D50 with 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX, anyone have this combo?

[oski]

Is there anyone with a D50 using this lens?

 

I'm currently using a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and I'm considering switching to this

lens for indoor shots.

 

More specifically, I'd like to know if you like using this zoom over a normal

prime. I like my Sigma, but sometimes I wonder whether the autofocus is as

good as the Nikon AF-S.

 

 

Thanks!

[ky2]

It will dwarf your D50, but it's a very good lens. Terrible at f/2 and f/1.4. Wonderful at f/2.8.

[michael_ferron1]

I've heard good things about the Sigma. Most lenses up to 50mm focus pretty quick but afs should win every time. Remember that center af sensor on your D50 is a croshair and superior to outer af sensors. In low light you can use that and recompose.

[ramon_v__california_]

the 17-55mm is an excellent lens for weddings and other special events. but it might not balance well with your D50. it will be too light with that lens. i use it with my D70. keep you 30mm and walk the zoom.

[oski]

I guess I haven't really learned how to use the D50's autofocus based on what I'm reading.

[briany]

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 has HSM, which is Sigma's version of Nikon AFS and Canon's USM. I doubt AF speed would be any better on the zoom.

[jeffrey_kempster]

I had a 17-55 before I bought the D50. It was my main lens. I usually paired it with my 70-200. I got an 18-200 in December. Since then I have to admit my 18-200 has been on the camera more than the 17-55, but when shooting weddings I don't even hesitate to grab the 17-55. My real only problem I ever had with the 17-55 was its size. It really is no bad to carry around. But from about 24-26mm and down the lens blocks the onboard flash.

 

I know, I know use an external flash which I do have. But now this setup is much too large. I just like a small to carry kit sometimes. Get the 17-55 you will not regret it one bit. But honestly my 18-200 is very close to this lens. Oviously my 18-200 isn't real great at f2.8, but my 17-55 isn't real great at 200mm. :)

 

For the longest time I only had this lens and the 70-200. This setup would cover everything I need to do. But it is just too big sometimes. I have a 35mm and an 85mm when I want to be very light.

 

Almost all the wedding shot on my web site www.jeffkempster.com are done with the 17-55. Take a look.

[oski]

Jeff,

 

Thanks for sharing your insight on the lens.

 

Though I'm a little unclear on whether you were using the 17-55 on the D50 or another camera (D70s, etc). I suppose I want to know how it feels in your hands besides the weight on D50 and how the autofocus behaves with the D50. Also, thanks for pointing out the flash issue as I wasn't aware of that.

 

I've got some more questions...

 

What type of flash did you use for those wedding photos? Also, did you use the 70-200 on your D50, and if so, what it the one with the VR? I'm considering getting one but I guess I need really strong evidence that the VR is worth another grand.

 

 

Thanks for your help Jeff.

[jeffrey_kempster]

Opps sorry for the late response. I used both the 17-55 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 VR with a D50 and a D70. They both work fine. I actually like how the 17-55 looks and feels on the D50. Very nice lens.

[jeffrey_kempster]

Also, The flash was an SB-600 on a Custom Brackets CB Junior frame. The 70-200 with VR is awesome. It was the first nikon lens I bought. It is very expensive, but there is really nothing like it. If you don't think you'll need VR then the Sigma 70-200 is real nice, so is the Nikon 80-200. VR is a life saver when you need it. You can't always take a monopod or tripod with you. I also have the 1.4x TC and use it with the 70-200 constantly. So much so that I probably need a 300mm lens instead.