Sigma 17-70 or Sigma 18-50

[jasonsmith894]

Is anyone using either of these lenses? I'm having trouble deciding between the

two. The 18-50 is the EX, so the build quality seems like it might be better,

but is the extra range in the 17-70 worth it. Also, anyone know if these can

actually be used for macro? Thanks

[squiggs77]

Please don't hate me. I haven't used these two lenses, but I do have the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and I love it. It's Razor Sharp even wide open and I can't complain about the focus. With either Sigma or Tamron, I would go for the constant f2.8 rather than a wider zoom range. The 50-70mm range really isn't that much.

[squiggs77]

Please don't hate me. I haven't used these two lenses, but I do have the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and I love it. It's Razor Sharp even wide open and I can't complain about the focus. With either Sigma or Tamron, I would go for the constant f2.8 rather than a wider zoom range. The 50-70mm range really isn't that much.

[2yellowdogs]

Jason,

I hate jerks who don't answer the question asked, but here's another vote for the Tamron. I looked at the Sigma and Tamron lenses and the Tamron appeared to have better build quality and the results have been excellent.

 

http://danzimmerman.smugmug.com/gallery/3118550#161935435-L-LB

[mike_earussi1]

The Sigma 18-50 has slightly better image quality than the 17-70, which has a better range. Depends on which one is more important to you.

 

For tests of these two lenses check out:

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

 

under nikon and

 

http://210.238.185.197/~maro/lens_test.html#10-20mmF4

 

under either 17-70 and/or 18-50

[gary evans]

3rd vote for the Tamron

[mark_fasano]

see http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00LtMR

[ashling]

I use the old style 18-50 and it's damn good with one exception - purple fringing in areas of high contrast. This has been sorted out with the newer model though I beleive. Also the fringing is a lot less serious when images are processed in Capture NX rather than Photoshop. The 18-50 has had superb reviews and to all intents is a superb lens. However, 50mm is a bit short... Just to fry your brain, have you considered the Nikon 28-105? Good value 2nd hand, superb lens, excellent range, workable macro facility. Not wide tho, you'd ned another lens for that range. If I was buying now I'd consider it for the tele end with perhaps a 12-24 in addition. To get back to your original question tho, go with the 18-50 over the 17-70.