Am I missing something here?

[Nikon_Dude]

Why is this f2.8 lens only 200 dollars?

SIGMA | 18-50mm Zoom Lens | for Nikon | 861306 | SuperDigitalCity

When this looks like a very similar lens but for 3 times the price...

SuperDigitalCity | SIGMA | 17-50mm Zoom Lens | for Nikon | 583306

I'm not too familiar with Sigma lenses, but both look like they have their stabilizer in it...

 

[Bram]

Yeah you're definately missing something. You're missing the f/2.8-4.5. along with the EX on the more expensive one. What it means is this: The cheaper lens has the capability of 2.8 but only at 18mm. The 17-50 will maintain a f/2.8 all the way from 17-50 while the other won't.

 

[Nikon_Dude]

Duh. Ok now I feel retarded for not seeing that. What does the EX mean?

 

[orb9220]

Means superior build and higher quality glass for the optics.
.

 

[Bram]

Orb beat me to it. Therefore it's more expensive.

 

[reznap]

Perfect example of "you get what you pay for."

OP, also consider the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (they make one with vibration compensation... like Nikon's VR - but the one without VC is sharper and more affordable). Like the expensive Sigma, it also maintains f/2.8 throughout its zoom range.

 

[Nikon_Dude]

Thanks I'll look into it. I'm not gonna be buying any lenses immediately but I want to get some faster zooms so just keeping my eyes out for what's available. I eventually want a 70-200 f2.8 and either a 18-50 f2.8 or the 24-70.

 

[Bram]

Thanks I'll look into it. I'm not gonna be buying any lenses immediately but I want to get some faster zooms so just keeping my eyes out for what's available. I eventually want a 70-200 f2.8 and either a 18-50 f2.8 or the 24-70.

Haha don't worry we all want those :greenpbl: