DA16-45 VS Sigma 17-70

simdavid · 26th April 2007

Hi all,

Which lens do you guys think is a better performer?

livetofly · 26th April 2007

personally vote for Sigma 17-70, for its wider zoom coverage, sharp image and closer min-focal distance. however, DA 16-45 got better build mechanical quality and SMC coating to prevent glare more effectively.

creampuff · 26th April 2007

The Sigma has the edge in terms of angle of view at the long end but in my opinion this isn't a very big advantage. But the difference at the wide end is quite dramatic. That 1 mm difference in focal length equates to about 10 degrees of angle of view between the two lenses (remember that angle of view increases tangentially). That certainly gives the Pentax the edge when shooting landscapes or interiors. (Pentax 83º~35º vs Sigma 72.4º~20.2º).

Both have aspherical and extra low dispersion elements (Pentax 13 elements/10 groups vs Sigma 15 elements/12 groups). One is a constant aperture while the other is a variable aperture, which could be an issue when using studio flash setups. Sigma has 7 aperture blades vs 8 for the Pentax.

The Sigma focuses closer and has a slightly higher max magnification, not a big issue for wideangles. It is a bigger, heavier lens with a bigger filter thread compared to the Pentax (Sigma 72mm vs Pentax 67mm).

Although the Sigma is plenty sharp, I went with the Pentax because of the wider angle of view figuring that I got other lenses to cover the long end of the focal length (50mm onwards). Also found out the lens resistance to flare is very good but there is a slight tendency towards underexposure metering wise, but this is easily compensated for.

fengwei · 26th April 2007

I've had both, optically both are excellent. If you prefer wide, go w/ the 16-45. Or better yet, go w/ the Pentax 12-24 or Sigma 10-20. If you like long end, go w/ the 17-70. For walkaround the park, street and event, the Sigma 1770 does have its convenience. I'd go w/ the Sigma 1770 if I'd choose between these two (for its longer end, closer min focus distance).

If you check my recent Philippines photos, you can see about 95 percent of my photos were taken by the Sigma 1770. It's a great lens for street and travel photography.

I did use my DA50-200 for landscape mostly during the whole trip

simdavid · 26th April 2007

Thanks for all the response so far....and Feng Wei, any comment on image quality on both lens like, distortion, CA, center to edge sharpness, and is the Sigma soft on F2.8. I may be going to travel to Tibet in the next 6 months and I think the Sigma is a good travel lens but wonder how does it perform to 16-45. Wouldn't want to sacrifice IQ over convenience.

Ultimately, I really want to own the 16-50 when I could afford it but need a intermediate solution meanwhile!

fengwei · 26th April 2007

Originally Posted by simdavid

Thanks for all the response so far....and Feng Wei, any comment on image quality on both lens like, distortion, CA, center to edge sharpness, and is the Sigma soft on F2.8. I may be going to travel to Tibet in the next 6 months and I think the Sigma is a good travel lens but wonder how does it perform to 16-45. Wouldn't want to sacrifice IQ over convenience.

Ultimately, I really want to own the 16-50 when I could afford it but need a intermediate solution meanwhile!

On the wide end, the distortion by Sigma 17-70 is worse than the 16-45 which is very good on this aspect. The Sigma's tele end is better than its wide end sharpnesswise, and it's abit soft at F2.8, but center sharpness is okay though. CA and flare are all well controlled on both lenses, but both have some CA issues at wide end, while the Sigma 1770 is abit better though. Anyway, you won't be disappointed w/ either one optically.

But if you are taking a couple lenses to Tibet, I'd suggest you to get the 16-45, or better yet, a 12-24 or Sigma 10-20. You'll need as wide as possible when you are out there. Besides a wide angle, you'll need a tele lens as well (both for landscape and people). Most Chinese are shy to camera, so a longer lens would help when shooting people photos. If I were you, I'd get a Pentax 16-45 and a 50-200 combo for the trip. Wish I could go there someday

Currently there is a 16-45 and a 17-70 selling at the b&s forum

Good luck.

26th April 2007	#1
simdavid Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 518	DA16-45 VS Sigma 17-70 Hi all, Which lens do you guys think is a better performer?

26th April 2007	#2
livetofly Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 391	Re: DA16-45 VS Sigma 17-70 personally vote for Sigma 17-70, for its wider zoom coverage, sharp image and closer min-focal distance. however, DA 16-45 got better build mechanical quality and SMC coating to prevent glare more effectively. __________________ = livetofly = @ Flickr & deviantART:blah:

26th April 2007	#3
creampuff Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: East side Posts: 3,352	Re: DA16-45 VS Sigma 17-70 The Sigma has the edge in terms of angle of view at the long end but in my opinion this isn't a very big advantage. But the difference at the wide end is quite dramatic. That 1 mm difference in focal length equates to about 10 degrees of angle of view between the two lenses (remember that angle of view increases tangentially). That certainly gives the Pentax the edge when shooting landscapes or interiors. (Pentax 83º~35º vs Sigma 72.4º~20.2º). Both have aspherical and extra low dispersion elements (Pentax 13 elements/10 groups vs Sigma 15 elements/12 groups). One is a constant aperture while the other is a variable aperture, which could be an issue when using studio flash setups. Sigma has 7 aperture blades vs 8 for the Pentax. The Sigma focuses closer and has a slightly higher max magnification, not a big issue for wideangles. It is a bigger, heavier lens with a bigger filter thread compared to the Pentax (Sigma 72mm vs Pentax 67mm). Although the Sigma is plenty sharp, I went with the Pentax because of the wider angle of view figuring that I got other lenses to cover the long end of the focal length (50mm onwards). Also found out the lens resistance to flare is very good but there is a slight tendency towards underexposure metering wise, but this is easily compensated for. Last edited by creampuff; 26th April 2007 at 02:13 AM. Reason: spelling

26th April 2007	#4
fengwei Moderator Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Bukit Gombak Posts: 9,090	Re: DA16-45 VS Sigma 17-70 I've had both, optically both are excellent. If you prefer wide, go w/ the 16-45. Or better yet, go w/ the Pentax 12-24 or Sigma 10-20. If you like long end, go w/ the 17-70. For walkaround the park, street and event, the Sigma 1770 does have its convenience. I'd go w/ the Sigma 1770 if I'd choose between these two (for its longer end, closer min focus distance). If you check my recent Philippines photos, you can see about 95 percent of my photos were taken by the Sigma 1770. It's a great lens for street and travel photography. I did use my DA50-200 for landscape mostly during the whole trip Last edited by fengwei; 26th April 2007 at 06:51 AM.

26th April 2007	#5
simdavid Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 518	Re: DA16-45 VS Sigma 17-70 Thanks for all the response so far....and Feng Wei, any comment on image quality on both lens like, distortion, CA, center to edge sharpness, and is the Sigma soft on F2.8. I may be going to travel to Tibet in the next 6 months and I think the Sigma is a good travel lens but wonder how does it perform to 16-45. Wouldn't want to sacrifice IQ over convenience. Ultimately, I really want to own the 16-50 when I could afford it but need a intermediate solution meanwhile!