Nikon 18-70mm or Sigma/Tamron 50-x

timmygcsc2308

timmygcsc2308

Messages
985
Name
Timmy
Edit My Images
Yes
Current bag consists of my D40, 18-55mm, 35mm and 55-200 VR.

However I'm giving my 18-55mm to my good lady to accompany the D60 I'm getting her which means I need a replacement mid range zoom. Current budget is £140 but this will fingers crossed rise to £270 in the next couple of weeks

The three candidates:
* Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-S DX which I can pick up used for £105 mint
* Tamron AF 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) which goes for about £250 used
* Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro HSM which I can get brand new for £250

Now I know the response..the tammy has the best IQ. But considering the price difference, £145, is it really worth it? I mean, I have a mid range fast prime, I'm not overly bothered about 1mm extra wideness since I rarely shoot below 20 anyway, having 20mm on the end would be nice since I wouldn't always have to switch to the 55-200, and reviews generally put the 18-70mm as being quite sharp.
The spare £165 could just get me an Nissin di622, a bag and a tripod
 
Having looked at reviews on all 3 before going for the Nikon 17-55 2.8 I would go for the 18-70, I would have said the Tamron but the non motorised one, but you need a built in focus motor.
 
The Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 is also very good. Mine was very sharp and I loved it - still have it but no use on my D700. I prefer fixed aperture as I shoot aperture priority most of the time. The Nikon 18-70 is a cracker, sort of passed over as a boring kit lens but excellent performance. I don't know if you will see a great deal of difference between them on a D40 or at all in practice once you have stopped down a bit. More important is 'faster' or 'longer'?
 
BlackCloud said:
The Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 is also very good. Mine was very sharp and I loved it - still have it but no use on my D700. I prefer fixed aperture as I shoot aperture priority most of the time. The Nikon 18-70 is a cracker, sort of passed over as a boring kit lens but excellent performance. I don't know if you will see a great deal of difference between them on a D40 or at all in practice once you have stopped down a bit. More important is 'faster' or 'longer'?
Click to expand...

and you could use some spare cash so you'd like to sell it to me for £150 :naughty: lol.

Ok, ta for the info, glad 18-70mm gets positive reactions :thumbs:
 
Value for money wise, can't beat an 18-70, plus it's a good focal range too. That said, I do like being able to go to f/2.8.
 
went for the 18-70mm in the end, got one for £80 :)

not really had the chance for a proper play but it seems really sharp, just did this:
B9PcD.jpg

ISO200, 70mm f/5.6

and this is a 100% crop of the above, cropped from 3872x2592 down to 800x600:
w041C.jpg


:thumbs:
 
I think value for money wise, you cannot beat this or the 50mm 1.8. Cracking lens for the money.
 
cambsno said:
I think value for money wise, you cannot beat this or the 50mm 1.8. Cracking lens for the money.
Click to expand...

well the 50mm f/1.8 is AF not AF-S so unfortunately no autofocus on the D40 :(
but rather liking my 35mm AF-S :thumbs:

foggy4ever said:
Nice result for £80 :thumbs:
Click to expand...

yea, early results leave me very pleased. Going to try capture a sunset tonight :thinking:
 
The only reasons I don't still have my 18-70 are that I've gone FF and the person who bought my D200 needed a lens to get him going.
 
And a great little kit lens to do that! I still use my 18-70mm on my D200 when I don't need wider apertures (studio), and it is spot on sharp
 
also something else is I can't get over how well built and robust it feels. Plus the front of the lens in comparison to the 18-55mm is huge!
 
technics100 said:
Where did you get it for £80? very good buy..
Click to expand...

ebay (auction - the guy made the fatal mistake of finishing the auction at around 10pm) :) came with its original box, instructions and unused hood too
 
revisiting this thread - I sold my 18-70mm and got an 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 because I had an 55-200mm so it made sense to have an 18-55mm and used the extra money for a tripod.
I now regret it I think - maybe I've got a soft copy but I just don't think it is as good as Mr.Rockwell makes out (apparently the 18-55mm and 18-70mm perform optically the same).
Images were much sharper with the 18-70mm, noticibly so.
I've got some more money under my belt now and would drop the 18-55mm and rebuy the 18-70mm in a heartbeat coz it'd only be another £60 or so but this morning I've received my tammy 70-200mm 2.8 and I'm quite frankly blown away, the IQ is just on a whole nother level to the 18-55mm so this has got me thinking hmmm yes Tammy 17-50mm...
but there's one going for £200 in the FS section - I could afford it but thats all I could afford, the Nikon would leave me with £100 in my pocket.
hmmm decisions :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top