. I also have a Sigma flash.
But I buy Sigma when I can't afford the Pentax original, it feels better for me to buy Pentax original.
--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo
Russell Evans
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,617
- Solutions
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1,732
Why do you need QuickShift-focus on a SDM only lens? Think about it, there are only electrical contact, not mechanical.
Thank you
Russell
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum