Should I trade my Sigma 17-70 2.8/4.5 for the Pentax 16-85?

<p>I currently have the sigma lens as my 'walkaround,' but am planning a trip to Ireland this fall, and was wondering if anyone had experience with the newish Pentax 16-85. I like the fact that it's weather resistant and also gives a bit more range, but wanted to get some thoughts from anyone who has used it or both lenses mentioned.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Bill</p>

<p>The Sigma was my first lens (although this was quite some time ago), and I did enjoy it. I got the 16-85 this year, planning to use it for a hiking trip. It did very well. It's quite versatile (although a bit heavy--this may be less of a concern for you, I am a small woman). I just keep it on my K-5 now unless I have specific plans that call for one of my other lenses. It doesn't handle bokeh like a Limited, but that's not generally what I'm worried about when I'm using a walk-around lens. For me, the extra reach over the Sigma is really important, I tend to favor a short telephoto range in the way I see.<br>

<br />Here are some pictures I have taken with it: <a href="

<p>Ruby,</p>

<p>Thanks for the info and the examples. Certainly looks like a great lens for my purposes, and the WR should be very useful in Ireland.</p>

<p>Bill</p>

<p>Bill, I use this lens range occasionally, but do not have or use either lens specifically. I suggest stepping back and consider the list of sites and picture activities you are planning or expecting to do. Then consider a lens range combination that fits it. If you have already done this exercise, then have you considered other focal lengths? I guess I don't see a huge need to change what you already have. In my case, I would likely choose differently as I don't need the zoom ratio(?). How about the Pentax 18-135? Just tossing out some thoughts in order to further complicate the idea! :-) In my case, 80-90% of images are taken within 28mm-75mm lens fov based on 35mm film format. I use the same thinking for APS-C capture and usually have both a film & digibody handy.</p>

<p>Thanks Jeff. I've also looked at the 18-135, but like having the bit wider angle and am somewhat hung up on the idea that less zoom range makes for a slightly better lens, though I used to use a Sigma 17-250 pretty heavily until I gave it to my son. A main reason for wanting to replace the 17-70 is the weather resistance of the Pentax lens, which will likely come in handy in Ireland.</p>

<p>Appreciate the thoughts.</p>

<p>If you don't mind taking a certain loss on your current Sigma lens, I'd say <em>"<strong>Yes</strong>, go for the Pentax." </em><br>

Photozone recently gave the newer, wider zoom lens a <em>thumb up</em> "<strong>highly recommended</strong>". Because of<br>

the quick & easy ISO adjust, f/2.8 vs f/4 are of little consequence anymore. Though size, weight and price<br>

are matters to consider...</p>

<p>Thanks Wolf. Appreciate the input. Hate to take the loss, but the weather resistance and extra range are pretty inviting.</p>