Sigma 17mm-50mm F/28 Ex Dc Os Hsm Review Ken Rockwell

9ballprodigy

I guys, normally I am able to do my own inquiry on this one but I discover at e information is skewed to one side or the other. I currently ain the 18-105 vr and I haven't many complaints other than the distortion I see at the wide extreme. The vr works well, and it'south pretty sharp when stopped down to five.six. The thing is that I'm actually tempted to trade up to a sigma 17-50mm ex bone hsm as my walk around lens. I hear the images are sharper and of course there's the 2.8 constant aperture to boot. I as well see that the af on the sigma is fast enough. Ken Rockwell denounces the eighteen-105 for beingness soft around the corners and Lens tip.com seem to praise it for having sharper edges than the eighteen-135. I'm actually on the fence about this one. Has anyone here traded upwards and was information technology worth the money? Is it worth the loss of range?

djacobox372

Take you considered the tamron equivelant? I see a lot more people rave near the tammy then the sigma. Sigma has sort of a bad rep when it comes to quality command, their lenses look and experience more substantial then the tamrons, just don't let that fool you--they aren't as well built.

9ballprodigy

i've fiddled with the tamron 17-50mm 2.viii vc in a camera shop, and i accept to say, i wasn't actually impressed. the zoom ring was rather tights, the af motor was loud and irksome, the focus ring moves when af is on, and i don't know if information technology was the resolution on the d90's screen or the fact that i'm used to 16mp rather than 12mp, but when i tried to zoom in on epitome, it was rather soft (on second thought, i really should have fabricated certain that the demo d90 was shooting in raw or lat least jpeg fine/large). either mode, i think i'll go back and see if i get the aforementioned result with my d7000 body.

sleist

I woull likewise suggest the Tamron. I know someone who has one and it has nice sharpness and dissimilarity on her D200.
The D7000 might be less forgiving of information technology's weaknesses though.
I ain nikon 17-55 f/2.8 and dearest it, but information technology's a bit more money.
I have not used the Sigma, but I've heard it compares similarly to the Tamron.

I even so own the eighteen-105 and notice information technology to be a very squeamish kit lens.
A chip lighter than the 17-55 too.

9ballprodigy

Ok. I got a chance to go back to the camera store and retry the Tammy 17-50mm vc with my d7000. The sharpness actually is substantial, but I nevertheless have qualms with the tight zoom ring and the slow af motor. Definitely because it. Although the hsm and better build quality of the sigma is worth considering likewise.

djacobox372

i've fiddled with the tamron 17-50mm 2.8 vc in a camera store, and i have to say, i wasn't really impressed. the zoom band was rather tights, the af motor was loud and slow, the focus ring moves when af is on, and i don't know if information technology was the resolution on the d90'south screen or the fact that i'm used to 16mp rather than 12mp, simply when i tried to zoom in on epitome, it was rather soft (on second thought, i really should take made sure that the demo d90 was shooting in raw or lat to the lowest degree jpeg fine/large). either style, i retrieve i'll get dorsum and see if i get the same effect with my d7000 torso.

I would agree that the sigma "feels" better, but I've owned both and the tamron was sharper, lighter, and focused faster. Of course sigma is well known for their quality control bug, I might have had a bad copy--wouldn't be the first time, the other two sigma lenses I've purchased broke within a year of buying them as well.

9ballprodigy

Are you lot guys talking nearly the vc version or not vc version?

MLeeK

I JUST posted images from the Tamron non VC version in NikonJosh'southward postal service most it.

The sigma-my only question is WHY would anyone want the Os characteristic on a lens with that angle of view? you would have to have your shutter at 1/l to avert vibration or camera shake... Most people tin't mitt concur at 1/50 anyhow AND for about subjects you'd be shooting at a shutter speed much faster than that anyway... I don't go why Sigma is putting OS on anything under 100mm at information technology'south longest end.

I'd choose the Tamron 28-75, personally if that'due south an option. If y'all NEED to accept the 17mm... I'd guess probably the Tamron 17-50. I LIKE mine, only you'll see my dislikes in NikonJosh's post.