Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Nikon 17-55 or Sigma 18-50 2.8


ray1 10 519 1 England
13 Jun 2005 5:21AM
Does anyone have the nikon 17-55 Dx or even better does someone have both this lens and the sigma 18.50 2.8 EX DC.

Any views on either lens would be good. The 17-55 is what I want but is there much difference between it and the sigma. No point in spending all that money if the sigma is as good.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

chrism 10 118 England
13 Jun 2005 6:26AM
I got the Nikon last weekend, the few shots I've had out of it so far have fantastic resolution.. I'll let you know when I get a bit more familiar with it.
ray1 10 519 1 England
13 Jun 2005 7:11AM
Thanks Chris - any chance of having an unprocessed nef to look at. Have you tested across the range from 2.8 upwards.
chrism 10 118 England
13 Jun 2005 7:44AM
Not yet, I got the lens and a D1X at the same time, but haven't had much of a chance to use them yet... I can send you a file later this week when I get some.
ray1 10 519 1 England
13 Jun 2005 10:09AM
Thanks chris i will send you my email.
IanA 11 3.0k 12 England
13 Jun 2005 10:55AM
The 18-50 EX Sigma is the sharpest lens I have ever used!

Ian
ray1 10 519 1 England
13 Jun 2005 11:05AM
Thanks Ian - I see you have the nikon 70-200vr. How do you compare it to that. I have the Nikon as well so that will give me a feel for a comparison.
IanA 11 3.0k 12 England
13 Jun 2005 11:43AM
In the tests that we carried out, the two lenses were virtually inseperable on the sharpness front. Build is good too. this has also been backed up by seperate tests elsewhere.
Hope it helps.

Ian
dave thelens 11 936 United Kingdom
13 Jun 2005 11:45AM
I have had the 17/55mm f2.8 for about six months now .. and its the best bit of glass I have ever had .. I use it for around 90% of my shots ... otherwise its the 70/200VR which is also a stunning chunk of glass ... I love 'em both
tepot 10 4.4k United Kingdom
13 Jun 2005 11:57AM
i would go with the Nikon 1st choice, and the Sigma second if i couldn't afford the Nikon.
ray1 10 519 1 England
13 Jun 2005 1:25PM
Thanks Dave, I think having the 70-200 is the route of my problem as once you have experienced that lens everthing else falls by the wayside. I can afford both Terry but being a tight arse I dont wont to spend anymore than I have to, however, I want the sharpest lens so will pay if needed. Cheers.
tepot 10 4.4k United Kingdom
13 Jun 2005 8:32PM
i think a general rule is get the best you can afford Ray, you most often gets what ya pays for in life, and that goes for anything, not just photographically.
ray1 10 519 1 England
14 Jun 2005 12:30AM
You probably right Terry and I suppose the pain of spending all that money only hurts for a week or two.
tepot 10 4.4k United Kingdom
14 Jun 2005 5:32AM
have you ever bought a cheaper version of something and everytime you use it you think to yourself "if i'd only bought the other one"? it bugs the hell out of me so i try to buy what i REALLY want in the first place, it got so bad one time, after i had bought a piece of hi-fi equipment, i actually went out and bought the one i had wanted in the first place, i then had 2 of them....lol

peace of mind though.
IanA 11 3.0k 12 England
14 Jun 2005 6:24AM
It amazes me that people will insist that paying 3x as much for a product will ensure they get something 'better'.
This is one case! :-|

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.