1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Sigma 18-50 f2.8 or Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 ?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by misupix, Oct 10, 2005.

  1. ...LL strikes again....

    I'm starting to want a two lens Travel Kit to minimize Lens changes: Nikkor 70-200 VR and a ?

    (I think about selling the Tokina 12-24 (rarely used), Sigma 18-125 and Nikkor AF 70-210 4-5.6D and maybe even the Tamron 28-75 f2.8.)

    The Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f2.8 comes to mind, but
    what about that price and the focus-problems with D70 (a lot of rumors on "the other site" :wink: )

    I could bet after I will make the purchase, Nikon will come out with a 17-70 f2.8 VR or something similar :mad:  ?

    or would the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 be a reasonable choice? (less then 1/3rd the price and a lot lighter)

    Has anyone experience with the Sigma?

    Any help would be appreciated!
  2. Micheal, I have no experience with the sigma, I just can't seem to convince myself to purchase third party glass as that IS the image. Not saying they are bad, just no experience. THAT being said, I LOVE my 17-55, it is a great lens that gets the bulk of the work on my camera. I feel sure it will work fine on the D70 also.
  3. Tosh


    May 6, 2005

    The Sigma 18-50 2.8 is my current focus. Although I have the 20mm and 28-70 2.8 in that general focal length range, I'd love to couple the Sigma 18-50 with my 70-180 micro or 180 2.8 for a lightweight vacation/travel kit. I sold my 18-70 kit lens because I found the 20mm noticeably sharper, but now find I miss its convenience (size/weight/focal range) as a travel lens.

    Here are some discussions of the Sigma 18-50 2.8 that you may or may not have seen:

    In the U.S., the cheapest I've seen the Sigma 18-50 2.8 is about $409, plus $17-20 shipping depending on location, from http://www.Sigma4less.com in NYC.

    If you have any other information on this intriguing lens, I'd love to hear about it.

    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 10, 2005
  4. Tosh


    May 6, 2005
    Gave up on the Sigma 18-50 2.8

    Today, I called my favorite camera store and ended up getting a ten-minus condition Nikon 17-35 2.8D in exchange for my 20mm 2.8D and $700. I'm hoping that what I'm giving up in physical compactness (compared to the Sigma 18-50 2.8) will be more than compensated by gain in image quality. In any event, I guess I'll be ready should Nikon ever go the FF DSLR route.

  5. did it, got me a Sigma!

    As you can see in my signature, I convinced me to go the Sigma Route!

    I wanted a 18/17-50/55 as a walk around lens for landscaped and citywalks.

    Thinking on the 4x price of the Nikkor, I decided to try the Sigma EX 18-50 f2.8 DC.
    The size is really nice, won't draw much attention. Only the lenscap is a joke, no chance to put i back on when lensshade is mounted! (The new Tamron and nikon are way better, with the grip in spaces) Otherwise the finish is really nice.
    If I really like the range (right now it seems a little short, but for longer I use my Tamron 28-75) I can allways upgrade to the Nikkor.

    I'll post some samples when I have some decent (Weather is really bad right now...)
  6. I haven't noticed any focusing problems with the 17-55 on my D70.
  7. Same for my 17-55 on the D70: even wide open it is sharp and crisp without any flaws. I love the focal range.

    Did I mention that this lens was sharp ?
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.