New Sigma 17-70, When does it come out?

[shaloot]

<p>Did I miss the announcement as to when this lens will get released? This is updated version of their 17-70, with HSM and OS. Also, some descriptions show the aperture range maxing out at the telephoto range at 4, vs. 4.5 for the older lens. There's probably not much difference b/w the two, but is this the case?</p>

<p>I'm close to pulling the trigger on the older version of this lens, but wondering if I should just wait if it's coming anytime soon?</p>

<p>And with this lens coming out, will Pentax keep their 17-70? I talked myself out of that lens by the way...</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>The old version has very iffy reviews, which is down to quality control i think. With it being a non EX lens it increases the likelyhood of you getting a lemon. A friend of mine has just ordered teh 17-70 Pentax lens, it doesn't seem that expensive for a lens you'll probably use the most, i would just go with that one if i were you, even if it means saving a little longer.</p>

<p>The 17-50/2.8 is the one that interests me! If, of course, it's made as well as other EX lenses I've had.</p>

[hinman]

<p>@Richard, I think I will be in strong disagreement with you. Can you be more specific on the iffy reviews of Sigma 17-70?</p>

<p>If you ask me to choose between the Pentax or the Sigma 17-70mm, I will likely to think less of the Pentax as the reported quality issues on SDM scare the many of us. See the 700+ signatures on <a href="http://www.petitiononline.com/593039/petition.html">SDM firmware petition</a> for the comfort. </p>

<p>The reason that I opt for the Sigma is simple -- it is inexpensive and a good walk-around and for all purpose lens, it doesn't need to be perfect. The DA 17-70 will fit the bill had it not come with the SDM stigma. I love my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 as I find it the best zoom that Pentax has produced. But with all the reported issues on SDM in 16-50 and others, I will encourage others to think twice in buying another SDM lens. Besides, my copy of used Sigma 17-70 is about half the cost DA 17-70 new. </p>

 

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I don't think Pentax generally discontinues their lenses based on what Sigma is doing. It does seem likely that Pentax took notice of the popularity of the Mk I Sigma 17-70 when they green-lighted their DA 17-70/4.</p>

<p>Maybe I'm not up to date on this but as of now I've heard few SDM complaints on DA 17-70 (just one?)-- probably most frequently on the 50-135; could be because 50-135 is an earlier design, but also could be because it has been around longer and had more time to break. Mine (knock on wood) is still OK.</p>

<p>I don't think the Mk I Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 had bad reviews, in fact I think reviews had been relatively positive if not necessarily bettering the Pentax rivals--DA16-45/4 and DA17-70/4. Like these lenses, it offers various improvements over the kit lenses for not <em>too</em> much money and I'd expect the new Sigma 17-70 will as well. I don't think its performance is quite as 'even' across the range, it takes larger filters, focus & zoom rings spin the 'wrong' way vs. Pentax, and it lacks quick-shift manual-focus touch-up. It seems likely that an HSM version would improve on that last issue however. On the positive side, it's a little faster at the wider part of the zoom and offers a closer-focusing 'macro' mode...though the Pentax zooms aren't too bad here, offering decent-enough and useful magnification--slightly better than 1:4 (.26x) for the 16-45, and nearly 1:3 (.31x) for the 17-70. Also on the positive side, the old version is about $100 cheaper than the DA17-70, though the new version will be close in price at time of introduction (whenever that will be).</p>

<p>I would look for reviews of the new Sigma in Canon and Nikon mounts, see how it compares. In the case of the new stabilized Tamron 17-50/2.8 tests suggest that performance seems to have slipped a bit, so it shouldn't be considered a given that new versions are always better across the board.</p>

<p> </p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>The only lens test for the new Sigma 17-70 I know of is here: <a href="http://www.lenstip.com/223.1-Lens_review-Sigma_17-70_mm_f_2.8-4.0_DC_Macro_OS_HSM.html">http://www.lenstip.com/223.1-Lens_review-Sigma_17-70_mm_f_2.8-4.0_DC_Macro_OS_HSM.html</a></p>

<p>and they rate it very highly.</p>

<p>They also tested the older one here: <a href="http://www.optyczne.pl/14.1-Test_obiektywu-Sigma_17-70_mm_f_2.8-4.5_DC_Macro.html">http://www.optyczne.pl/14.1-Test_obiektywu-Sigma_17-70_mm_f_2.8-4.5_DC_Macro.html</a></p>

<p>Their conclusion, the newer one is better.</p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>And it's on sale now: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_11?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=sigma+17-70mm+f2.8-4+dc+macro+os+hsm&sprefix=sigma+17-70">http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_11?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=sigma+17-70mm+f2.8-4+dc+macro+os+hsm&sprefix=sigma+17-70</a></p>

<p> </p>

[ricardovaste]

<blockquote>

<p>@Richard, I think I will be in strong disagreement with you. Can you be more specific on the iffy reviews of Sigma 17-70?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Up and down. Hit and miss. That's what I mean by iffy :). Sigma EX lenses aren't know for great QC and they're the top of the line offering. So a non EX lens naturally has an even lower hit rate. Hence, when you get a good sample reviewers seem very happy with it, but there are too many not so happy customers for my liking. So buying an old one second hand would be a waste for me, personally, I like my lenses to do the job from the go and not have to be sent back and forth for service or just sold on for something else.</p>

<p>So if you do go for the old version, definately try and find it new somewhere where you get a warranty.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>p.s. Didn't realise the 17-70 had motor problems Hin, that is a great shame. So does Pentax have a well made, reliable standard zoom...? I will have to remember to mention that to my friend who just ordered one.</p>

[shaloot]

<p>Well all this just threw a kink in my plans. I've read on the other forum that people are happy with the older version of the lens, but I didn't realize that the 17-70 from Pentax hasn't had the SDM issue per say. And if this new lens is going to cost the same as the Pentax then... hmm.</p>

<p>The close focus feature I would find useful, and I'm more interested in new than used. By which I mean having a warranty.</p>

<p>Well maybe I'll hold off the purchase yet again... and maybe get my car's brakes fixed instead :)</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>ha! I think brakes might be more important Somanna :)</p>

[ken_yee]

<p>I'm happy w/ the old version, but only after I got to the 3rd copy. The first two had decentering issues that were really hard to find...only when I shots a lot of frames on vacation because it happened at specific focal length/range combos...<br>

Not sure if the new one is worth upgrading to if you already have the old one..</p>

 

[les_lammers]

<p>I have a Pentax 17-70 SDM. It was in the box unused for 6 months. I sold it here and it went to Australia. I did not check on a body it B4 I mailed it and packaging was bomb proof. :-). It was DOA. I took it back and the motor was replaced under warranty by CRIS. So what do *I* think? I'll take KISS..screw drive.. and avoid CRIS in the future. IMHO, the more complicated a lens is the more risk of potential problems. I don't think this is Pentax only issue. No more HSM, SDM only, silent whizz bang lenses for me. There may never be another issue with this lens...but it is going on e*ay.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>I dunno Les, I've never heard of any SSM failure with Sony G or ZA lenses... I'd say it's the way forward, when it's done right. I get much more accurate focusing with my HSM lens and full time manual focus is great.</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>Richard,<br />You may be right. This is just my opinion and I may change my mind when the technology matures a bit...or my eyes get worse. :-)</p>

<p>Ya know, it could be an assembly issue that causes these failures and not anything mechanical per se. QC is not what it used to be. Even the Leica people have issues with MF lenses. :-(</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>I sometimes think the reason we have mechanical issues, as well as optical issues is simply because we shoot digital and view on a monitor where we can zoom in. I bet a large percentage of people who return lenses for optical complaints wouldn't have even noticed them if they were shooting film (or just printing to the size they 'would'). At the same time, there is so much pressure because of this on lens manufacturers to get every pixel as perfect as possible that the emphasis slides to the glass, rather than the mechanics and electronics. There are lots of well made lenses out there of course, so many... just you feel if there was more money put towards build/electronics and people were more realistic with how they view their images... the world would be a better place ;). Sorry, getting waay off topic now..</p>

<p>We should all go back to M42's maybe :)</p>

[les_lammers]

<p>I just don't expect a motor to fail in an essentially new lens. The availability of a three or five year warranty from Pentax on SDM lenses would make me more comfortable with them. I had no issues with the optical qualities of the lens. It was quite good.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I will admit, I like the quick & quiet focusing of the DA 17-70/4 SDM. And even though I haven't seen many reports of problems with this lens, I do worry that it may let me down someday, more likely than my other AF lenses. It shouldn't be that way, and hopefully in a couple of years some of these teething pains will be behind Pentax. Maybe lenses built today have fewer of these problems than before. Anyway, I would have bought this lens with or without SDM based on spec, tested performance, and build. I hope I don't regret it.</p>

<p>One other thing--I actually feel better knowing that Les' problem was a DOA issue, not one that failed after use. This leaves open the possibility that it was merely a QC problem, possibly an assembly issue, rather than poorly or under-designed parts that are doomed to eventual failure. I would feel better if the warranty was longer, like three years.</p>

<p>Anyway, as an aside, I was reading something recently where some new Hasselblad 50-110 (?) zoom lenses that were probably priced at nearly $3K had early issues with the front elements falling out. I'll bet that disappointed/surprised/p.o.-ed some people. I'll also bet that Hasselblad handled it better than Pentax seems to be doing and probably replaced these lenses as quickly as they could.</p>

<p> </p>

[les_lammers]

<p>Andrew,<br>

You bought this lens after I posted a few pics with mine. I did not use it often and it 'died' sitting in the box. It was never dropped or abused. Perhaps it was a QC assembly / issue, not the design, and the workers are now doing it right. CRIS said they replaced the SDM but I don't know what that means. There can be no doubt that the old manual lenses were more rugged but they were not as complex. My 'repaired' lens may never have an issue. I think we just have to get used to 'problems'. I have no plans to leave Pentax.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>BTW, I saw that the K-mount version of the new Sigma 17-70 should be <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10021601sigma17mm70mmsonypentax.asp">due out imminently</a> .</p>

<p>Les: OK, it was working when you got it but it was DOA when you shipped it to Australia. I misinterpreted what you initially said.</p>

[jeremy_corbin]

<p>I'm beginning to think that the SDM issue has been similar to the "Runaway Prius" issue in the news lately. What we have with Toyota is a good car company that subcontracted the wrong part to the wrong manufacturer. I'm sure it's more economical to have another company make the SDM motor for the lenses and then shipped to Vietnam for assembly. It's a disappointing event, and no matter how the company handles it, the reputation is tarnished.</p>

<p>Frankly, I'm not in a position that I *need* a silent focusing lens. My requirements are more generic with my first and foremost requirement being Ease of Use. If it's a PITA to use, I won't use it. I won't get a return on my investment. This one factor has several contributing factors; making it complicated. My Vivitar 28-80 lens is rather sharp for what it is, but the CAs against strong contrast backgrounds makes it a pain during post (assuming I can do anything about it at all) if I didn't want the dreamy look. If I spend more time cleaning up the mess it made than I think the lens is worth, than I won't use it. Subsequently I haven't used this lens for anything significant in months.</p>

<p>To bring this around full circle, if I'm so afraid that the lens I pick is going to let me down or make me work harder than I have to I'm not going to use it, and money (which everyone seems to have little of these days) is wasted. My equipment should work <em>for me</em> ... not me <em>for it.</em> I'm very interested in the IQ of these lenses, and I'm seriously considering the Sigma 30mm EX f/1.4 as my primary lens, but HSM isn't a feature that excites me...rather.... it scares me. I'm not against Sigma at all, I'm just afraid of fancy motors that fail and give me more work to do.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Jeremiah, heard very mixed things about the Sigma 30/1.4, but it seems nice for APS-C (for those that like 50mm on 35mm) so, as ever, buy new with warranty if you go for the Sigma :)</p>