Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 OS v Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS

milster

milster

Messages
2,438
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
I pretty much had my mind made up on the 17-50mm to replace my kit lens but I went to the shop today and tried out the 17-70mm as well, it's really confused me now. Both lenses seem are considerably better than my kit lens, now I can't make up my mind.

I only had a quick play with both (and enjoyed both) but now getting home and looking at the pictures I think the 17-50mm has better image quality and a constant 2.8 but the 17-70mm has the extra reach and isn't such a strain on the budget (I'd get to keep my 35mm 1.8, which is debatable if I go for the 17-50mm).

Anybody had experience of both (or either) with any helpful advise please?

Thank you :D
 
Just to jump in on this I was pondering over exactly the same thing after paying with the tamron 17-50 and not liking its autofocus but wondering if I can justify 500 quid on a lens at the moment!
 
Used to have the 17-70 and while it wasn't bad, it wasnt amazing.

You also need to consider that 50mm vs 70mm is hardly any different. The main difference here is a constant 2.8 versus 2.8-4.

If OS isnt that important (which on this lens I am not convinced it is...) consider the older Tamron 17-50 2.8 which gets good reviews :)

FWIW the 17-70 is also pretty good at macro shots... that was a nice feature of the lens tbh
 
I use the 17-50 as my walk about and love it. IQ is fantastic. Having not used the 17-70 it's hard to help but the two things I'd pick up on are that the 17-50 has the constant 2.8 but it's quite a heavy imo.
 
I've got the 17-50... can't bear to take it off camera!!!

super sharp, stunning colours, fast, lovely size/weight. It's better than any Nikon lens I own (and that hurt to say ;) )

I use it with D7000
 
I think I'm still edging towards the 17-50mm, just wanted to try and gauge some other opinion :)

I didn't particulaly feel that either lens was very heavy while using them today, but I was only using them for a little while.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
This is pretty confusing now, the tamron sees to get decent reviews as well, I'd get that for £110 cheaper:shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top