|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on January 09, 2023 Pros: A real and authentic beast. Sharp and excellent focal range. It lends itself to any type of photography. From portrait to landscape. Cons: VIGNETTING and is only for DX. Ridiculous hood. Opinion: It is a lens that I have had for at least 8 years now. It is an excellent quadrangle that lends itself to any type of photography. It is very sharp and bright. It is true that cartoon but nothing alarming. Handy, perhaps heavy compared to other lenses but gives you excellent security. The hood, on the other hand, is ridiculous. Good light to all! |
 | sent on December 18, 2022 Pros: Sharp, beautiful colors, stabilized, super easy to use! Internal autofocus, so also suitable for entry level bodies. It is used at a reasonable price (about 250 euros). It also performs well on an FX (at least judging by the results it gave on my D810) Cons: For me no one Opinion: A lens with which I immediately found the feeling. I use it on D200, D720, D810. I did a lot of tests and comparisons filling my galleries with quite insignificant test photos. It's the lens I feel best with. It easily brings out the best from all the cameras I've used it with. In my galleries there are various comparison tests made using this lens with my camera bodies. A good photographer would surely get better results and would know how to make the most of both the bodies and the optics I use. But for those like me who live photography as a relaxing pastime this lens seems ideal for its ease of use. I did not give 10 just because I do not consider myself sufficiently experienced and I did not want to inflate the result with my vote. |
 | sent on April 22, 2022 Pros: Sharpness, fixed aperture at f/2.8 Cons: AF "noisy" for videos, rings Opinion: I switched to the Sigma 17-50 after a year with the "classic" Canon 18-55 and the difference is noticeable, despite the good performance of the lens kit. The fixed aperture at f/2.8 is certainly its strong point and unlike other lenses, it offers excellent sharpness already at TA, which becomes excellent from f/4. Pleasant bokeh, considering the type of lens I would not have expected better. The construction is discreet, the consistency is perceived starting from the weight, adequate for the type of product, while I would have preferred a less contrasted zoom ring also because there is the 17mm manual lock that prevents involuntary extensions, questionable also the ring for the MAF that in addition to not allowing the full-time manual focus, rotates only 45 °, making precision adjustments difficult. The overall yield is excellent but at short focal lengths, in addition to the classic distortion, there is a slight loss of quality on the sides of the frame; on average, chromatic aberrations and stabilization. To conclude, the AF works rather well but in some cases, especially in unfavorable light conditions, it is not very precise; the HSM engine is not particularly noisy, however during video recording it becomes unbearable if you use internal microphones (in this sense the Canon STM, for example, are much better). Despite the flaws, it remains probably the best zoom for APS-C under € 300 and a decent upgrade compared to the lenses in the kit. |
  | sent on November 08, 2020 Pros: Ta sharpness, construction, MAF speed, stabilization, value for money Cons: For what it costs, no one. Opinion: If you wanted to make a comparison with the world of football, paraphrasing even a well-known Ligabue song, I would call this lens an excellent "median": honest, versatile, well done, you mount it, shots and he always gives you a good result ... I had bought it for a use that -- at least reading a lot of reviews -- did little to suit what I would need, "a short zoom" to use under basketball basket, MAF's speed seemed not to be adequate, instead - as usual, I haven't put too much weight on what I read around and when I can, I prefer to buy and try firsthand... - it was enough to mount it on the 7D2 and "as if by enchantment" little Sigma became a splinter, keeping the focus on gusts of 5-7 frames, without any problem. It is already sharp at 2.8, the stabilizer works excellently, the blurry is pleasant although it is not at the levels of the "Hawthorn" IS II (but in my opinion higher than that of the 40 pancakes) and then the construction, even if there is a lot of plastic, is really beautiful, well above the purchase price, the barrel flows smoothly but with the right resistance, so much so that the 17mm lock button I think is superfluous, the lampshed fits perfectly even in the rest position and finally, no problem of F/B focus, consequently no need for fine adjustment (and it is already the third Sigma that does not require "fine af adjustment", I think that in Sigma they have changed something in the "quality control"...) |
 | sent on August 31, 2020 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, construction, value for money. Cons: Autofocus ghiera. Opinion: I have owned it for almost a year now and I am very happy with the purchase. It is built well and in hand by a beautiful feeling of solidity and in the packaging there is a very useful semi-rigid handbag for transport. The sharpness is great at full opening, which is great news for taking photos with poor light and getting photos with a nice blur. The stabilizer is effective and not by any kind of problem. In the end it became the lens I use most often. The only flaw I found him is the MaF ring, which has a really, really small run and in a position that too often ends up under the fingers getting stuck and thus preventing the operation of the Af. |
| sent on July 24, 2020 Pros: In my opinion, the best "short zoom" there is for Canon APS-C Cons: Nothing, except, a little, the lampshade that hooks not immediately. Opinion: It weighs the right because it is well stabilized. The button that locks the focal excursion at 17mm is very useful when you're walking around. Given the considerable versatility, you will find that you will shoot more than half of your photos with this goal. At least that's what happens to me. Personally, I consider it superior to the much more expensive rival Canon 17-55, even from the crucial point of view of sharpness. |
 | sent on June 23, 2020 Pros: brightness, constant opening, value for money, stabilization, sharpness Cons: if I have to find it, the lampshade is not up to the goal: the plastic is of poor quality and as a result the lampshade is not robust; In addition, the attack of the lampshade on the lens is precarious Opinion: I bought this lens a few months ago to replace the kit lens (an 18-55 mm DCIII, so not stabilized) of my EOS 1200D and so far I am very satisfied. As soon as I saw it in the store, the difference from the kit lens immediately emerged: the Sigma is bigger and heavier than the "plastic" and is more robust in the construction. It is sold, in addition to its bag (discreetly padded), with the lampshade, which for Canon is an optional (expensive). The Sigma 17-50mm is a standard lens for aps-c that can be used for various photographic genres, since it starts from 17mm wide angle to finish at the length of 50mm useful for portraiture. Its value is undoubtedly the constant opening of 2.8 to all the focal points, which brings in so much light thanks to the wide diameter, gives pleasant bokehs and generally allows you to detach more of the background than the lens in kit; the optics are stabilized, which allows to recover about 3 stops (the 4 declared by Sigma seem a bit too much). My model gives warm and bright colors, as I like. I preferred it to the Canon 17-55mm because of its more affordable cost (the Sigma costs about half the Canon) and I recommend it to those who, like me, want to make an upgrade of the optics in kit. |
 | sent on May 01, 2020 Pros: Price, weight, AF Cons: Nothing Opinion: they are a couple of sticks that I have this lens.... beautiful lens, grip to use on 70D, I find it as fast as Auto Focus even in cases of poor light, fast even to refocus on fast approaching subjects, besides found at a great price here on the market. For the use I make another planet than the 18-55 canon. Opinion as a true amateur on the beat nor! |
 | sent on April 07, 2020 Pros: Body solidity, Zoom block (to prevent the lens from sharpening when "resting"), so much sharpness Cons: Colors of the yield a little cold, Aesthetically not nice, Noisy autofocus Opinion: A lens with, undoubtedly, many merits. Its constant openness, all over the focal length, the compactness, the solidity of the body, the masculinity of the whole lens make the lens in question greatly appreciate. The price, in line with the unsteady Tamron counterpart, is a nice pro to keep in mind when thinking of a standard zoom optics. The sharpness of the lens is remarkable, especially by closing the diaphragm a bit, but even at 17mm it makes very well with that slight wide-angle touch. The barrel distortion is contained, although it sins for a certain cold and slightly washed-out tone of tones (for me I love the rendium of Tokina 11-16, where the dominant hots fade), but easily corrected in post production. Nice lens for generic and street outings, cute for a bit of "macro" (close up), where the sharpness emerges immediately. A blade in the landscapes. Also great with slab filters, not having front that rotates. Great value for money, from nice satisfactions. |
 | sent on September 01, 2019 Pros: Brightness,construction,sharpness towards 50 mm,performance price Cons: Autofocus with some problems with little light Opinion: It's a few months that I use it, I'm really satisfied with the quality of the images it produces, the price is really good compared to even the nikon not even stabilized, the color yield I like, the sharpness good especially on the 50 mm even at ta, a little less sharp at 17 but acceptable. The brightness 2.8 to all focals is one of the highlights. One thing I noticed is that it focuses closer than the stated one and allows you to make nice macros given the 50 mm sharpness, despite not being a specific lens. I recommend the purchase also saw the good price also on the new. |
 | sent on August 27, 2019 Pros: sharpness, fast and quiet af, price Cons: Nobody Opinion: Purchased new with seals. I don't understand the sometimes negative reviews about this lens... The autofocus, for which so much is spoken, is quiet, precise and fast. To put it mildly, it is a performance between the Nikon AF-S and AF-P. The sharpness is noteworthy, because it is on par with their Nikon counterparts but they cost three times as much! The construction is very solid and robust. The weight is right. 600g: It should be remembered that having too light a grip in your hand leads to inevitable defects such as choppy. micromove and blur. It has no chromatic aberrations even in situations of very marked backlight/contrasts. The stabilizer is great and guarantees at least three stoppages advantage. It can also be used for professional use given the precise construction and reliability of the guineas and mechanisms. Rating: 10 |
  | sent on June 20, 2019 Pros: Great all-rounder, constant opening great value Cons: non-tropicalized, noisy stabilizer, loses sharpness at TA Opinion: Great zoom all-rounder very bright. I used it on Nikon D7000 and it gave me a lot of satisfaction. Great for those who need a photo zoom in the interior. An important flaw is the fatoo that is not tropicalized: in fact I had to sell it because mushrooms were formed on the front main lens. Another small flaw is the noisy stabilizer even when it is not running (it looks like something has broken inside). If you can call it defect the zoom dial turns as opposed to the Nikons... I recommend it for those who have entry level SLRs since they have the internal autofocus. |
 | sent on May 13, 2019 Pros: Constant opening. Autofocus motor integrated into the lens and compatible with Nikon entry-level SLR cameras. Very, very limited chromatic aberrations. Focal excursion essential for a handyman zoom. Sharpness. Blurred acceptable for an economical zoom. Excellent price and performance ratio Cons: Not frated if resting and stretching along the severity. The weight, then not so high for the quality that expresses, however, does not balance the reflex that do not have a solid grip (Nikon d3400 for example). Not tropicalized. Focus ring with excursion too short and not well usable. Opinion: I use the zoom on Nikon d3400, and the reason for the purchase was to be able to shoot in the focal lengths that most use on APS-C (18mm, and 28mm) with good quality and wide openings. In the Nikon catalog I have not found solutions except at the cost of having to upgrade the camera body to preserve the autofocus. Excellent sharpness. Its best performance is between F4 and F 5.6 and between 17mm 20mm and 28mm. A possible defect of which it is important to be aware: the lens corrects many faults and this makes the image slightly flat in the subjects close together and with a little abrupt tonal passages. Obviously this is a compromise that I gladly accepted to have excellent flexibility, stabilization, and better quality of a kit lens at a very low price. No problem of back or front focus, precise autofocus in my case (I almost always use the center point or the automatic.) I would only replace it with a couple of high quality fixes. |
 | sent on May 02, 2019 Pros: Price, weight, size, stabilization, sharpness, brightness. Cons: Construction, absence fulltime AF. Opinion: A lens that pleasantly surprised me. I do not understand the reviews that speak of slowness of AF, maybe it will be my D500 to work miracles but I do not notice any difference with the 24-70 vr, maybe just a little noisy but not too much, my 85 1.4 D did much worse. I'm just upset that he doesn't have full-time fire. Even with little light it guarantees assoutically professional performance, I recently threw a disco party with photographically bad light and with the AF in group I missed 5 fires out of 600 photos, so it was unexpectedly excellent. Sharpness to the center exceptional even at TA, at the edges is honest, the blurry pleasant, the AC not unmanageable. The specimen I was able to try did not experience any front/back focus issues. At this price I would have satisfied myself with features of much lower. I absolutely recommend it. |
 | sent on April 23, 2019 Pros: brightness, value for money, stabilizer, colors Cons: Low performance AF When there is little light Opinion: I use it with the Nikon D7200 and I find it very good. The stabilizer does its job and the photos, especially in the middle part, are sharp. The colors are typical of Sigma and I meet 100% AF when there is little light wrong and is not fast, however it happens when you over the limits of the machine. Being an f2.8 is also good for portraits set. The Blur is nice |
 | sent on January 20, 2019 Pros: The price definitely... faithful colors and sharpness in the center really high Cons: loud autofocus, for videos is unusable. Opinion: Bought to use it with adapter on my eos m50, well I was disappointed only by the noise of the autofocus... tttt... T.. tttrttt... unusable x video, too bad. As sharpness in the center already in TA is definitely good, at 35 and 50mm from the best, obviously wide-angle side closed to f/5.6-8 is perfect. Bought used as new at 200 degrees I would say they were spent very well, x the canon takes twice as much. I must say that it also offers a nice contrast, long ago I happened a copy not of the best maybe, this one instead I keep it stretra. Another defect perhaps that during the focus the dial rotates and every now and then I touch it with the left hand, made the habit I keep it further back. I can say that I have replaced 22mm and 50 stm with a single goal, which is no small feat. |
 | sent on November 29, 2018 Pros: sharpness, brightness, bokeh, constant aperture, enclosed housing and lens hood, versatility, compact size, stabilizer, color rendition, price Cons: Chromatic aberration, slightly noisy and low-performance autofocus in low light conditions Opinion: Bought for just over a month, has already given me great satisfaction. The brightness is great, as well as the sharpness, and the aperture of the diaphragm remains constant even increasing the focal. The bokeh is very pleasant, and all at a really low price. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a single lens all-do that does not cost too much, or to those who decide to replace the kit lens, since the price is very competitive. In contrast there is the chromatic aberration that appears very often, but the problem is relative because with a simple click, with different programs, you can remove it. The autofocus is not the best but it defends well. At this price it is difficult to find better. |
 | sent on November 08, 2018 Pros: weight, colors, af speed, construction, and especially the price Cons: No one, to be picky, remains the photo taken x quite a bit, on D7500, solvable by tapping the button scatto...ma son bazzecole... Opinion: Taken by 1 day, from Galaxia, spectacular lens, extremely bright, I'll test it in the evening, but it churn spectacular photos with warm colors, as I like, has the lock zoom key, even if it does not go down, one more thing that does not fail, me it did prefer to 17/70 that He doesn't have it. Speed in the focus, the stabilizer makes a slight whistle but imperceptible, I am extremely satisfied with my purchase, even as weight is not excessive, I do not bother at all. Rated 10, and I'd recommend X Street, being almost a Wide angle, but at 50 is fenomenale.il Mio does not suffer from F/focus or B/focus, tested in Galaxia headquarters, which thank x the Kindness |
 | sent on September 26, 2018 Pros: Crisp and excellent colors Cons: Maybe a little noisy autofocus Opinion: I use it for about a year with my Canon 7d Mk II for photos and videos. I have to say that it has a good definition and an excellent color balance. The blurred seem to me creamy and the purchase I would certainly do it again. In the video, being also bright, the yield is very good but using (only when I pick up "on the Fly") the microphone of my camera, the noise of the autofocus is made to feel. For everything else I find a lens just not bad even if compared to others I use, very good level. |
 | sent on August 22, 2018 Pros: sharpness, brightness f 2.8, fluid zoom mechanism, price Cons: Weight, F/B focus, autofocus in low light, huge filters, (cannot deactivate the stabilizer?) Opinion: Bought this lens to replace that kit, used on a Canon 1200d. The lens looks solid, it also weighs a lot (about 650g) and the neck is felt after a few hours especially if accustomed to that kit. The image quality is great, after F4 I would say perfect. A few problems of F/B focus typical of Sigma but you only notice when shooting from very close and the depth of field is minimal. The autofocus is in crisis when there is little light and you often have to resort to an auxiliary light or go directly in manual; In optimum light conditions it is quick, quiet and hardly mistaken. Very nice Bokeh and easy to get seen the wide aperture. The stabilizer works fine (even too much since on my Canon 1200d you can not disable, I'm trying to contact Sigma to solve the problem) allows you to get sharp images even with the dim light of a fire, even in the videos you Performs well without strange shots. Beautiful the huge front lens, however, requires 77mm filters that are quite expensive. Ultimately I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to replace the kit lens. |
 | sent on June 28, 2018 Pros: Sharpness from fixed optics, f 2.8 diaphragm constant over the entire focal range, great versatility, excellent colour rendition, affordable price. Cons: AF not very precise and suffering with low brightness, good mechanics but not the height of the excellent lenses, does not have the full time MF. Opinion: I currently use it on Nikon D7200, there work quite well in many areas (ceremonies, portraits, landscaping). He's a decent handyman who does his job and does it very well. The last specimen in my possession (purchased 2 months ago) was very sharp, especially at 17mm 2.8, and from F4 onwards it becomes a razor, at all focal points, really exceptional. At this price I believe that there is not a handyman zoom with comparable sharpness. Negligible and solvable chromatic aberrations in PP as long as shooting in RAW. No problem with B/F focus. A little vignette but only at f2.8 and I think we can grant him the price. Anyway with a click Camera raw corrects everything. Of this lens I really appreciate the respectable value f 2.8 which is constant from 17 to 50mm and extremely usable thanks to its sharpness. Blurry very pleasant and much better than other similar price zooms, slightly warm chromatic shades (which I appreciate very much). Silent and fast Autofocus, but not foolproof, on average 100 photos 3-4 are slightly out of focus. Good mechanics, but the zoommata is not always very fluid due to the weight of the front lens. It does not have full time manual focus, so be careful not to hinder the movement of the AF ring during use. The exterior finishes are very good, and in the box everything comes out (semi-rigid bag, caps, petal hood of excellent workmanship, but that scratches immediately). All in all it is excellent if considering the price, optically speaking it offers really remarkable performances, from fixed optics (try to believe). Delighted to get it back in my outfit after a moment of "loss" with the Nikon 16-85 VR that did not result in the height of 17-50, but this is another story. |
 | sent on May 27, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, price, solid construction, f 2.8 at all focal lengths Cons: Nothing for the price at which you are currently Opinion: Purchased from Amazon on offer about a year ago, he immediately became the trusted companion during outdoor trips or on those occasions when serving a handyman. No problem front back focus ne on Canon 1100d ne on Canon 70D. Excellent sharpness and good chromatic rendering. Compared to the mid-low-end lenses at home Canon seems decidedly more solid and better built, with hard nuts at the right point. The hood in my specimen fits smoothly. The presence of the hood and bag in the package are definitely a plus. Absolutely recommended for amateurs who want to make a first upgrade of optics compared to those from kits. |
 | sent on May 25, 2018 Pros: F/2.8 aperture on focal length, sharpness, colors Cons: AF sufferer with low light, focal excursion not by "handyman" Opinion: It will be that I arrive from a famous lens certainly not for its quality (Canon EF-S 17-85) but as soon as I started using it was immediately love. The build quality is excellent, you feel you are holding a quality product. It has a great sharpness even at f/2.8 and the color rendition is extraordinary. The distortion even at short focal lengths there is but nothing that can not be corrected in PP, as well as the minimum chromatic aberrations: Easily eliminated by a click. Although the focal length is not suitable for all situations (the only thing I regret the 17-85), the quality of the shots is really phenomenal, especially in low light, when you have to raise the ISO and my camera (700D) normally suffers a Little. If we really want to find faults, the AF in low light conditions a little fatigue and the lens is a bit pesantuccia, but given the general quality are flaws on which we can quietly postpone... I bought it on the famous oriental site with prices out of the world, and the value for money at €230 is just amazing, but even at the "Western" price it's worth it. |
 | sent on May 25, 2018 Pros: Construction, brightness, sharpness, beautiful blurred, price content, bag supplied. Cons: On Nikon D 7200 does not work automatic deactivation for viewfinder indications, you must press the shutter button lightly. Opinion: On the advice of other frequenters of the site I took this lens, buying it at one of the usual banned sites. For 220 euros I think it's impossible to ask for more. Great sharpness, on Nikon D 7200, from which in fact I have no longer disassembled. Besides my specimen has no problems locking the lens hood, after a few months of daily use, and even the cap does not seem as bad as others say. Now that I'm used to it, I seem strange to those of other lenses. I find it very sharp already at 2.8. When checking the accuracy of the focus performed with the machine mounted on a tripod, the specimen in my possession has been shown to be free from F/b focus. At the minor focal length, framing with the viewfinder you have an impression more from fish-eye than we put to the 18-125 OS Sigma in my possession, compared to which for the rest there is not exactly comparison. The focus, if done pointing to an object that has a minimum of contrast, as recommended by the camera manufacturers, is done in a way I would say impeccable. In short, for the price that you pay offers features in my opinion surprising and therefore should be taken without delay. Returning to this page after some time, I find a series of negative impressions about faults that I have never personally found on my specimen, bought again. Someone even speaks of its use with adapters and in this regard I wonder how you can think of obtaining indications of some likelihood in such conditions. |
 | sent on January 15, 2018 Pros: Construction, brightness, value for money (at least at current prices), sharpness Cons: Af inaccurate Opinion: Bought online at 245 euros (parallel import), as soon as I arrived I immediately made to my sample the test of the 3 batteries, diaphragm to f. 2.8. Result: slight back focus at focal lengths 17 and 21 mm, it is accentuated at 28 and 35 mm, to disappear at 50 mm. The entity varies slightly from shot to snap. I have not tried other diaphragms. Obviously it can also be due to my camera, now dated (eos 300d). The focus is fast and quite silent. The construction is excellent, the lens is solid (and 'an EX series) the zoom ring has the right hardness and there are no yokes. The images are beautiful, detailed, sharp, at all focal lengths, with a prevalence of focal lengths from 30 mm upwards. All in all I decided to keep it, I think the inaccuracies of the f in practical use and with more closed diaphragms should pass almost unnoticed (to detect them at 17 and 21 mm you need to make a specific crop in the area in focus), but remains the advantage of having a well built, very bright and nit lensIDE. |
 | sent on January 10, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, constant aperture f / 2.8, hood and enclosure supplied Cons: Hanging hood, not particularly fast focusing Opinion: Used on Canon 550d and 7d, my model had a sharpness in the extraordinary center. Returns warmer shades than the Canon lenses I used. The focus is fair, but not very fast: the Canon 15-85 was much faster. Excellent quality / price ratio. My lens hood was not very firm in engagement. The equipment with soft bag is a plus not just, considering the already low price. |
 | sent on October 03, 2017 Pros: Value for money, f / 2.8 on all focal lengths, stabilized, accurate and fast AF in optimal light condition Cons: Heavy, low fatigue with low light, flare in backlight, back / front focus Opinion: I have been using this lens for about 2 years and throughout this time I have stressed it for good. I bought this lens as an alternative to nikon kit 18-55 and I have never regretted it because it is always attached to the machine. The quality of the materials is good, except the hood that does not hook up well and risk losing it (but these are tiny ). The 2.8-inch opening is definitely a point in his favor and the stabilizer allows you to drop a lot under the safety times, which is very useful for those who are free-hand. The lens is heavy and in fact after a while that you are using the free hand you feel and the arm starts to tire, for me it is not a big problem since I use it mainly on the stand. The AF is accurate and fast in Optimal light conditions allowing fast moving subjects without any problem, when the light is weak this speed and accuracy is lost a bit. To get the best sharpness you need to close the diaphragm and infacts from f / 3.5-4 onwards is really clear. I found greater sharpness at the extreme focal lengths (17 and 50 mm). The 17mm distortion is minimal and easily corrected in pp.rnIt is strictly used for landscaping and what I often noticed when shooting in full back is flare, but with a little bit of detail everything is resolved. The problem with this lens is the Sigma quality control, unfortunately you can easily get into a sample with resolving back / front focus issues or calibration on the camera, if the machine allows it, otherwise you will be forced to send everything (including the reflex) to the service center.rnrn |
 | sent on September 11, 2017 Pros: Sharpness and construction Cons: Close focus? Opinion: Basically I did the 3-pack test without any problems with front back focus, I must say I was afraid to find defects. I have this slow for about 2 months, my body machine is a Nikon d5500. Solid construction with tactile materials. I happened to put my fingers over the manual focus ring instead of the zoom ring. I was slightly forced but nothing happened. So you need to be careful if you do not want to ruin the lens. The sharpness is good, at TA with 50 mm i can do beautiful bokeh, even at 18 mm the results are good. In low light conditions it seems to me, but I still have to try it well, that the AF misses a few strikes. The same thing happened to me when I try to shoot from a few inches, even if it is not a macro lens, some photos come back blurry (for example, water droplets on trees, green on a green background). Here I ask the opinion of the most experienced people, could it be my Nikon or the lens that work hard? Overall, compared to kit 18-55, the jump is onit, beautiful colors that it forces. |
 | sent on September 09, 2017 Pros: sharpness, 2.8 constant, effective stabilizer, value for money Cons: flare in backlight, chromatic aberration (soluble with one click in pp) Opinion: I use this one-year lens mounted on a 7D old and I have to say it's my favorite. It has incredible sharpness and autofocus allows me to hook even fast moving subjects without bending. I was undecided between this sigma and the canon 17-55 2.8, I chose the sigma for the quality ratio and I do not regret it at all. absolutely recommendable |
 | sent on August 11, 2017 Pros: Sharpness at the center of the frame, 2.8 constant, stabilized, fast af ... Cons: AF is not good in low light conditions, scroll to display the enlarged photo in the bad display, focus focus always active even in auto focus mode, sigma lottery for models without front / back focus. Opinion: The construction is qualitatively good, the quality of the image is good in the center and it decays a bit as it goes to the edges, there is the stabilizer even if not among the best and most essential for this focus. Focusing is fast but makes it difficult to "hook" the subject, which is in low light every shot. The scroll that serves to view the detail of the photo on the display is ridiculous and slow, you have to press the button on the car body to move the selection square, at least on nikon.rnImplant was suffering from back focus.rnThe focus ring always turns in af.rnBuone mode if not front / back |
 | sent on July 17, 2017 Pros: 2.8 constant on focus, incredible sharpness, fast AF Cons: Slight distortion at the lower focal points but now everything is correctable in post Opinion: I opted for this lens after having definitively retired the 18-55Exposure of canon 17-55 for budget reasons, I read of a good sigma notation and the 2.8 constant and I definitely chose to buy it. I'm afraid a scary sharpness and an AF Very fast and silent, will be my handyman for a long time. As unique "flaws" indicate the weight however easily manageable is a slight distortion to the smaller focal lengths. |
 | sent on July 14, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, fixed aperture at f2.8, quality / price ratio, solidity. Cons: Chromatic aberration at the lower focal lengths also at intermediate openings, slight problem of AF, above all at 17mm focusing on infinity in conditions of not optimal brightness, 77mm filters. Opinion: I recently bought this lens, I have not yet had the opportunity to try it thoroughly but an idea in my mind I made it. Precise that I use it on Canon 600D. The lens in question is very clear, at the center of the frame the image is nice sharp a bit 'to all openings (perhaps from the best from f2.8 to f11), of course at the edges and corners the results are not the same , but nothing to do with the 18-55 f3.5 / 5.6 IS II Canon provided me with the kit, where the image was not defined at all in these areas. The constant aperture at f2.8 is very useful, saves you in low light situations, even the bokeh is pleasant ... The construction is solid. It is a glass that gives a feeling of compactness in hand, nothing to do with the "plasticoni" that are often supplied in the kits, obviously the bayonet is in metal, the quality of the materials will be seen with time, it is also present system to lock the ring of the focal.rnFor what concerns the against%2C there is inevitably a chromatic aberration, especially towards the edges / corners of the frame, which manifests itself at the shorter focal lengths, more or less at any aperture and in conditions of strong luminosity or contrasts in the image. I have not encountered constant front or back focus problems, but especially at 17mm when you focus indefinitely, the lens could unpack (even if only slightly, it is something that you notice only magnifying a lot of the image) the focus in AF in low / bad light conditions, unless you take a picture in Live View, in this case the problem does not seem to be present. 77mm filters are quite expensive. Present evident distortion at 17 mm, easily correctable in pp. However, it remains one of the best choices for the quality / price ratio in the standard zoom on the market of reduced sensor DSLRs in my opinion. Waiting to test it better, in any case I would recommend it for people like me, is an amateur photographer. |
 | sent on July 07, 2017 Pros: Obviously the value for money, excellent sharpness, not excessive weight, constant opening 2.8 on the whole range of focals. Cons: Only for apsc. Opinion: I find it to be a very valid lens, specially designed for apsc and bears the acronym EX (acronym that names the a-side optics A ). From what I have read around, in comparison with the much-declared 17 55 Nikon, it is, in certain circumstances, even higher than the latter. The lampshade attack a little slow? Yes, a microscopic little game, but they are trifles. Diaphragm at 3.5-4 becomes the classic blade. The blurred is very good. Wide front lens of 77 mm, to be protected, as I did, with a filter Hoya hd PROTECTOR (cost just under 50 degrees ). |
 | sent on May 19, 2017 Pros: Value for money, TA clarity on the whole excursion Cons: Focus ring unscrambled in AF (very annoying to me) Opinion: I have been using this lens for more than a year on Canon Eos 70D and I can not say it well. Before I had an EF-S 15-85mm but the need for greater brightness pushed me towards this lens that gave me satisfaction right away, always sharp that with a good bokeh. Many speak badly of the general construction and complain of the hood or cap, but they forget the price paid. My experience is positive, recommended for those who can not afford Canon EF-S 17-55mm! |
 | sent on May 12, 2017 Pros: Brightness, unrivaled price ratio and construction. Cons: Sometimes the autofocus is not very precise. Lighten with a slightly lighter attack Opinion: I had this lens right from now, I took the replacement kit 18/55 and I can not say it right. An excellent and excellent yield. Solid in hand and with a bright spot so bright gave me many satisfaction, both on d3300 and d7200. I feel I recommend it to everyone, who starts and who is a semi pro. You will not regret it and then that price is really great. Little to envy at 17/55 f2.8 of Nikon's home. Only one sins the hood that does not look very hot, but to me personalemnte has never detached. |
 | sent on May 11, 2017 Pros: Brightness, focus speed, sharpness. Price. Cons: I have not found it yet. Opinion: A lens that does his job well, once assembled it will be difficult to replace it. Very low price for the potential it offers. An optic so I feel I can recommend it. Good for a cameraman, I would not know for a professional how it behaves as I'm not that. It certainly is worth the price for which it is sold. Rn I hope it was useful, in my profile a few clicks you can see. |
 | sent on May 02, 2017 Pros: Brightness 2.8 in all openings. Cons: AF sometimes inaccurate. Check for compatibility issues with Canon 80D. Opinion: Great lens for apsc, use it as everything to do and I find it very good. Only one fault, I do not think the AF really looks, but maybe it's just a compatibility problem with my 80D. I've also tested the lens to shoot videos and even in this field it does very well. Purchased on Amazon for around 300 turned cmq a good deal. Recommended. |
 | sent on February 11, 2017 Pros: Brightness (f / 2.8 across the zoom range), good sharpness, easy handling, excellent color rendering, price. Cons: Yield backlit and vignetting, hooking the very poor hood Opinion: I bought this lens to replace the Nikon 16-85 that was f / 5.6 at 85mm, and are generally satisfied. The color rendering is great, it leads very well around, and is very suitable for those who must make such night shots or in very dark places, at high ISO yield is very good, better than Nikkor.rnNon however, in my opinion, live up to other Sigma lenses such as the ulti art gone, and even the height of Nikkor with Nano Crystal Coating.rnCome build quality I would say it's more than good, it did a tumble down a hill and is emerged unscathed, the only criticism is the hood that after a while 'becomes very unstable in the graft bayonet, which softens parecchio.rnrn |
user63386  | sent on February 11, 2017 Pros: f 2.8 at all focal lengths, clear at room temperature, solid, lock button to lock the hike, bokeh, good stabilizer, color. Cons: nobody Opinion: I just changed the sigma 17-70 C with this goal. the 17-70 C did not satisfy me at all, the A F was never accurate, TA was always too 'soft' and stabilizer was scarce. As soon as I put the 17-50 on my D7200 I felt a certain feeling. I did some test shots and for now I am fully satisfied. Sharpness too monstrous to TA rnA.F. very precise (not me wrong a shot), bokeh (50mm) great. I pushed the d above 2000 ISO 7200 and returned to me with this lens a 'very detailed image, which is not the case with the 17-70.rnHo took some photos to 50mm with 1/20 and 1/10 times without problems .. stabilizzatore.rnNessun great problem of front / back focus.rnE 'a lens that everyone should have in an APS-10 C.rnVoto kit. |
 | sent on November 10, 2016 Pros: absolute clarity - alive, saturated color - bright - Price Cons: a minimum of distortion and vignetting to the lower focal but at this price ... Opinion: Among the dozen goals I have tried on my old Canon EOS 500 D this lens in terms of sharpness and precision is inferior only to the excellent paintings Canon 70-200 F / 4.0 L USM that was going to cover the whole upper focal, has to be great, especially in light conditions not excellent considering it is a 2.8 and has an excellent stabilizer, but I also got wonderful shots with portraits and landscapes, also has the standard hood, perhaps the only ones in are noted at 17 mm where shines a slight vignetting and minimal distortion, but its most serious defect is that it's not compatible with FF and I'm selling a great reluctance |
 | sent on November 08, 2016 Pros: sharpness, constant openness, solidity Cons: weight, distortion 17 Opinion: Excellent lens for APSC, the use as all do, and he never let me down, good stabilizer, my copy does not suffer from F / B focus ... only flaw a bit 'pesantuccio ... but to the touch gives the impression of solidity. AF silent fast and accurate ... advice to those who want to make a step from the kit lens without spending a fortune. |
 | sent on November 08, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, construction, supplied accessories, constant aperture. Cons: Distorts the focal low, flare. Opinion: Excellent lens produced by Sigma, bought 340 € to replace 18-55 STM. High sharpness at all focal lengths, from F4 onwards becomes really sharp. Suffers a little 'flare against high lights, it is not recommended for demanding backlit but it is perfect with night lighting (not afraid of the street lamps). Fast focusing, solid and well-constructed goal, it very well on APS-C, distorts, a bit 'between 17 and 20mm, but nothing serious. I think in the price range in which it is located is the best buy. |
 | sent on October 27, 2016 Pros: Robustness, sharpness, brightness, bokeh, quiet autofocus, value for money. Cons: Nikon D7100 on the monitor does not autodisattiva after the preview, you have to press the shutter button halfway to get it off, front cap loooong plasticky. Opinion: Hello to all. rnSono owner for more than a year of this goal, and I can claim to be entusiasta.rnLo bought to replace the Nikkor kit lens 18,105 of which was equipped with my D5100.rnStrutturalmente is very robust, the zoom smoothness is a bit tough and turns on the contrary than the nikon in my possession but not a problem. Has the lock button to zoom that can be activated, however, only the focal 17mm to prevent elongation of the camera to zoom down but my copy has never happened in fact, remains there even if it is located on focal intermedie.rnLa quality the lens cap laugh seems to belong to a toy, because sin does not do honor to this objective. rnI 2.8 will have on the entire focal length as its rival Tamron and the benefits are seen particularly when shooting indoors or under special lighting conditions as also happens to me for street.rnAutofocus accurate and fast, the ultrasonic motor is extremely quiet and the same applies to the VR, sis2339; habit and act in automatico.rnIn conclusion, I find it a great goal and a great value for money, unless you are a professional I'll consiglio.rnrn |
 | sent on September 01, 2016 Pros: bright, 2.8 hard, solid construction, good autofocus and slienzioso - sometimes mistaken shots but it's ok -, bokeh, sharpness, color Cons: distortion at the focal earliest, vignetting (visible to 17mm 2.8), little three-dimensionality and depth Opinion: I state: I am not a professional and I tried this point for a few days. However I want to bring you back my positive experience. I previously purchased the Sigma 17-70 C 2.8-4, but since I needed more brightness and had not satisfied me, I sent back and replaced with this 17-50 2.8 I have to say it does its job very well. TA is perfectly usable, just close little to enhance all details of the really good foto..nitidezza. Bokeh like, the soft blurred at the right point, and this makes it in my opinion also suited for portraits. A real gem for the price (especially used). It Replaces 18-55 from kits admirably. Nevertheless, I am considering the idea of ??sending him back ... because in my opinion lacks three-dimensionality. At this price, to be a zoom, does his duty very well. 8 vote |
 | sent on August 31, 2016 Pros: bright goal, well done not very heavy excellent sharpness and fast, quiet autofocus. rnUna blade f4 Cons: A soft Po at f2.8 but better than a kit lens Opinion: I was torn between the Canon 17-55 f2.8 and Sigma 17-50 f2.8 finally seeing the reviews on canon and always soft at f2.8 at the edges but less than the sigma but only slightly, however, the price is twice ... rnPenso that the price performance ratio we better not for this price ... rnContento choice ... RNA f2.8 to 50mm are made of beautiful portraits with a nice broken ... rnOttica very good all-rounder for the light the video head with a 80d |
 | sent on August 31, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, excellent for overall image quality, good bokeh, nice colors Cons: The stabilizer of my exemplary broke; exterior plastic and tires were damaged quite easily, Opinion: The step up from the various 18 55, 18 70, 18 105 etc ... of Nikon lenses Kit is everything, and is famous for its optics ability to "switch off" the subject from the background, thanks to brightness of the same; capacity which, conversely, is made almost entirely absent in the kit zoom; RNLA image quality is very good, excellent sharpness, very good bokeh (not like the fixed but, to be fair, not even that far), perhaps only the colors are slightly below those that return the optical Nikkor: I found them slightly "chilly" .... but nothing particularly negative or worthy of complaint .... rnAnche focal end (50 mm) and wide open enough critical condition for a constant aperture zoom lens, I did not notice quality declines or contrast: the image remains always engraved and detailed! rnAd focal beginning, 17mm, distorts a lot .... nothing dramatic, but the distortion is evident almost ogni photo type (not only architecture, palaces etc ...) rnPer first 50 mm plans are Pochini ..... well let's say you come to busts, perhaps portrait from the shoulders of the person up .... but no longer tightly framed, worth unpleasant distortion! RNLA minimum focus distance when in truth it is not enough to make "macro" (true), returns, however, very useful for special effects, type flowers in the foreground and blurred background .. ..or deliberately very tightly framed .... rnIl my copy has the perfect MAF (luck?!?), on the other hand the stabilizer works "jerky" .... in fact it broke because it is no longer his job .rnLa building is a bit 'controversial ..... very "plasticky" plastics, rubbers which tend to swell and lose traction with the objective body, not to mention the dirt that is deposited in the serrations .... |
 | sent on July 18, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, f / 2.8, fast and quiet AF, quality / price ratio, construction Cons: AF adjustment problems, ring MAF, poor resistance against the light flare Opinion: I bought this lens used 200 euro. The flaws that I found: would require an AF calibration due back focus that occurs especially in low light (various opinions on the internet report testimonies of individuals who suffer from front / back focus besides me). The focus ring is not full time manual and has a very short range, almost unusable in MF (besides the fact that around and you have to be careful not to force it because you can appeal by mistake with the lens) .rnPer the rest nothing to say! I think the best purchase that can be done on a aps-c to replace the classic 18-55, both with regard to the optical quality, both for the fact that the optics is MOOLTO more bright! RnConsigliatissimo! |
 | sent on July 02, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, Excellent image quality even s f2.8 Cons: The protective cap is difficult to insert, Focus Ring no "friction" must be careful not to force it into AF. Opinion: Great goal, well-built, sturdy, the photos show a good and excellent sharpness at f2.8 to f4. rnMontato Nikon D7200 I immediately noticed a focus inaccurate but it was due to some rnerrate settings in the camera menu. I corrected the settings and now the focus is perfect, rnottengo good results: as already said a good sharpness from f2.8 and beautiful colors rndei, well contrasted, even in the evening landscapes. RNE perfect for nights out in the company of other people, you can shoot faster and ottenerernun good result. |
 | sent on March 07, 2016 Pros: Quality d 'image, focal range, brightness Cons: Focus Ring Opinion: Excellent lens for sharpness and focal ranges, personally traveling will never break from the SLR. Very bright and well stabilized, the focus is not lightning fast, but more than acceptable. Only flaw in my opinion is the rotation of the focus ring which besides being noisy is likely to be erroneously blocked with your fingers. I have owned two copies, both have no problem front / back focus. |
 | sent on February 25, 2016 Pros: excellent build quality, sharpness as well, fast and quiet AF, F / 2.8, stabilizer, lens hood Cons: Weight and the focusing ring does not Full time AF Opinion: I bought new in July 2015 I had time to stressarlo as they should, and I must say that I have not disconnected from my Canon 650D, a handyman lens from 17 to 50, with a discreet sharpness already af / 2.8, f / 4 onwards it is superb. At first I was doubtful when choosing between the sigma 17-50, Tamron 17-50 and Canon 17-55, but then I think I made the right choice, from field testing is much more sharp and smooth performance of the Tamron and almost at par emblazoned Canon, and i do not think the price difference has reason to exist between the two except for the brand. I had no front / back focus problems, even on my previous 17-70 model I had none, Sigma in recent years has improved a lot on this. super stabilizer least +3 stop, only draw weight that is felt after a day of work and the focus is not adjustable Full-time AF automatically, the rest would really recommend it to anyone who wants to make a quantum leap , I can always take good shots at home. 9.5 rating. |
 | sent on January 14, 2016 Pros: Good build quality, sharpness by applause, incisive fast silent AF done well by massive security, together much better than many noble Cons: The picture remains on the screen for an inexplicably long time before auto shutdown set to show photo taken for a few seconds as it should be, exceeds the minute on Nikon D7200, goes out only with slight press of the shutter to avoid unnecessary battery power, not so with original optical Opinion: Received last week target newly built optical stabilized and packaged branded "D5300 compatible" EX HSM. Cameras hooked to more dated Nikon D300 and D80 / 90 times off the display are short in the order of 5-6 seconds so I ca is still a bad youth unresolved return it? are undecided pictures under test are actually pretty good incisive outclass the big production of medium c aps of Nikon, it is not a drama restrain him. rn I would be interested to know the opinion of those still using the binomial D7200 / Sigma 17-50 |
 | sent on January 11, 2016 Pros: excellent quality / price ratio, very well built and very solid, impressive AF Cons: non-tropical conditions rather heavy Opinion: I use it for weeks on D7200 and not miss a beat. Great in the gusts and exceptional even in close-ups. He replaced the old Nikkor 18-55 VR finally giving me a lens that is difficult if not remove the camera when I need f brightest where then 35 and 50 f. 1.8 decisamente.rnOttimo him outclass even the slight bokeh maximum apertura.rnDecisamente a lens recommended to all those who can not afford the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8. |
 | sent on January 05, 2016 Pros: F2.8 aperture, affordable cost, good costruzionw Cons: I find no particular defects ... Opinion: Use this lens by two years and is always mounted on my car, a d5100. I use a little for everything portrait view is I find it a great alternative to the more expensive Nikon f2.8 17:55 that I could try and that is another thing but it costs 2.5 times more than that. My problem is not suffering from Front / Back Focus thankfully. To my humble opinion I can recommend it to anyone looking for a good product without needing gutted ... |
 | sent on November 22, 2015 Pros: as good quality / price, fast and quiet AF, stabilizer Cons: a bit heavy but you get used Opinion: I at for my Nikon D5000 and I'm very happy with its performance for the moment ... a great goal that woman bright colors and recommend it to everyone and also ... at affordable price with new 2 years warranty ... I hope to have time and to be able to take many beautiful pictures and then share with you all ... JUZZINI |
 | sent on November 03, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, af fast, build quality, stabilizer. Cons: weight and size. Opinion: Use of this sigma canon 70d, the difference in quality from the lens kit is truly remarkable, as well as the feeling of quality previously only holding it in his hand. Af very quiet, he was never given problems. Very good sharpness even if I had to use it to better train and get into it in confidence. Only annoyance that feedback is overweight, but it is my opinion: I do mostly street and after a whole day around the weight feels .. At the same time, however, gives a nice solid feel. Stabilizer that surprised me, I took a free hand in less than optimal light conditions without a flash and I found myself very well, also because of the excellent 2.8 fixed aperture. The value for money is excellent. |
| sent on October 16, 2015 Pros: Af fast and quiet, stabilizer, quality / price ratio advantage, housing and hood included Cons: Softness in TA, possible problems of front / back focus, lens hood and cap as a bit 'poor Opinion: I took this lens in place of Tamron 17-50 smooth version, because I felt the need of the stabilizer taking often by hand. I can not say I was disappointed, but the first thing I noticed was the difference in sharpness than the Tamron, Sigma unfortunately is significantly softer at room temperature, is at the center than at the edges, but closing a stop situation fortunately changes, from f5.6 on the sharpness becomes optimal. The stabilizer does work well, does not compensate its fourth stop as stated but still makes a difference. My copy does not seem to have problems sull'af, but apparently it is not difficult to run into a specimen is not perfectly calibrated, probably due to poor quality control on the part of the house, with which the new series, however, seems to have improved the situation . The thing I like most about this is the af ultrasound, fast and imperceptible, compared with the slow and noisy af the Tamron is definitely a nice pasI forward, but mostly does not go into crisis when the light begins to decrease as the Tamron, always manages to hook without major problems. Soft case and lens hood included, which never hurts, even if the quality of the lens cap and attack / hood is definitely improved. Overall it is a very valid objective, solid and well built, with a remarkably affordable price. |
 | sent on October 15, 2015 Pros: Excellent value for money, good overall quality, child care provided in the package. Cons: Nikon 7100 some minor bug. Opinion: Lens taken with nikon 3300 to replace lens kit, proved too good on the big sister greater d7100.rnLa build quality seems good, the fixed aperture to 2.8 and stabilize allow some shots a bit 'risky in low light. rnPurtroppo as known on D7100 suffers from a couple of bug compatibility (image of the captured image that remains on the display, difficulty in scrolling on the display itself), but it is easily the habit and, at least for me, are not certainly a more than fair price problema.rnIl is finally another reason to take it in considerazione.rnConsigliata rnrnFrancesco !!! |
 | sent on October 09, 2015 Pros: Sharpness in the center already at full aperture and sharp even at the edges by f4 up, construction (although plastic, but it is of plastics of good workmanship), auto focus fast and accurate in conditions of good light which remains comfortable and precise also when the light begins to run low. Blurred. Cons: Strange noise coming from inside the barrel when it shakes the goal. A little 'soft edges wide open. Opinion: I have the lens in question by a week, it purchased to replace 18-55 kits. After an initial fear for the loss of those 5mm on the canvas, as soon as I started using it I have just forgotten (just do some small step forward and everything is resolved). I have heard criticisms of the weight but for me there is absolutely no problem as in the case of this target weight = robustness. Sharpest the center already at full aperture and closing at f4 becomes clear even at the edges. I think it's the best compromise of aps-c for those who can not shell out more than twice for the Canon ef-s 17-55. Lens hood and soft case included in the package that are meant for me a lot: p (user Canon are being used to find almost anything in the packaging of the objectives). |
 | sent on July 20, 2015 Pros: 2.8 fixed aperture, sharpness, speed AF Cons: Focus ring that rotates in AF Opinion: I took about 3 weeks ago for this light to replace the Nikon D90 kit lens from 18-105 to have that extra piu.rnrnSubito tested to see if my copy was suffering from front / back focus. All ok.rnSu Nikon D90 fortunately there is not even the problem of incompatibility does remain on the display after shooting foto.rnrnLa overall sharpness is more than fair to even 2.8 to 50mm and focus fast in good lighting conditions .rnrnPerò I noticed some flaws: rnFocus mooooooolto inaccurate when light conditions are scarce! Just can not control the soggetto.Sul 18-105 was better! RNLA focus ring that rotates while using the auto focus is annoying! If by chance (and it happens often) you happen to keep your fingers on while using the autofocus and strive feel rotate the ring by issuing a "worrying" metallic whine ... :( rnrnA full aperture, by blurring sincerely I expected much more .....! rnIl 50 mm f / 1.8 Nikon mostly blurred considerably exceedore..rnCmq recommend |
 | sent on July 11, 2015 Pros: Opening in the first place, sharpness, stabilizer, built-in hood (yes, I consider it a pro), focus lightning, excellent value for money. Cons: just to be picky: heaviness (which is absolutely not a problem) Opinion: I bought this lens in January (my canon 18-55 left me) and I waited a while to review it to try really the qualities and defects. After 6 months I can say that I'm absolutely happy with the purchase! the lens is clean and razor sharp since f2.8 giving the maximum to F3.2 onwards. the autofocus is instantaneous and precise (for the price you pay the lens is too much). I use it mainly for photos in clubs at night with external flash and excellent results! The colors are saturated, sharpness at the top as mentioned above. A 17mm distorts a little but I like it so I do not consider myself a counter. A note that I do have accessories that Sigma provides: a plastic hood (of which many complain but as I said I love this lens haha) and a hard case very well done. Absent the full time manual focus ring and the distance but for the price you pay the building is secondary. The latter is not the best (plastic) but keeping the machine in hand the lens is pretty solid. In conclusion invoglio people seeking something more than usual objective standard provided by the house nikon and canon and want to do an upgrade: sharpness, aperture and autofocus speeds are the main qualities of this lens (the ones that ultimately we look in a lens) so if you have the opportunity buy it! |
 | sent on July 08, 2015 Pros: stabilized, construction Cons: Price dell'usato Opinion: Having had the Tamron 17 50 smooth and vc, the canon and the sigma 17 55 18 50, as zoom handyman on aps-c I missed the sigma 17 50. Taken especially since stabilized, to make night shots without a tripod, I saw that 17mm can take a 1/6 - 1/8 against 1/13 of the Tamron 17 50 liscio.La stabilizzazzione should be better than the Tamron 17 50 VC but for now I think I would say slightly better than similar tamron but not much higher . Flare: in the range I would say, I expected better still less than 18 little brother 50 but it seems most of the Tamron 17 50 smooth. Sharpness: Blurring of 17 50 tamron, slightly but is still better as the Tamron 17 50 VC.Colori: beautiful, saturated. AF works reasonably, not a series L, but is better than the Tamron at least it seems to me. Weight in the range to be a stabilized 2.8, much less cumbersome however the canon 17 55 which is a cannon. I recommend it to anyone who wants to stabilized optics photo Hands free otherwise better tamron 17 50 smooth that weighs less, costsless and the sharpness seems to me slightly but slightly higher. |
 | sent on June 23, 2015 Pros: sharpness, 2.8 constant aperture. fast and accurate autofocus Cons: except maybe the weight so far I have not found Opinion: bought used, but practically new, at a good price 270 euro. I am convinced to buy it after reading the reviews here on Juza. excellent optics never an issue of focus and no problem of front or back focus. even in low light, such as churches, night photos etc. Autofocus does not miss a beat. I use it almost daily for about six months and I am satisfied that I have also seen the firm spent. if you find it used and you have to try it (to avoid that is a flawed model) buy it will not disappoint even to ta |
 | sent on May 17, 2015 Pros: Build quality, good sharpness at RT, fixed aperture to F / 2.8, quality / price ratio Cons: Quality of the lens hood, possible problems of back / front focus (QA sigma) Opinion: After a bit 'of reflections I bought this lens because I needed a goal with a good focal range (from "almost" all do) with a fixed aperture of f / 2.8.rnChe say ... Excellent lens with good sharpness at TA It reaches its maximum between f / 4 and f / 5.6 (bokeh is quite pleasant and harmonious). rnLo stabilizer works well and HSM is fast (to some hesitation in low light) ... From online review many specimens manifest problems of front / back focus and are therefore sent to care for the calibration (Milan) but, fortunately, the He had no problem. rnPer else I can say that aesthetically the lens is very solid and transmits quality (plastics are well done and look very resistant) ... In my opinion the value for money is great (more than all his rivals ... Slight difference with the Canon 17-55 ... but the latter costs almost twice) .rnvoto 8.5 / 10 (for the high possibility of having a model to be calibrated) rnrn |
 | sent on March 21, 2015 Pros: build quality, 2.8 throughout the zoom, focus, stabilizer Cons: hood, AF ring not in full-time Opinion: I own this lens by about 6 months and I can not be really happy with the choice fatta.Ottima sharpness already 2.8, excellent stabilizer and quality costruttiva.La tactile perception that this view is truly remarkable, seems to have a lens upper class between mani.Molto good even the blurred that can dare.Se compared to the ridiculous price that is around is definitely a lens to have. |
 | sent on March 09, 2015 Pros: Size, openness, stabilizer, construction, sharpness and focus fast and accurate. Cons: Regarding the target anyone, the lens hood and 'ridiculous and plasticaccia. Opinion: I was looking for a lens to replace the excellent Canon 15-85 because it's too dark, ignoring the Canon 17-55 because 'over budget and after trying the Tamron 17-50 vc I butatto with some doubt on this lente.rnChe say, after a day of testing I was entusiasta.rnAF fast and precise, crisp already 'in TA, solid construction, excellent materials, size and weight perfect for my new 650D.rnComprato to 380 € with 3 years warranty mtrading, certainly worth all the money spent and I do not 'regret the Canon which costs doppio.rnUnica flaw parasol, however, and that' included in the price, and 'own small and plasticaccia leggera.rnDavvero recommended. |
 | sent on February 14, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, weight, f / 2.8 at all focal lengths, stabilized, finishes. Cons: Ring AF not full-time. Opinion: Optical purchased for my D7000, I was really surprised at the quality of this zoometto! I state that I had until recently ago the Nikkor 17-55 f / 2.8 and I did not expect granchè.rnInvece was pleasantly amazed at the improvements of Sigma.rnOttima sharpness already at maximum aperture, which increases to f / 4. rnPressochè absent chromatic aberrations, and quite fast AF. Also nice to mention the weight, which does not tire the hand and the whole is well balanced (as opposed to 17-55) rnPurtroppo unlike my old Nikkor AF wheel of the ring and you can not use the manual focus while using automatic, negative feeling accentuated when your fingers touch the ring and feels moving under his fingertips. Just get used to place your fingers in another modo.rnL'AF is fast (not like 17-55), but the hike is short and is soddisfacente.rnNota interesting for the lock button of the extension of the zoom, which however this size of size and weight is more una gem that a real necessità.rnlo stabilizer, which the old Nikkor 17-55 was not present, here is useful, works well and is very quiet, allowing photos at shutter speeds much lenti.rnInsomma purchase really advisable. |
| sent on January 14, 2015 Pros: Excellent sharpness, good even at TA, maf fast and reliable (except in situations critical lightning), excellent materials and finishes from optical level. Cons: No One Opinion: I bought this lens in combination with my d7000 sostituzuione in the 18-105 VR, for the need to have a larger aperture because I like to take pictures indoors and at night with natural light ... at first I was doubtful about the choice, mainly because of the well known frequency of specimens suffering from f / b focus.Fortunatamente I found after testing accurate (just received!) that my focus regolarmente.rnAvendo owned in the past a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC for Canon ( that I mounted on the 60D before I steal it alas!) I can say that it is the quality of the images that the materials, as well as engine maf are well above .rnDunque I recommend buying it to anyone! rn (I specify that I have not tested the lens in the video) |
| sent on January 02, 2015 Pros: Excellent razor sharp, even at full aperture (f2.8). Stabilizer excellent. Auto focus quickly and accurately in optimal light. Cons: Auto focus very inaccurate in light conditions not optimal (eg shots to church with or without flash). Opinion: The lens Sigma 17-50 f / 2.8 offers incredible loudness already in TA (f2.8), pity about the inaccuracy of self focus, which in less than optimal lighting conditions, tends to err very, very easily ( ironically, the lens Canon 18-55 f3.5-f5.6 IS II has proven much more reliable in this respect), so that in the next few days I will replace the Sigma with the more expensive Canon EF-S 17-55mm f / 2.8 IS USM. I hope that the new optical maintains the same color rendition and sharpness of Sigma 17-50.rnrnPs. I changed two Sigma lenses for MAF problems. The auto focus of the first example, was so imprecise as well err 2 of 3 shots in daylight. The second specimen presents problems only when the ambient light is such as to employ ISO 800/1600 or Flash. |
 | sent on December 13, 2014 Pros: Excellent construction, accurate, that gives a feeling of solidity. Extreme sharpness already at 2.8. effective stabilizer. Maybe, according to many critics of Sigma lenses, I was lucky: this is my sixth goal Sigma (I also have a 12-24 still I, a 105 2.8 OS HSM Macro and 70-200 2.8 HSM OS) I never had to complain about construction limits or back problems or front focus ... Cons: Wanting to be superpignoli, a critical move goes to the front lens cap and lens hood, made of materials not up lens. The slight distortion to the minimum focal length with maximum aperture can be corrected already with only the camera software, in my case a Nikon D7100. Opinion: It bought about a month ago, after careful and meticulous reading of the various tests on optical focal range and brightness equal or equivalent. I can say that the purchase was perfectly timed; the value for money is great and the goal does not fear the competition of rivals, indeed, in my opinion, is superior to the noble and expensive Nikkor 17-55. |
 | sent on November 27, 2014 Pros: Sharpness even at full aperture, stabilization, favorable price, accurate autofocus Cons: AF fast but slightly noisy for video, nothing Full time manual focus Opinion: After a few months of use I can say to be very satisfied with this lens. Having already tried in the past the Tamron 17-50 2.8 does not stabilized and the old Sigma 17-50 2.8 unregulated, I think this point is at a level definitely higher. The optical quality is very high, very crisp and clear with TA slight decrease at the edges, giving the best from F.4 up where it reaches a good sharpness even at the extreme edges. Color rendering very pleasant with warm colors and contrasting. AF always fast and accurate, no front / back focus on my Canon 70D. Good stabilization. Excellent build quality (EX). In the past I've owned the famous canon 17-55 f.2.8 and I can assure you that the differences in favor of the latter are small at the expense of a double price. Obviously regarding the quality Sigma I feel lucky and I do not exclude that some samples may have problems front / back focus, I think it still the best buy for those who can not / want to invest too much money in the excellent Canon. |
 | sent on July 31, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, opening TA f / 2.8, very attractive price Cons: Stabilizer that does not convince me, I just like the stabilizer on the canvas. Cartoon a bit 'and distorts enough but is corrected in post. Opinion: Great lens, I recommend it to all owners of an APS-C. It 's the equivalent of a 24-70 on FF.Su canon 60D behaves just fine, precise autofocus. The colors are very nice and crisp. Small defects are due to the cost, definitely not a top of the range, but the necessary replacement of the 18-55 kit.rnLente very well built and solid, lens hood is not so solid, you have to be very careful. |
 | sent on July 16, 2014 Pros: Sharpness; brightness; equipment; weight; stabilizer, HSM; very advantageous for money provided you do not fall into a flawed specimen. Cons: The counter is not the perspective that in itself is really great .. the counter is SIGMA!! I do not recommend. Opinion: The lens is very sharp even at RT. It 'very bright, very good in cases of low light. The stabilizer is fantastic, very effective! The engine of the fire is fast and silent! In short, this lens does not seem to have anything wrong with it. The problem is Sigma. It happened to me exemplary suffering from back focus and I had to send in the warranty optic right now before you leave for the holidays. Which is annoying. I'll leave the camera at home due to poor quality control of the sigma NOT that surely will cut off 'from the optical attractive, I will never take more account of the sigma, for me it might as well fail. rnih Ultimately though it is a very good optics to avoid going to look for the bellyache not recommend it highly! Even I was in, mass, maybe that's fine, if not then okay go on warranty etc etc.. That is, the next time I avoid ... so you know, with sigma you have very good chance of having problems like that .. at this point, avoid it like the plague! |
 | sent on July 02, 2014 Pros: I think it has a value / price ratio. Excellent sharpness, color rendition and quality construction. Cons: The only cons is psychological. It is the fear of an exemplary peck flawed. Opinion: After a few months of use I would say that I'm excited about this lens. I had already tried the tamron 17-50 2.8 smooth (made in china) and the sigma 17-70 2.8 to 4, and I can say that in my opinion there is a gulf between the lens in question and the two above-mentioned . The optical quality is exceptional: crystal clear already at RT, even if it is from F.4 onwards that reaches the top of the yield; Very nice rendition: Returns warm colors and high-contrast; the build quality is worthy of the acronym EX, although it is a bit 'annoying little noise it does, if you shake it when the stabilizer is off; AF always accurate and fast. I do not know the noble canon 17-55 f2, 8, but I am sure that is not worth twice the money compared to the sigma (€ 350 against € 750). So if you find over the figure for the canon, I recommend you dive in with your eyes closed on sigma. rn |
| sent on June 25, 2014 Pros: bright, sharp, well-built, stable, price, comes with case and lens hood Cons: does not have the Full Time manual focus, some specimens have problems f / b focus Opinion: I 've got it used at 230 €, I started a bit' skeptical because of the numerous reports of the problem of f / b focus, then I 've tried it and I have removed all doubts, the' objective is phenomenal! RnOttima sharpness to center at F 2.8 at all focal lengths, F 4.0 is also a knife around the edges, really a great objective, well-built and comes with hood and pouch! rnOttima stabilization, perhaps not to the levels of Nikon and Canon ( but very close), I would really recommend to all (of course it is advisable to avoid running a test on a specimen with f / b focus)! rnHo had the Tamron 17-50 2.8 smooth, the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC and beats them both for a span ... I think we are certainly at the levels of the Canon and Nikkor lenses, if not better in some respects .... GNI 'only flaw is that it does not have full time manual focus .. . |
 | sent on June 19, 2014 Pros: None Cons: none Opinion: I want to buy this light for a nikon D7100, I read on the forums as segue.rnAllego original opinion: rnrnL'altro flaw is that it is not fully compatible with the Nikon D7100 (which I own). Unfortunately, this specific machine model is slightly incompatible and when you are finished taking a picture, the optical stabilization system internal lens "not releasing" and remains active for 60 seconds more, consuming extra battery. Also, if you set the machine to show you the picture you just took for a few seconds, this defect will keep the photo displayed for 60 seconds regardless of the timeout that you set (unless awarded the shutter release button, which turns off the display.) In short, a very good lens that suffers from some incompatibilities with the machines recenti.rnaltra review about 7000 d: rnOttima sharpness, a fantastic lens for its price, but unfortunately not compatible with my D7000, where, despite the replacement with a new obbittivo, to continued to suffer from a strong BackFocus.rn |
 | sent on June 11, 2014 Pros: Great sharpness-very precise autofocus high-strength clear-even to 50mm Cons: None Opinion: After trying his antagonist: the Tamron 17-50 2.8 I see that this is really very clear that it is 17 to 50mm. The Tamron 50mm because I had made it very lost in nitidezza.rnQui is always excellent. Great in the landscape and good portraits. For those doubtful I recommend without any hesitation that this lens will amaze you with its sharpness and accuracy of Autofocus, this last much quieter than the Tamron. In conclusion, if you are looking for an all-rounder of the highest quality at a very affordable price, here you will find everything for your teeth ... |
| sent on March 01, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, construction, detail, stabilizer, size, colors, bright, absent aberrations, excellent backlight, af fast and precise (used on D7100) Cons: Weight (due to good construction) and infrared hotspots making it unusable in this kind of photos (d50 modified at 720nm) Opinion: This is a central aps-c zoom lens that can be used in any condition thanks to its construction, versatility and size. It delivers really sharp shots (far more than the Nikon 24-70 f2.8), already from the TA with the highest sharpness already From F4 and with really nice colors. A professionally designed lens that is equally high on the Nikon range with the smaller ones that it does not offer ... such as the zoom ring lock used for photo shooting on the tripod and studio. Sigma Finish (other than the one above in the photo that is the old one) improved and fantastic af. Less versatile but brighter, better built and sharper than the famous 16-80. Aiming to take advantage of the many mpxs offered by current DX reflexes. Vote 9.5 |
user24742 | sent on January 16, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, good value for money, well done, AF speed. stabilizer EX Cons: no first trials. Opinion: I purchased this objective by consulting on the card and on the various reviews, I weighed up the pros and cons, but never having seen it tried, I launched cm ² purchase with so many doubts and fears, even xchè instead of this I had a Tamron 17 50 f2, 8 VC, which I sold to just go to the Sigma Having said this, I immediately tried the lens on both my 2 cameras, a 50D and a 60D, and my fear of the famous F / B focus is immediately vanished, the lens is precise with the two machines, while bringing the details to 100%, then I also did some test video with the 60D, both manually and automatically, and also there is no problem, just a difference in video between the Sigma and Tamron, ie when automatically opens and closes the aperture seems to make a click on the image, while the Tamron does not me he did it, but I have to try it better ...... for the rest, it is very well built, the zoom is fluid at the right point, it hard nor too soft, while the Tamron had to strain to zoom and the CanonI own a 18/135 is too fluid, then in the photo made in outside so without too much intervention and the sun, the colors are bright, contrast and well balanced in the hand by a sense of solidity, aesthetically it is very elegant, even if this is not the important thing but cmq is very good, ... What can I say, in my opinion to have it all, a good lens EX series, lens hood, and padded bag for transport, all inclusive, you know that if you have to take the buy Canon L series ... but at what price.?? I recommend it quietly, the value for money is more than exceeded ..... I found it by buying last minute 337,00 € new to me, because a few hours later he was rose to 377.00, cmq a good price considering the initial cost of some time ago. |
 | sent on December 18, 2013 Pros: Price, aperture, low noise, fast af, stabilizer (actual yield 2-3 stops), color rendering, sharpness cental, lens hood, soft case, lock 17mm focal lengths, which is important Cons: Softness side ta (up to f4), hsm without ftm. Opinion: The usual bright, to date, there are three more palatable. Canon / Nikon, great but expensive (720 €). Tamron, good and extraordinarily economical (280 € 380 € smooth-vc) and sigma, just below canikon, well balanced but it cost about 600 € at the time of the reviews of the author. A sudden fall in the prices of the Amazon, has allowed me to buy it at 325 € (ss included). RnrnHo immediately noticed the quality EX. I have verified the absence of f / b focus. And I started to shoot. Compared to the 18-55 quite another planet. Bright, an af inaudible and fast. Less heavy competition, with a front lens worthy of respect and a flawless construction. The feeling on the 50d was immediate. Even the lens hood (criticized in some reviews), however, is the real surprise was eccellente.rnrnMa soon as I opened the photo on lightroom. In many cases, they are equivalent to the canon 50f1.8 (which is known as a fixed excelled by quality). Already at full aperture, the central area is clear, well-contrasnanny and enjoyable. I must say that many photos can also be used without adjustment of tones and colors. A small flaw is the softness in the side when shooting wide open (f4 already in the problem goes away). In fact, however, when using a wide aperture, usually, there is the subject close to the central square (rule of thirds / golden) to make it stand around with bokeh, therefore, in practical use, this defect only becomes a peculiarity that must be taken into account to avoid placing the subject areas estreme.rnrnLa vignetting and distortion (which are in accordance with normal light), rather than contained the 25mm, are well corrected by the programs of pp, then do not consider them pros do it contro.rnrnrnSono very satisfied and would recommend vivamente.rnrnP.s. the price has gone up around 400 € but remain the most advantageous choice. |
 | sent on August 22, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, stabilization, brightness, robust Cons: High chromatic aberration, AF is not always reliable Opinion: I have used this lens is that on the 1000D 60D and in both cases I immediately liked the quality of the image produced, very sharp and contrasty. The weight and build quality seem to me two positive aspects, while the AC is one of the main negative aspects, fortunately easy to fix in PP. Another downside is that the AF especially at f/2.8 suffers a lot for me and I use the camera mainly while traveling and not for macro and landscapes the problem is not negligible ... rnQuest'ultimo aspect keeps me from recommending it to all |
 | sent on February 17, 2013 Pros: Sharpest already at room temperature and at all focal lengths, warm colors, contrast, light, excellent stabilizer 4-stops, Merry AF. Cons: maybe the price, slightly soft edges to 2.8, vignetting and distortion present at low focal but normal. Opinion: The new sigma goes to confront directly and with dignity with Canon 17-55 f 2.8, does not have the value / price of the Tamron 17-50, but, overall, is far superior. This sigma lends itself flawlessly for general use, I prefer it even to the canon because of the warmer colors. Already at f/2.8 is very sharp at the center, the softer the edges, but from f / 4 shoots a sharpness across the frame which I believe is unmatched in this ambito.rnForse little known even for reasons related to the price and competition, cost over 600 euro, and this puts it in a middle ground between the very expensive Canon, and Tamron.rnCome all sigma may have (more than other brands) problems f / b focus, so I would feel to recommend to owners of SLR equipped with adjustment for AF (micro) on board. |
 | sent on January 02, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, weight stabilization Cons: Vignetting and distortion Opinion: When I arrived he was dead, did not work the auto focus but once you have arranged all right. In my opinion has a stunning clarity. Also great in the light. It weighs little and so it is very easy to handle. Only in: vignetting and distortion (but with camera raw settles well). Excellent value for money. |
 | sent on October 25, 2011 Pros: Very sharp. Lightweight and easy to handle. Cons: AF system is not reliable. Build quality. Price too high. Opinion: Probably due to the poor quality control of the Sigma, my copy has a broblema back focus, easily solved on a 7D with the AF fine tuning. It also presents another problem sull'AF: If you use the center point and then make up the scene, easily gets out of focus. To work around this problem currently compose the scene first and then choose which AF point to use. A significant problem that will force me to send assistance in the lens. For all these problems would not recommend it to anyone, despite the sharpness is really at the top. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
