I'd like advice on an upgrade... I am very interested in either the Sigma 18-50mm 2.8 ex (but it is not OS) or the Sigma 17-70mm OS (But it is not ex, nor is it 2.8 through its zoom range) (it is also new with only a few mixed reviews) My question: How...
1211085
sigma recently came out with 17-70 version which has a C mark on it. its a good walk around woiyth f2.8 to 4. IS or OS is a good thing and its a personal decision. I have always preferred them as sometimes you forget to hold your breath for that magic moment which may not be as crisp otherwise.
1337629
Image quality between the 24-70 and 28-75 is leaps and bounds. The 24-70 is just as sharp as Canons 24-70 version. Not to mention having VC. Definitely worth it if you have the money. I owned the 28-75 and it was a great lens for what is was but the 24-70 is such a step up in my opinion. Cheers
725617
I use my Sigma religiously! It has actually become my favorite lens! As far as a comparison, I do not own a Canon version and have not tried one. Many reviews here http://reviews.cnet.com/lenses/sigma-apo-70-200mm/4505-13038_7-35643871.html
990745
Congrats on the D5000 (and both great lenses you have). Be sure and get that 35mm down the road, believe me it will probably be the best 200$ you'll ever spend if you do any shooting indoors. I have tons of other lenses (including a 50mm f/1.4) so I held off for a while on getting the 35mm f/1.8, once I did finally get it I was kicking myself for not getting it sooner, it's that good. Happy shooting.
1200245
I'm going to suggest a different question. Do you really want a newer version? I recently bought a used 300mm F4 for 950. Its sells new for around 1300. This lens has been due for replacement for quite some time. So i had to ask myself the same question you have, when will a replacement come out, because it is certainly overdue. Problem is, when it does come out, it will be of lesser build quality, it will remove the aperature ring(G lens), add VR, and cost well over 2000. While I would like the VR on this lens, is it worth the huge proce difference, and the reduced build quality. I also used the same logic on a 17-35 i just bought. So what I would suggest, is to judge the current lens on its merits. The only gripe I would have with this lens is that it is AF and not AF-s. It will be much cheaper than a new one, probably much better build quality, and who knows when a replacement might arrive.
194932
First review I've found for the new modelhttp://cliffmautner.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/10/101309-the-new-nikon-70200mm-f28g-ed-vrii.html
543320
I had the 1.8 and switched to the sigma and LOVE IT!! My pictures are more colorful and sharper plus I love the depth of field!!!
501122
Thanks for the feedback. I ended up getting the Canon 17-55/2.8IS. It was more expensive, but I had come across some extra money. I've had that lens for several month now and it's awesome. The zoom range is excellent, it's great having f2.8 through the whole range, and the IS adds probably at least 3 stops. It's very sharp when I do my part, especially when it's stopped down a couple clicks. I would still love to get a lens like I described in my OP, but I'm looking at a wide angle zoom and a better telephoto lens before that one.
168736
Thanks to all of you for help with my question about this lens. From what I hear, the new Zeiss 16mm-35mm for the A7 is due out in the next few weeks. I'll wait for that one. And thank you all again...
1247240
hum... what do you mean, by a "base" lens? I consider myself a "advanced" amateur haha... i also have a D7000, and i use this lens mostly for street-photography and some portraits. This lens are definitely for open space when you use it in a crop sensor (which is the case), if you need a lens for indoor, i would go for some sigma or even tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which is more expensive. I even have a nikkor 35mm f1.8 which is not wide enough for small indoor places, but it is also one great lens.Talking about the image quality it is amazing. It's always nice to have one prime lens. You will never regret. hum... what do you mean, by a "base" lens? I consider myself a "advanced" amateur haha... i also have a D7000, and i use this lens mostly for street-photography and some portraits. This lens are definitely for open space when you use it in a crop sensor (which is the case), if you need a lens for indoor, i would go for some sigma or even tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which is more expensive. I even have a nikkor 35mm f1.8 which is not wide enough for small indoor places, but it is also one great lens.Talking about the image quality it is amazing. It's always nice to have one... » Read More hum... what do you mean, by a "base" lens? I consider myself a "advanced" amateur haha... i also have a D7000, and i use this lens mostly for street-photography and some portraits. This lens are definitely for open space when you use it in a crop sensor (which is the case), if you need a lens for indoor, i would go for some sigma or even tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which is more expensive. I even have a nikkor 35mm f1.8 which is not wide enough for small indoor places, but it is also one great lens.Talking about the image quality it is amazing. It's always nice to have one prime lens. You will never regret. « Show Less
1848271
I think I was misunderstood? When I bought my 50D, it was a toss up between the 5D and the new (at that time) 50D with a couple of kit lenses. I chose the 50D (newer tech wise and more stuff) and I'm satisfied for now. If and when I upgrade, it would be the latest (tech wise) full frame Canon like the 5DMkII. I was just thanking John M. and ED F for validating my non-researched decision to go 50D instead of older 5D at the time.Bob
75252
Thank you for taking the time to answer my question, I ended up buying the Sigma lens and I agree with you when you say that is a great value for the price.So far I'm very happy with this lens, I have used it in both daylight and night time (with external flash) and the results have been excellent with my D5000, the OS is great and focusing is very fast indeed.Again, thank's !George
1966949
I almost decided in favor of Sigma, but then I realized that Sigma is made for a crop camera only. While I'm not looking to buy an FF one any time soon, when I do, it will be costly, so I wouldn't have the money to follow it up with expensive lenses, not to mention that a good prime is a good prime, which I expect to last me a long while... So that is becoming a big drawback for me...
608749
I've owned both. For the obvious, the 17-70 has a more useful FL, while the 17-50 has the constant f/2.8 throughout its range. Physically, the 17-70 takes 72mm filter vs 77mm filters, the weight is lighter by 20% (470g vs 565g) and its a smaller lens which may balance on your APS-C camera better (79mm x 82mm vs 84mm x 92mm). The 17-70 will give you also a psuedo-macro capability at a 1:2.9, which is rather useful. Personally, another point to note (and I've substantiated this myself after coming across it in a few Google blurbs) is that 17mm on the 17-50 is REALLY not 17mm, but 18mm when looked at closely. May not be a deal breaker, but to some it is and the lens really is, in practice, an 18-50 lens. I found the color rendition of the two lenses to be similar (lovely, in fact) and I find the 17-70 to be sharper across the frame at 50mm than the 17-50 is, which is not surprising as that's the farthest reach of the 17-50's FL and it's expected to suffer a tad there. If you haven personally used the new Sigma Contemporary and Art series lenses, I suggest you give them a try. Excellent materials, tight tolerances, well made. I ended up keeping the 17-70f/2.8-4 C and selling the 17-50 f/2.8. I have f/1.8primes to cover the need for low light shooting should it arise, and the extra FL is more important to me
1630104
Whoa, buying and having it shipped straight from Hong Kong? Did you ever do that in the states or only in the UK? BTW, thanks for the great posts Mark, they're turning out to be very very helpful. I am currently shopping around for a telephoto and have to make a decision soon about the aperture f/4 or f/2.8, the $$ i want to spend on it and whether I want IS or not. You may be able to help with the $$ on the Hong Kong issue. Thanks again! Nino
189243
J. ONeill says: Did you make a decision? I am currently debating the same two lenses. I am leaning towards the Canon since it seems there are quite a few quality/AF issues with the Sigma. Any advice is appreciated. If you own a camera with micro focus adjustment like the 50D or 7D, Sigmas front or back focusing is a non-issue. Also, even if you don't own a camera with micro focus adjustment, if you get a Sigma lens that front or back focuses, you can send it to Sigma for calibration.
8522
Hardy,Thanks for the info about getting better lenses. I just "bit the bullet" and bought the 24-105mm L lens. I have heard this same wise advice from other photographers, and I am looking forward to getting sharper photos with the new lens, and I will try to get only L lenses from now on. In the end, you truly get what you pay for.