Replace Sigma 24-60/2.8 with 17-70/2.8-4 OS?

Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
729
Location
Douglasville, GA
My equipment had been pretty set for the last 5 or so years... I'd been quite happy with the following:

Nikon D50 Body
Sigma 10-20/4.5-5.6
Sigma 24-60/2.8
Tamron 18-200/3.5-5.6 (shared between me and a buddy)
Vivitar 100/3.5 Macro
Sigma EF-500 DG Super

I also had a Sigma 70-200/2.8 D HSM but sold it about 4 years ago... the size/weight was eliminating it from seeing much use once the kids (triplets) came along and my hands were needed for parenting AND photography at the same time. I did without a long lens all together until recently. I replaced the D50 with a D90 which stirred up interest in seeing what else was out there.

I'm now sitting on the following, with the itch to make more changes:

Nikon D90 Body
Sigma 10-20/4.5-5.6
Sigma 24-60/2.8
Sigma 70-300/4-5.6
Tamron 18-200/3.5-5.6
Vivitar 100/3.5 Macro
Sigma EF-500 DG Super

What I'm (strongly) considering is selling the Sigma 24-60/2.8 (an excellent fast zoom that's even better on the D90 because of the more powerful focus motor) and replacing it with a Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 OS. I might even sell the 18-200 as well, but it wouldn't bring much money and a buddy of mine borrows it fairly often as well (he's actually had it for more than a year and I haven't missed it). My biggest hesitation is how light and compact the 24-60/2.8 is for a constant f/2.8 lens... if I let it go and want it back, will I be able to easily find another one? I bought it back when they were being closed out for $200 new... they seem to be going $225-$300 now. If I got along with they 17-70 OS enough, the 18-200 would likely be gifted to my friend permanently.

There are a handful of times, mostly indoors and/or close-up with the kids where the 24-60 just isn't wide enough, I'm not carrying the 10-20 with me, and I couldn't switch quickly enough to grab a shot anyway. The 17-70/2.8-4 would become both my high-speed normal zoom and walk-around lens. It would dovetail nicely with the new 70-300 OS and eliminate the need to carry the 10-20 unless I knew I had a need for it (indoor architecture, close-up car wide-angles, etc). The trade-off would be f/2.8 at the long end. With the D90's decent high-ISO performance along with OS, I'm fairly sure I could live with the loss.

Anyone have any opinions on why I should or shouldn't? I don't shoot weddings or anything of critical importance... mainly kids and general travel photography with a few car shows, parades, etc thrown in the mix.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
2,847
Location
Middletown, NY
If you have a couple of extra bucks to spend, I would update the D90 to a D7000. You will immediately have a better AF system and will be able to tune your lenses for absolute accurate focusing on thos modern body. You will automatically have the opportunity to get sharper imagery. I would also consider a nice prime lens, something like the 35 1.8DX. I use to own the Sigma 24-60 F/2.8. I also bought it years ago when they were on sale. I did not think much of the lens at all. Don't get me wrong, a good photographer can make hay with less serious lenses, but good gear cannot hurt by no means.

" mainly kids and general travel photography with a few car shows, parades, etc thrown in the mix".......

Just my 2 cents FWIW.

Mike
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom