Sigma 17-50 2.8 or Sigma 17-70 2.8-4? Low light people shots?

Nikon_Josh · Sep 22, 2011

Thanks for the great and insightful advice

Tammy make great lenses, no doubt about that one. Just the AF and build quality are a downer for me compared to the high quality of the Sigma in these regards.

Nikon_Josh · Sep 23, 2011

Just one last thing to ask you guys, do you think it's worth me selling me Canon S90 to fund this purchase?

I'm in huge turmoil over this question, I just can't seem to 'like' this camera, when I bought it I thought I was getting a compact that can produce decent photographs. But I really hate the results it produces on most occasions, it is raved about in most reviews. But I find the results are hugely similar to any other compact camera I have tried. NOISE NOISE NOISE....No Dynamic range.. Poor colour reproduction.. did I mention dynamic range..this camera is always always blowing highlights in every situation. I thought it was meant to put other compacts to the shame with its slightly larger sensor.

I just wonder if I will regret selling it and going back to a cheapo compact...

Markw · Sep 23, 2011

That really is a personal question that only you can answer. If you don't think you would come to situations where you will NEED the S90 over the 17-50/2.8 OS, then I wouldn't sell it. But you don't seem to enjoy the photos the camera produces. And, if that's the case, I would definitely sell it. I wouldn't keep any camera or lens alike that produces photos that were sub-par to my liking.

Mark