Anyone using a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8?

dakkon76

TPF Noob!
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
464
Reaction score
39
Location
Eastern Washington
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
So, after enduring a long week at work and getting quite a bit of overtime and double-time, I think I'll have enough on this next check to buy myself a 7D :D (I wish I was more motivated to work extra all the time...) Since I'm selling my XSi with it's kit lens, I would only be left with my 2 primes. I decided that I'd look into a decent zoom to start out with for taking some landscapes and shots of the kids, etc with.

After comparing the Sigma to the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 it sounds like a lot of people who've reviewed the lens are pretty happy with it. I'm wondering if anyone here has been using it with good results? Since I won't have anything that's wider than 50mm (cropped, even), I'm wondering if this is the way to go. Since it's the difference between basically working 1 shift or 2 shifts, I wouldn't cringe too bad at going with the Canon over the Sigma but, from what I read online, about the only negative of the Sigma is that it doesn't have manual focus override like the Canon does... but I haven't really used this too much on my 2 lenses that have it, either.
 

Derrel

Mr. Rain Cloud
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
48,227
Reaction score
18,926
Location
USA
Website
www.pbase.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I will be getting a Sigma 17-50 2.8 myself at some point, I have to say looking at all the reviews I came to same conclusion. This review is the one you need to check out- it answers your question for you.. here goes..

Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 vs Canon 17-55mm f2.8 and Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 « Darwin Wiggett

Good Lord...that overpriced Canon has its lunch handed to it by a Sigma in a lot of those tests...no wonder Canon's reputation as a lens maker is still so middlin'...
 

Texas Parrothead

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
126
Reaction score
5
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
I bought the Sigma 17-50 2.8 Nikon mount in March and have been loving it ever since. This was was on my camera 99% of the time....until I just got a 24-70 2.8 to play with. I don't think i will ever sell it. I currently have enough money to upgrade to the Nikon 17-55 2.8 and won't (that is how much I love it). IQ is great. Low light capability is great (for a zoom). Build quality is great. You won't ever regret buying this lens!!
 
OP
D

dakkon76

TPF Noob!
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
464
Reaction score
39
Location
Eastern Washington
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
But now you prefer the 24-70? I was all hot for the Canon 24-70, but now i worry that the 24mm would end up not being wide enough on a crop body, being effectively 38mm.
 

shootermcgavin

TPF Noob!
Joined
Sep 22, 2011
Messages
939
Reaction score
77
Location
Midwest
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I was actually thinking about getting that 17-50, but the 24-70 sounds like it'd be a better fit. Quiet a price jump though. I compared the Tamron to the Sigma 17-50 and the photos I took were identical, the one thing that I did notice was the zoom on the Tamron is really sticky and the Sigma has a lot smoother zoom. My 18-270 Tamron is sticky in the same way I think it's just the way they build them. I haven't got a sigma yet but I'm anxious to try it for the next lens.
 

Texas Parrothead

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
126
Reaction score
5
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
I went through very undecided and stressful period with the 24-70 f2.8. I bought the Nikon version ($1700) from adorama. I like it but it wasn't as sharp as I thought it would be at 2.8. So I bought a brand new copy of the older Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Macro (Non HSM) ($599). I was very surprised that it gave great results at 2.8 in low light. Not as good as the Nikon, but not good enough to justify $1100 difference. The Nikon went back and the diff went into a savings account for future purchases. That being said, if i could only keep either the 17-50 or the 24-70 I would keep the Sigma 17-50. It has OS and I think it does have better image quality than the 24-70. Don't get me wrong, I like the both but I think the 17-50 has slightly better image quality. The reason I like the 24-70 is my style of shooting is to get in close and the 24-70 makes that a little easier. I like to zoom in on my little ones and not make it apparent I am shooting pics. I do notice that I don't use the wide portion of the 17-50 that much. so the 24-70 suits the focal range better for me. I know my rant probably isn't helping you decide to much. It is just my own personal insight to both of these lenses and my style of shooting. Good luck!
 
OP
D

dakkon76

TPF Noob!
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
464
Reaction score
39
Location
Eastern Washington
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Not at all, I appreciate the rant. I know that the majority of the work I do with either of those 2 will be pics of people so I find myself wondering the same thing - do I really need it quite so wide. Both of the primes I have I really enjoy shooting with... so part of me wants a lens that will reach as far as my 85mm does. At the same time, it doesn't take that much to switch between the 2 and having 17mm for doing some landscapes or close-up wide angles may come in handy; not to mention the lack of IS on the 24-70 was something that turned me off. Granted, you can shoot fast at 2.8, but if you want to increase your DOF then you're stuck with a slower shutter speed in lower light.
 

Texas Parrothead

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
126
Reaction score
5
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
yeah, One thing i have noticed with the 24-70 is i can't shoot at as slow a shutter speed in low light at 2.8 as I can with the 17-50. With the 17-50 i can easily go down to 1/30 sec, as long as the kids aren't moving to fast. If they are sitting playing quietly then 1/30 works fine. With the 24-70 i need to keep it above 1/60 or 1/80 to get a sharp image. If the kids are running and jumping then it is a mute point for either lens, shutter speed has to increase.
 

Big Mike

I am Big, I am Mike
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Messages
33,896
Reaction score
1,853
Location
Edmonton
Website
www.mikehodson.ca
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Is that a new SIgma lens? They used to have the 18-50mm (Tamron had the 17-50mm).
 

Big Mike

I am Big, I am Mike
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Messages
33,896
Reaction score
1,853
Location
Edmonton
Website
www.mikehodson.ca
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
I wouldn't say that the Canon had 'its lunch handed to it'....he did say that the Canon was sharper, corner to corner...especially in the F2.8-F11 range...which is where it's likely to be used most.

Of course, it's more expensive...the Canon/Nikon lens always is. The Canon will have a better resale value as well. But it is really good to see another high quality lens in this range.

I have the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 (non VC) that he mentions is the best bang for your buck in that group. I'm thinking of selling it if anyone is interested. I need to fund some full frame lenses.
 

vindex1963

TPF Noob!
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Location
Phoenix
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I LOVE my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and think it runs with the best of them. It's pretty much glued to my
Nikon D300 99% of the time.
 

Most reactions

ClickASnap

New Topics

Top