Sigma 17-50mm Yes-No?

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by Mygixxer, Dec 27, 2017.

  1. Mygixxer

    Mygixxer TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Oregon City, OR
    Hello all,
    Recently upgraded and got a canon 80D. It wasn't the camera I really wanted, but it checked the box to everything I truly needed. Was difficult to make the responsible choice and get what was realistic instead of extend myself into getting something that was more of a "want".

    I have used a canon 18-135mm for the majority of my shots because its very versatile for what I have been shooting. I want another lens with a little bit of range, but with a faster aperture. As much as I'd like to drop $1000 on a lens, I just dont have that available and am looking for the most bag for my buck type lens. I'm not huge on prime lenses, but the nifty 50 f/1.8 is in the back of my mind to grab at some point along the way.

    Through my research, the sigma - 17-50mm f/2.8 seems to fit right within the perimeters that I'm looking for. I'm well aware of the hatred towards the moving focal ring and how loud it is during video. However, I wouldn't be looking to shoot a ton of video with it and if I were, I would most likely be doing slow panning shots with manual pulls. I've seen this lens go anywhere from $289-$360 new and as low as $200 used.

    Is there another lens that I'm overlooking that would be a good comparison to this lens or even perhaps a better option?


     
  2. stk

    stk TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    49
    Location:
    Norway
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I have that Sigma for Nikon, and I'm not overly impressed. Stopped down it's just about as sharp as anything else, but at wider apertures it's not. And the image stabilization is not doing a whole lot, either.

    That being said, I'ts good enough that I haven't sold it, and I'm still using it, I'm just not sure if I would buy it again.

    To get similar specifications in this price range I think Tamrons 17-50mm f/2.8 VC is your only bet. If it's better, I don't know. You could also see if you can find a used Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS.

    Or just keep your 18-135mm and buy a fast prime.
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2018
  3. SquarePeg

    SquarePeg Nevertheless... Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    6,132
    Likes Received:
    3,683
    Location:
    Boston
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Hard to offer advice without knowing what you shoot. Are you shooting portraits? Vacation photos? Landscapes? Children? Sports? Street? A bit of everything?

    I bought the Sigma 17-50 when I had my Nikon and ended up returning it. I know it’s highly recommended by many but I was unimpressed as well. I do most of my shooting outdoors and much preferred the shots I got with my Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.

    The 50 1.8 is pretty much a must have, IMO.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Destin

    Destin Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    922
    Location:
    Western New York
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Meh. My 17-50 made a few good images but most of them were soft and underwhelming.
     
  5. beagle100

    beagle100 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,879
    Likes Received:
    473
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    the sigma is almost as good as the Canon 17-55 with similar features but less expensive. If it's for portraits consider a longer large aperture prime. (85, 100, 135, etc)
    And for a "little bit of range" consider one of the 70-200 zooms
    www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless
     
  6. Designer

    Designer Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,589
    Likes Received:
    4,165
    Location:
    Iowa
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Hello!

    I'm not at all familiar with the Canon line, but if you had asked about Nikon lenses, I might have been able to help some.

    I certainly would not "like" to drop $1,000 on a lens, either, so I don't. I look for the best quality lenses by reputation and personal observation), and then I locate a minty used copy for about 1/3 to 1/4 of the cost of new. Sometimes even less.

    Personally, I wouldn't purchase any Sigma lens, regardless of the price.
     
  7. Mygixxer

    Mygixxer TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Oregon City, OR
    Thank you all for the direction. Might hold off then and just go with a 50mm 1.8 for the meantime. I'm using this mostly for portraits and close ups objects for instagram. Lots of Bike objects and poses.
     
  8. jcdeboever

    jcdeboever TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2015
    Messages:
    14,948
    Likes Received:
    8,382
    Location:
    Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    It is going to be hit or miss with Sigma from my experience buying both new and used. Every one of mine had focus accuracy issues. I no longer have the system but my 17-50 2.8 was better on my D3300, than my D7200. Both focused to the left looking through view finder so I had to compensate the position of the focus point. If you do get one, buy it new and immediately print out a focus test chart and test on a tripod. A brick wall will do in a pinch. I just find it easier to see where its focusing using a test chart. Also set up a table with a few objects lined up on it from front to back to check for front or back focusing. I'm not sure your buying decision, I assume it's price. I don't know enough about Canon to offer a better alternative.
     
  9. SquarePeg

    SquarePeg Nevertheless... Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    6,132
    Likes Received:
    3,683
    Location:
    Boston
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    If you're taking pics of close up objects, you may want to consider the Sigma 17-70. It's a variable aperture but - it is a "macro" lens in that it can focus super close. Again not a 2.8 across the board like the 17-50 but one of my favorite inexpensive lenses.

    Taken at 70mm

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Mygixxer

    Mygixxer TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Oregon City, OR
    That's a great shot.

    I scored a 50mm f1.8 Mk1 today (metal ring) which was brand new in box for $80 on Craigslist. Couldn't pass it up. So I'll play with this lens for a while and see if I still feel the need for something with some range.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. ac12

    ac12 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    586
    Likes Received:
    194
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I would have said to THINK about a 35mm or 50mm f/1.8 prime.
    Each focal length (35 and 50mm) has a purpose (pro/con). So YOU need to think about which focal length matches best what you shoot.
    I was in this predicament, and finally after much thinking went with a 35mm. And I am happy with that decision. I think the 50 would have been too long for me.
    But for $80, I would have jumped at the 50 also.

    I have the Nikon equivalent, the 18-140 for daylight general purpose use and the 35 f/1.8 for low/dim light shooting.
    My next option is a 70-200 f/4, for the faster speed in lower light.
    The 18-140 hits f/4 at 27mm. Any longer and it is smaller than f/4, and hit f/5.6 at 100mm.
    I considered the f/2.8 lens, but the f/2.8 lens is 2x the price and 2x the weight of the f/4 lens. So the f/4 lens won.
     
  12. khakoo

    khakoo TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 28, 2015
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    London, UK


    Sorry this is off topic, but now I'm curious. What was the camera you really wanted? :icon_mrgreen:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1

Share This Page