According provided by lens Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM (FLD glass, Nikon mount F) huge thanks to Pavel.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM is a fast full-time zoom for cropped cameras of various systems. I reviewed the version for Nikon DX cameras, so when buying such a lens, pay attention to which system it is made for. The lens is suitable for all Nikon cameras, even the simplest ones, without a focus motor.
Main technical characteristics of Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM:
| Review Instance Name | The following inscriptions are on the lens barrel, near the front lens 'Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM Ø 72 LENS MADE IN JAPAN', on the lens barrel 'Sigma DC 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX HSM Optical Stabilizer' |
| Basic properties |
|
| Front Filter Diameter | 77 mm |
| Focal length | 17-50 mm EGF for Nikon DX cameras is 25.5-75 mm |
| Zoom ratio | 2.94 X (usually rounded to 3) |
| Designed by | for Nikon DX digital cameras, there are modifications for other systems (Sigma, Canon, Pentax, Sony) |
| Number of aperture blades | 7 petals |
| Tags | focusing distance in meters and feet, focal lengths for 17, 21, 28, 35, 50 mm, mark of bayonet mount and mount / fix hood. |
| Diaphragm | control is via the camera menu (analog Nikon G - lens type) F / 2.8-F / 22 aperture over the entire focal length range |
| MDF | 0.28 m, maximum magnification ratio 1: 5 |
| The weight | 565 g |
| Optical design | 17 elements in 13 groups. The scheme includes:
|
| Lens hood | Bayonet type, plastic, with the possibility of installation in transport mode |
| Manufacturer country | LENS MADE IN JAPAN (Lens made in Japan) |
| Production period | C February 2010. In April 2013 augmented by a lens Sigma DC 18-35mm F1.8 HSM A (ART) |
| Price |
Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 is intended to be a relatively cheap replacement for 'native' lenses - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM DX и Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 17-55mm 1: 2.8 IS USM.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
The Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 is a good weighty lens with a huge front lens that uses 77mm filters. The lens is made in Japan, the copy from my review does not have any obvious backlash, and the lens trunk does not spontaneously protrude. The lens has a metal mount and a special zoom lock at 17mm - 'Lock'. But from the side of the bayonet in the lens, you can see its entire electronic soul with boards, springs and other insides. I am concerned that access to such lens elements has not been blocked. And three more screws on the inner sections of the lens, which are located behind the front lens, do not look very good.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 - has fast auto focusalmost the same as the native Nikon 17-55 / 2.8... The high focusing speed is most likely due to the low travel of the focusing ring, which rotates only 45 degrees. I notice that virtually all of these third-party lenses 'save' on either the focus ring or the normal focus motor.
Auto focus is not only fast, but also enough silent. Noise level is several times lower than that of Tamron 17-50 / 2.8 и Tamron 17-50 / 2.8 VC, all thanks to HSM.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
When focusing and zooming, the front the lens does not rotate, with filters should not be any problems. The focus ring and zoom are rubberized. During zoom, only one lens section extends. The minimum focusing distance is only 28 см, which will allow you to get macro pictures with an increase of 1: 5, which is pretty good for this kind of lens. Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 has a focus distance scale and a zoom position scale.
Bad that the lens does not support continuous manual focus control, but in order to focus manually, you need to switch the lens to the 'M' mode using the 'AF M' switch. Failure to do so could damage the lens motor.
The lens has a 7-blade aperture, which closes to a maximum of F / 22 over the entire range of focal lengths.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
The lens comes with a wonderful case and lens hood. The hood can be worn back and forth, while maintaining low access to the focus ring, even 17 mm.
The inside of the lens. Several boards in two rows.
Of course, one of the main features of the lens is the image stabilization system, which allows take off at longer values excerpts... There is a special mode switch on the lens barrel - 'OS ON OFF'. I may be nitpicking, but generally stabilized lenses will freeze the jitter a little. JVIthat I did not see with this lens.
The instructions somehow incomprehensibly say that the stabilizer is powered by the camera even in the 'OFF' mode within a minute after turning on the camera or after pressing the focus and / or metering button exposure, or during the time while the metering is working. If you listen closely, you can indeed hear a slight noise in the middle of the lens, even with the stabilizer in the 'OFF' position. When you press the focus button, the noise just increases - apparently the stabilizer starts working at full power. This oddity can seriously affect the lifespan of a camera battery. I think this method of OS implementation is not logical. Stabilizer on the lens SIGMA C 17-70mm 1: 2.8-4 DC OS HSM MACRO works in a similar way.
Important: when the lens is removed from the camera, or when the camera is turned off, if you shake the Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 OS a little, you will clearly hear a noise in the middle, as if something had fallen off there. This is normal lens behavior, and the lens group responsible for stabilization is noisy, in the off state the lenses are not 'suspended' in the magnetic field.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
The lens was stuffed with 2 FLD glass elements and 2 aspherical elements.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
In work, Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 proved to be quite good. Focus misses are rare, but still happen. The sharpness in the center of the frame pleasantly surprised me. But on the edges of the frame, everything is not so good, and vignetting in the wide-angle range on open diaphragms. And of course, strong barrel-shaped distortion of 17mm. If you close the aperture below F / 4.0, then it's a sin to complain about the lens.
The parameters shown in the photo gallery:
Everything is filmed on Nikon D80. EGF is 25,5-75 mm. On-camera JPEG L fine without treatment, reduced size to 3 MP. Everything was shot in N (Neutral) Picture Control. The long exposure noise reduction function and high ISO noise reduction function were turned off.
Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM
I used the lens data for several months on the camera Nikon D90 and left only positive impressions. Below are pictures from real photo tasks:
All fast universal zoom lenses
Below is a list of all such aperture-type universal zoom autofocus lenses for SLR and mirrorless cameras with an APS-C sensor or less.
Tokina (DX, various mounts)
- Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-50 F2.8 DX Internal Focus, model AT-X 165 PRO DX, for Canon (C/EF version) and Nikon (N/AIS version), from July 2006. Optical design is the same as Pentax SMC DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM
Tamron (DI II, DI III-A, various mounts)
- Tamron Aspherical LD XR DI II SP AF 17-50 mm 1: 2.8 [IF], model A16 N / E / P / S (under Nikon [N], Canon [E], Pentax [P], Sony / Minolta [S]), since February 2006. Produced in Japan, China and Vietnam
- promaster DIGITAL XR EDO AF Ashperical LD [IF] 17-50 mm 1: 2.8 MACROprevious lens under the brand Promaster
- Tamron Aspherical LD XR DI II SP AF 17-50 mm 1: 2.8 [IF], model A16 NII (only for Nikon cameras), since March 2008
- Tamron Di II SP 17-50 mm F / 2.8 VC B005, model B005 E / NII (for Canon [E] or Nikon [NII]), from September 2009, Japan or China)
- Tamron 17-70 mm F / 2.8 Di III-A VC RXD Model B070, Model B070, Sony E only, from December 2020
Sigma (DC, different mounts)
With constant maximum aperture (DC EX and DC ART series):
- Sigma DC ZOOM 18-50mm 1: 2.8 EX (+ -D), since July 2004, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K. The version for the '4/3' system has been available since February 2006 (not mass-produced). The version for Nikon in its name includes the prefix 'D'.
- Sigma dc 18-50mm 1: 2.8 EX MACRO, since September 2006, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, 4/3
- Sigma dc 18-50mm 1: 2.8 EX MACRO HSM, since June 2007, for Nikon DX cameras only (Nikon F mount)
- Sigma dc 17-50mm 1: 2.8 ZOOM EXOS HSM, from February 2010, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
- Sigma dc 18-35mm F1.8 A [ART, HSM], from April 2013, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
- SIGMA DC 18-50 mm 1: 2.8 DN C [Contemporary], since Oct 2021, for Sony E, Leica L
With variable maximum aperture (DC and DC Contemporary series):
- Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5, February 2006, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
- Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5 MACRO HSM, from July 2007, for Nikon DX cameras only (Nikon F mount)
- Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4 MACRO HSM OS, from December 2009, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
- Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4 C, [MACRO, OS, HSM, Contemporary], from September 2012, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
- Sigma dc 18-50mm 1:2.8-4.5 HSM OS ZOOM, from March 2009, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
Nikon (DX, F mount)
- Nikon DX VR AF-S Nikkor 16-80mm 1:2.8-4E ED N, Nikon F mount, from July 2015
- Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM, Nikon F mount, from July 2003
Pentax (DA, Q, K and Q mounts)
- Pentax SMC DA * 16-50 mm 1:2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM, Pentax KAF2 mount, since February 2007. Optical design is similar to the lens Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-50 F2.8 DX Internal Focus (joint development of Tokina and Pentax)
- HD PENTAX-DA * 1: 2.8 16-50 mm ED PLMAW, from July 2021, Pentax KAF4 mount
- HD Pentax-DA 1: 2.8-4 20-40 mm ED Limited DC WR, Pentax KAF3 mount, black or silver body, from November 2013
- SMC Pentax 1: 2.8-4.5 5-15 mm ED AL [IF] [LENS 02], Pentax Q mount (crop factor Kf=5.53X or Kf=4.65X)
Canon (EFS, EF-S mount)
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 17-55mm 1: 2.8 IS USM (Image Sabilizer, Ulstrasonic, EFS), Canon EF-S mount, since May 2006
Sony (DT, A and E mounts)
- Sony DT 2.8/16-50 SSM, Sony A mount (Minolta A), since August 2011
- Sony E 2.8/16-55G (Sony SEL1655G), Sony E bayonet mount, from August 2019
Fujifilm(X)
- Fujinon Ashperical Lens Nano-GI XF 16-55mm 1: 2.8 R LM WR, Fujifilm X mount, since January 2015
- Fujinon Ashperical Lens Super EBC XF 18-55mm 1:2.8-4 RLM OIS, Fujifilm X mount, September 2012
Samsung (NX)
- Samsung lens 1: 2-2.8 S 16-50 mm ED OIS i-Function, Samsung NX mount, since January 2014
Olympus/Panasonic/Leica/Yongnuo (4/3, Micro 4/3, Kf=2X)
Mirrored 4/3:
- OLYMPUS ZUIKO Digital 11-22 mm 1:2.8-3.5, from February 2004
- OLYMPUS Digital 14-54 mm 1:2.8-3.5, from June 2003
- OLYMPUS Digital 14-54 mm 1:2.8-3.5 II, from November 2008
- OLYMPUS ZUIKO Digital 14-35 mm 1: 2 ED SWDsince January 2005
- Panasonic Lumix LEICA D VARIO-ELMARIT 1: 2.8-3.5 /14-50 ASPH. MEGA OIS, from July 2006
Mirrorless Micro 4/3:
- OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 12-40 mm 1:2.8 PRO, since October 2013
- Panasonic Lumix Leica DG Vario-Summilux 10-25 mm f / 1.7 ASPH.since May 2019
- LUMIX G VARIO 1: 2.8 /12-35 ASPH. POWER OIS, since June 2012, in March 2017 an improved sub-version is released (outwardly they do not differ in any way)
- Panasonic Lumix Leica DG Vario-ELMARIT 1: 2.8-4.0 /12-60 ASPH., since March 2017
- Yongnuo 12-35 F2.8-4 STM ASPH, since April 2023
Price
You can see the prices for this lens. on E-Katalog at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
In general, I liked Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 much more than its counterparts from Tamron, especially the quiet focus motor and the diameter of the front filter. The diameter of the filter, equal to 77 mm, is considered a professional standard, under which an experienced photographer over time selects a fleet of filters.
Sometimes, when working in the cold, the focus motor starts to buzz / whistle, and the focus itself can take much longer.
Results
If you find a good copy of Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM, then such a lens will be an excellent staffer for every day and will even cope with more or less difficult tasks. The lens is attracted by a constant aperture value of F / 2.8 across the entire range of focal lengths, an image stabilizer, and fast and quiet auto focus.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Thanks for the review, it was interesting to know about a slightly more expensive alternative to my tamronchik. If this sigma were available a couple of years ago for the money (from 3700 UAH), then, probably, in due time I would buy it instead of a tamron. However, in addition to the size of the filter and the noise level, as I understand it, you should not expect much difference.
I hope you will someday be able to get a Tokina 16-50 f / 2.8 for your review - apparently, a very rare lens judging by the lack of offers on flea markets and sporadic reviews.
It's my pleasure. This Sigma is worth $ 100. more expensive than Tamron with a stub, and I think that it will be better. But Tokin 16-50 is really, very difficult to meet.
Thanks for the review, it’s just about time, as now I’m facing the choice of a lens. I want Tokin 16-50, but you really can't find her in the afternoon with fire. Maybe really take such a Sigma ...
If you need Tokina 16-50 for Canon, then at Russian or Ukrainian auctions it is sometimes found at a price of about $ 400. But Nikon's option is in short supply.
there is an even more expensive alternative, but accordingly it will be much better in quality, this is Sigma 18-35 1.8, it is not for nothing that it is recommended - https://buynbest.ru/luchshii-universalnyi-zum-obektiv-canon/
best aperture, at the level of fixes, where else can you find one? it’s too heavy, but you have to pay for quality. this is not ordinary plastic sigma and falling apart after half a year or a year of average use.
At 18-35, problematic autofocus is often noted, which is not always treated with a proprietary docking station. In addition, not everyone is comfortable walking with this hippo.
True point, I also have problems with autofocus. On one carcass all the rules, on the other back, on the third front and so on. If you have one carcass and a kilogram of nerves and patience, then by purchasing a docking station you can configure everything as it should. Well, or choose from several one that will not smear on a particular carcass. And if there are several carcasses, then everything is a disaster. The rest of the lens is gorgeous. Sharpness with open is better (or at least not worse) than that of cheap fixes like 35 1.8 or 50 1.8, blur is pleasant, minimal mdf, gorgeous assembly. And all this at an aperture of 1.8. In fact, a crop with this sigma is an almost equivalent replacement for ff with 24-70 2.8. In any case, making my own comparison, I cannot say that sigma is in some way inferior to 24-70 2.8l from canon. Unless it strains the reluctance of sigma to make their lenses of the art series dust and moisture resistant.
I have a sigma of 17-50 2.8, on an open aperture with a minimum focal length of 17 mm it gives such a horror. and 35mm fix is sharp and does not give such soap. can anyone met such a disaster? all photos from 2.8 to 17mm are
Lubrication + defocus. The problem is either in the lens / carcass + hands or only in the hands.
Most likely only in the hands. Here is a photo from Sigma 17-50 2.8 + Nikon D7100, cut to 1500x1000:
in the left wing of the door leaves are more or less in focus
Thanks for the review .. I'm just going to buy to my d7100.
So which lens is still better, this Sigma or similar Tamron?
I believe that in the general case, Sigma is better, but in reality, everything very much depends on the direct instance.
Arkady, thanks for the review!
Would you say this particular Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM instance is good? :)))
I ask because when shooting remote objects, the picture turns out, it seems to me, to be somewhat friable.
Yes, good. Visually, the picture becomes not so sharp by pixel, when focusing to infinity - this is typical for all lenses.
For this reason, I shoot landscapes on my Tamron only in this way: I close the aperture as far as light allows - up to 16-22, focus on the closest object in the frame, then compose the frame again and click. In this case, I get excellent sharpness over the entire area. If you focus on distant objects, the result is noticeably worse.
Can it still focus on hyperfocal more correctly?
Thank you very much for your review! It has long been waiting for him and waited. I wanted to compare my impressions with the opinion of a professional.
Distortion on short yes, there is. And unfortunately, if my d5100's native lenses recognize and adjust the barrel on the fly during shooting, then this option in the menu is not active with this lens. Specifically, my copy sometimes (twice) lost connection with the camera. This happened when trying to autofocus to work on a heavy focus point for him. Poeloziv a little, he stopped responding to half-pressing. It was treated by turning the camera off and on, or by detaching and attaching the lens. There are so few autofocus misses that they cannot even be called statistics. A little more expensive than Tamron, but I never regretted that I did not save.
Thanks for your feedback. I see a lot of non-native lenses falling off, as well as problems in Live View.
Sergey, try to gently clean the lens contacts with a school eraser. There is a possibility that this is the oxidation of contacts. This happens when the lens is constantly on the camera.
This is not oxidation of contacts at all, but hackwork of manufacturers.
Arkady, how different is the lens from sigma 24-70? In addition to focal lengths.
I didn’t use it, but given your nickname, I don’t think it’s worth answering this question at all.
Contacts are clean. It looks like the focus control computer goes into a stupor under certain circumstances. And I think it's not even about the electrical circuit, but about the “software”.
It seems to me that they and the tamron have absolutely similar optical circuits and very similar technical solutions except SWM. Well, and what is still not quite familiar is the large tolerances for quality. A very decent copy of both a tamron and a sigma can be caught, or it can be frankly bad, and this is a new lens! I would say that they are analogous to the tamron, with the exception of the ultrasonic AF drive.
Thanks for the review! Very informative.
The difference in image quality between Tamron and Sigma counterparts is great.
The Tamron has a 2.8 aperture with a focal length of 35mm or more - inoperative (maybe such a specimen was caught), there is terrible soap on the contrasting details. The Sigma has its entire focal range at open aperture fully operational.
Two of the Sigma's weaknesses are the forced A / M focus switching and the “non-switchable” stabilizer. The operation of the latter can be heard (but not seen) even in the off position of the switch, which affects the battery life.
If someone is facing a choice between Sigma and Tamron, then I recommend Sigma.
Now it becomes clear why I did not notice the apparent cessation of jerking pictures in the JVI.
Stabilization is still disabled by the switch, but its drive is not.
This is audible by a characteristic click in the lens after a certain period of time.
It is recommended to carefully choose a lens when buying. And this Sigma and Tamron vary in quality, everyone knows this, and the author also mentions this point in the review. I do not complain about 2,8 to 35mm on Tamron, there is soap, but no more than other analogs.
And my Tamron 17-50 / 2,8 VR is pretty damn sharp on open on all fr. Here is an example photo, though not full-sized.
http://cs614718.vk.me/v614718029/1ba75/oYDLxkEVmHc.jpg
Sigma has a peculiarity of the stub operation: the stabilizing lens is on a magnetic suspension, it should always be suspended in working condition (it will be difficult to take a picture if it hung like that in the hole), which takes energy, and a small hum is heard. When the stub is on, in addition to the suspension itself, motion compensation is also included, but the lens is ALWAYS suspended, in both positions of the stub switch. It is she who rumbles when shaking, if the device is turned off.
Arkady, if you suddenly come across, it would be interesting to read a review about Sigma Zoom 17-70mm 1: 2.8-4. they seem to have been two revisions already, but not a single sensible review was. Perhaps it can be a good replacement for the regular 18-55
I had the “pleasure” to contemplate examples from 17-70 sigma in conjunction with canon 60d. The impressions are as follows:
1. The sharpness is less, not so sharp as 17-40 from the canon, but more interesting than the whale.
2. Godless chromatism. Of all modern lenses (canon 17-55 f2.8; 17-40 f4, canon / nikon 18-55, canon 24-70 f2.8, canon 70-200 f2.8l, canon 24-105 f4l) that I used, none were so limp as sigma 17-70. If the Canon Canon 17-55 began to limp only with a pronounced side-backlight, then this lens chromates without any bright light sources (at 10 megapixels, which will be 18-20, I do not want to think at all).
PS I hope that my experience will help you)
Sigma 17-50 / 2.8. Excellent zoom. Fast and quiet. Sharp enough at 2.8 on the entire focal range. Max sharpness at aperture of 4-5,6. There are practically no oversights. "Well tailored, tightly stitched."
Why are Nikkors so bad? Why buy a “cheaper” lens? Does Nikon make money for third-party lens riveters? On what system does the photographer shoot if the body is Nikon, and the lens is Sigma, Tamron ...? The picture is formed by the lens, if you change the "brushes", then on Carl Zeiss!
The picture is taken by the lens, and the photograph is taken by the photographer :).
And who said that Nikkors are bad? And this is you seriously about “third-party riveters.” I assure you, you will not distinguish Carl Zeiss from this Sigma in the blind. He is praised as a reporter. And Zeiss without autofocus and stabilizer is problematic to shoot a reportage. Both of these lenses are wonderful each for their own purposes. In addition, a lot of beginners often change their "brushes" without learning how to draw)). The plot rules the picture is secondary.
Denis, the only Nikkor similar to this Sigma, namely the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G aperture zoom is not bad. In addition to the price. In Russia, it costs between 42000-49000 rubles.
Denis, they are bad at their cost. When people don't have the opportunity to spend a lot (for them) of money, they choose cheaper products. You will also say: "Why is the full frame so bad that many of you are sitting on crops?"
What is bad about Bentley that they take him so little and ride Logans :)
Even from the native lenses, you have to choose by brute force, in order to get at least something compatible with the camera by the focus (or sharpness) shift. The search for “my” camera and selection of “my” lens takes a long period of time. You need to strive for the ideal in order to get something worthwhile. Yes, the subject in the photo is important, but nobody canceled the need to create a high-quality photo. There are millions of soapy, beautifully plotted photos, but you still need to look for technically high-quality and sharp ones ...
Technically high-quality and sharp images, which still need to be looked for, can be made both native, and with a compatible lens.
Your diagnosis is “Photographic adolescence of the 3rd degree, with a penchant for photoanonism according to the original and major technique”. The disease is extremely dangerous, especially in advanced cases!
Treatment:
1) Do not use the Internet for a month
2) Do not go to stores with photographic equipment, so as not to aggravate the disease
3) The most important thing is to take more pictures and think about HOW TO TAKE the picture, and not BY WHAT MEANS
The attending physician J.Hetzer.
Well, here again this song is about a magic camera and a space lens with the help of which we will get something “worthwhile.” There are a lot of good lenses (you don't need to look for a long time), it's another matter for what purpose each specific one. Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony, Fuji are magnificent cameras. I repeat, the main thing is WHAT you shoot. Well, while you are looking for “your” lens, try Sigma 17-50 2.8 and you will get “Technically high-quality and sharp” photos even without editing in the editors.
Stomach, too, the main thing is to be full on time. But, you must admit, eating meat with mashed potatoes and gravy is better than rollington. The analogy is, of course, terrible, but the essence, I think, is clear.
Thanks for the review, I’m looking at similar staff members.
PS
And on the account of Tokina I saw a review on onfoto.ru where she was compared with the likes of Nikor and Tamron.
I own this glass, I can’t get enough of it. Everything is gorgeous, and, compared with the tamron, the picture is more plastic, somehow. It’s hard to describe. Fortunately, I did not observe any problems.
Under Nikon.
No one has a problem with Nikon D7100?
Yesterday they brought me Sigma 17-50 from Korea, it works better on the Nikon d7100 than the native nikkor 50 f1,8. And the picture is somehow voluminous or something, and it does not smear practically, but in the dark it surprised me with very tenacious autofocus.
Two years on the D7000 and 7 months on the D7100 - the flight is excellent! I love this glass, which is worthy in all respects. You can perfectly shoot EVERYTHING (within the limits of your focal points, the only thing (but this is not a minus, but a matter of personal taste) - half-length and face portraits are simpler than on fixes, but no worse in terms of sharpness, which is so popular among the people. , landscape, evening city photography, rallies (with wiring) - everything is buzzing. I have not tried to shoot video.
But I’m wondering - what does the focus noise level matter?
Firstly, if you shoot different things, and not just weddings, when you put everyone in the right place and know that they are being filmed now, then the focus noise can distract the subject, make it tense up, or even “disrupt the frame”.
Secondly, noise is so critical when shooting video, especially if you use the built-in microphones.
And from the work of the mirror, such models are not afraid of pants? ;)
Personally, I hear my tokin only on video, and only if it starts to get lost and “drive” in search of focus, and if it focuses immediately, it is almost not noticeable. In general, it seems to me that when shooting a video, it is easier to focus manually, although you need to see the scene well, otherwise there will be errors.
Ai-ya-yay! I meant a tamron!
Selling a new Sigma AF 17-50mm F2.8 EX OS HSM for Nikon preobreten in Japan a month ago for 450 bucks (took for d7000 but in connection with the full transition to ff sell)
box, docks, handbag - everything is in place!
Super lens - beautiful bokeh, fast aperture, with excellent multistep stabilizer - complete set - checked for back-front focus, option with d7000 is possible
lens + UV protector (Japan) - 450 bucks + your shipment
I take
(kazsad2008@yandex.ru)
Damn, I would also take ((
450 bucks is a little expensive today.
Arkady, tell me, please. Isn't it better to take an old version of sigma without a stub so that the lens does not eat a lot? 17-50mm is not at all cretical without stabilization. I read your review of similar tamrons, I already started to look closely, and then this article also came across) now, probably, I will take sigma)
It’s easier to buy a spare battery.
I also have a new sigma 17-50. We bought two of the same as a gift, now I sell one.
There is not a big back, but because tried on with 7000, then made an amendment. Eat anyone else you need, write.
How much do you sell a girl lens for? The country?
At IBEY, today there are 289 offers of sigma 17-50. A minimum of 350 dolars. Why do not the bourgeois like it?
For how much do you sell, warranty or not?
Arkady, I have a question, tell me what is better to take Sigma 18-50 mm f2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM (with a stub) or Sigma 18-50 1: 2,8 EX D (without a stub) ??? I have a Nikon B80 (both motor and non-motor). But as I understand it, at 18mm with f2,8 with the stub turned on at the same ISO, the shutter speed for a lens with a stub will be shorter than for a lens without a stub ??? But at 50 mm with f4.5 and the included stub, the shutter speed will be shorter or longer than on a lens with a constant f2.8 at the same 50 mm ??? What to choose prompt ???
Arkady good afternoon, I want to change the kyoto 18-105 to Sigma AF 18-50mm f / 2.8 EX DC MACRO HSM Nikon F (D90 carcass) advise, is it worth it?
can someone use this glass in such a bundle?
Hello Sergey! I have a similar question. Did you get the answer? If so, share it. Is it worth it? Regards, Yuri.
Thanks for the review))) I already want myself this))))
Hello everyone ! the new Sigma AF 17-50mm F2.8 EX OS HSM for Nikon was purchased in Japan a month ago for 450 bucks (I took it for d7000 but I sell it in connection with the full transition to ff) FOT D7000 sold
box, docks, handbag - everything is in place!
Perfectly checked for the absence of - back-front-focus (the Japanese mentality affected - that's why I always buy such things only from Japs)
Super lens - beautiful bokeh, fast aperture, with excellent multi-stage stub
SUPER PRICE !!! Lens + UV protector (Japan) - 400 bucks + your shipment
buy how to contact you
kazsad2008@yandex.ru