magicianhisoka
Senior Member
thats darned expensive. shall have to wait for much lower price
New SIgma 17-50mm HSM OS
- Thread starter azul123
- Start date
eternalSun
New Member
Hi all! I am currently thinking of getting a new lens to replace my kit lens for my D90. Thinking of getting this lens but not sure how well it does compared to the Tamron 17-50mm non-vc. Has anyone used both lenses before? Is the IQ and AF same or better than tamron 17-50 non-vc?
aungzawwin
New Member
for sure, it would cost more, weigh more and uses larger filter(77mm) than Tamron(67mm)
dodongdodong
Deregistered
get the tamron
eternalSun
New Member
hi, don't mind can explain why you choose the tamron?? thanks
natasastra
New Member
I don't like extended lens somehow. 17-50 is not internal focus too.
maldito
Senior Member
Here's the Tamron (Non VC) vs Sigma comparison
Tamron wins by a mile.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
The sigma corners are too soft.
Tamron wins by a mile.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
The sigma corners are too soft.
Where got, can't see that at the long end. Check the 50mm 2.8 results.
But its true that for wide angle the tammy wins. But actually I aim more for center till anywhere within 1/3 of the edges performance. Corners never get used and I never notice it even for wide-angle shots of say ballrooms.
Probably some landscape shooters shooting handheld 17mm at sunrise/sunset w/o the luxury of a tripod, that's where the OS comes in and helps with 2 stops advantage I guess (2.8 -> 5.6). Prob its better to compare the Tammy VC with the Sigma OS version.
What is important might be for some group shots where you really need to squeeze everyone in and use the pic right to the edge. But seriously the edges is definitely better than the corners. Usability of edges is going to be higher than corners. But general shots you won't shoot that shallow, but I do shoot at f1.4-f2 at 30mm for some small groups or 2 pax group shots to POP the image and get more background at low light venues. Why only small-grp/2 pax? Shallow DOF, so only usable for more or less similar subject - lens distance. Its very difficult to explain whether or not what works and what does not work in real life (ie screw up), you just get it after shooting hundreds of thousands of shots so it gets drilled in.
The other night I was shooting more of telephoto for the sigma 17-50 at 2.8, testing OS etc. Quality quite ok lah.... Actually I am not not hard up for sharpness, since seriously though I shoot at full res, but editing always never done higher than 25-33% even on a 24". :bsmilie:
Your link actually demonstrates/confirms what I see, the contrast is better than my 17-50 non VC. This allows the picture to POP more. But seriously I don't shoot for hobby at all, so all my comments are aimed more for wedding photography picture style and sometimes what the clients want. ;p
The sigma center performance damn power wide open actually.
Darn, 50D....4752 pixels, you can blow to 19" @ 250dpi. 18x12 still got room to spare.
One thing's for sure and don't need any stopwatch since its so obvious, both side by side, the Sigma AFs much faster and with much less hunting. The Tamron would need 2 or 3 more additional micro-adjustment steps before AF lock. But I don't base much on measurebating, so need to wait till next month when using the lens in real life environment, before confirming. This is extremely important to me, much more than corner sharpness.
PS, I have both copies of the lens, a somewhat spoilt 17-55 and good old tammy 28-75 but that's already with fungus (as backups)
Last edited:
maldito
Senior Member
May I ask how was your experience with the tamron 28-75? Is it a good substitute for Canon 24-70 or Sigma. As I am planning to get this lens in the future.
Well on a DX crop body it works good....the results are more or less in the league of the 2 DX wide angle lenses mentioned here. But I think I read + saw sample pix (several years ago, so not sure what has changed, I don't think so) that on FF it would not be that good.
But I used a 12-24 to compliment the 28-75 tamron on 1.5X DX, but later decided not to shoot that wide (complaints about people looking too fat) so decided 17mm is already ok for most. My 2 other bodies can mount primes liao loh.....even better "effect". :bsmilie:
Seriously not many people appreciate 8-10mm on 1.5DX, even for our usage we don't use it that much.
My advice to non canon users, make sure u can accept the zoom's rotation.
If ur shooting style requires u to zoom in n out fast n u have more than 1 zoom lens,
it might be confusing when u switch from one to the other.
Why sigma has 2 different directions for their zooms is beyond me,
else, their new range of lenses r truly impressive.
If ur shooting style requires u to zoom in n out fast n u have more than 1 zoom lens,
it might be confusing when u switch from one to the other.
Why sigma has 2 different directions for their zooms is beyond me,
else, their new range of lenses r truly impressive.
Yeahthat's true, that's important if you are operating with > 1 zoom lens on several bodies. :bsmilie: Will be mighty confusing. Say for people who works with even a 70-200 or UWA 8/10mm. But I am using this zoom and 2 primes for every shoot, so no issue.
aungzawwin
New Member
yes.. thaz frustrating.. i was hoping to see it in "Nikon" direction of zooming :bheart:
more than that, the focus ring rotates when AF.. just like my 18-50 f2.8 HSM.. can't manual override in AF mode..
it AFs a bit faster in lowlight and more silent than Tamron atleast..
Similar threads
