Sigma 17-50 and 70-200 2.8 opinions

[batmura]

I would appreciate opinions on these two lenses by Sigma. Are you guys pleased wih their performance, sharpness, etc? How do they hold up against competitors? For instance is there a significant difference between the Sigma and Nikon 70-200?

Cheers!

 

[KmH]

That depends on which Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 you're referring to.

 

[robbins.photo]

I would appreciate opinions on these two lenses by Sigma. Are you guys pleased wih their performance, sharpness, etc? How do they hold up against competitors? For instance is there a significant difference between the Sigma and Nikon 70-200?

Cheers!

I can't speak for the nikkor versions but I do have the Sigma 70-200 mm f 2.8 with os and I really like it. It works great on a crop sensor camera. I've always found the image quality and sharpness to be more than adequate for my needs. Autofocus is fast and reliable, really for the money it's a great lens.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[D-B-J]

I really like my Sigma 17-50 2.8OS. I've had a lot of success with it--it's sharp, accurate to focus, and the OS performs well.

Jake






Just two examples. I should add that I like the bokeh, given that it's a standard range 2.8 zoom.

 

[batmura]

Do these lenses work on a crop sensor camera?

 

[Derrel]

Do these lenses work on a crop sensor camera?

YES. The Sigma 17-50 sort of has a reputation as a very good, and very useful lens on APS-C bodies. Some "big names" actually use the Sigma 17-50. Both lenses work on APS-C cameras.

 

[D-B-J]

Do these lenses work on a crop sensor camera?

YES. The Sigma 17-50 sort of has a reputation as a very good, and very useful lens on APS-C bodies. Some "big names" actually use the Sigma 17-50. Both lenses work on APS-C cameras.

It's like a 24-70 is for FX. I opted for it over the Nikon as it was newer, cheaper, and had OS.

Jake

 

[batmura]

Is the bokeh of the 70-200 good? How about the 17-50? Does it produce a nice creamy background at 2.8 or is image quality sacrificed? Would it be safe to say the 17-70 is a vast improvement compared to Nikon's 18-55?

 

[Trblmkr]

Is the bokeh of the 70-200 good? How about the 17-50? Does it produce a nice creamy background at 2.8 or is image quality sacrificed? Would it be safe to say the 17-70 is a vast improvement compared to Nikon's 18-55?

I got the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 to replace my Nikon 18-55 as well. The only question I had was, why the hell I waited so long. It's FAR superior to the Nikon kit lens for sure and would buy it again if need be.