Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DF vs Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC?

[DaveAndHolly219]

Looking at these two used lenses as a potential "general purpose", architecture, interior shots, some portraits, concerts, etc. to add to my gear bag. Would be used on a D90 and D300S.

Opinions on either lens vs the other?

28-70: Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF Wide Angle Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon AF D Cameras

17-70: Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro Autofocus Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Nikon AF Cameras

 

[Derrel]

One is for a full-frame sensor camera as a wide-to-short tele (the 28-70), and the other is a DC or APS-C-only lens, designed also to be a wide-to-medium tele on a 1.6x sensored camera.

The 28-70mm could be used on both an FX or a DX Nikon camera; I expect the 17-70mm wil not cover the entire 24x36mm sensor are of an FX Nikon like a D3, or D700, or D600,D750,or D800. However, it's possible that the 17-70mm lens could cover the 5:4 area on an FX Nikon that offers that in-camera crop option (D3,D800 series for example), and it WILL cover the APS-C or "DX" central area on an FX Nikon body.

Using the Nikon D90 or D300s cameras, a 28-70 on an APS-C camera is fine for outdoors uses, where 28mm x 1.53 is a 42.8 to 107mm effective length zoom...kind of a pseudo-normal to moderate telephoto range. The 17-70mm is more of a wide-angle of course, being 26mm to 107mm effective focal length in the same terms as 135 format or "FX Nikon" format when shot on the D90 or D300s.

The 42.8mm short end on the 28-70mm will really crimp your style for architecture and indoor uses. It's just too long at the bottom end of the zoom range.

 

[JonA_CT]

I used the Sigma 17-70 a bunch on my Canon SL1. Here are some shots from that...if you have anything specific that you'd like to see, let me know. This was just what was hand on flickr. If I were going to buy another crop frame camera, I would definitely buy it again.

20160215-_MG_3837 by jwa04, on Flickr

20160124-_MG_3483 by jwa04, on Flickr

day 9 bw by jwa04, on Flickr

20160105-_MG_2975 by jwa04, on Flickr

 

[DaveAndHolly219]

I should mention I do already have a Sigma 17-50 2.8 that I love. But my wife and I share gear so if we both want to use a moderate zoom range type lens at the same time, it becomes an issue. I'm really just wondering which of these two lenses produces better image quality overall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

I thought you were plannng on geting a used D3 or D700 FX Nikon? I seldom think about maximum image quality as being a factor in a generalist zoom lens for utility duty, but more about the usefulness of the focal lengths. Zooms have gotten to the point where image quality is pretty good. I dunno...I strive to get the lens to f/5.6 or f/6.3 most of the time, and at that small of an aperture, most lenses are all amply GOOD.

 

[DaveAndHolly219]

I thought you were plannng on geting a used D3 or D700 FX Nikon?

Without going into details, plans changed. Going to stick with DX for now. I'm nowhere near the point skill-wise where DX vs FX is holding me back in any meaningful way.

 

[Derrel]

Well, for generalist uses, having the 26mm bottom end on the 17-70mm opens up a LOT of wide-angle picture-making that the 28-70 would make impossible. Plus...if you look at reviews of the earlier 28-70/2.8 Sigma, it is not a strong performer at f/2.8,and needs to be stopped down to at least f/4 to get "quality" pictures. It was never a really top-top-top quality zoom; its from the earlier Sigma era; it is not like the Nikon 28-70 AF-S optics-wise.