JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:price, build quality, brightness, sharpness, stabilization, HSM, possibility of close-up of a good standard (macro).
Cons:a little "hard" image over the focal 50mm has no control focus full time, not fixed f/2.8 at all focal lengths.
Opinion:It 'a very good lens quality, though not the EX series Sigma. I used it for a year and I found the highest level of image sharpness between 17 and 40mm; loses some 50 to 70mm, but I do not see it as a problema.rnCompete very well with the 16-85mm Nikon, which is much brighter and less expensive and even constructive level best, despite the focal range a little more time corto.rnOgni Sigma produces low-cost gems like this ... it's worth it as optical wild and not only to replace the zoom "kit". rnOra is replaced by the new C series, but despite being discontinued, if they find new and used still several outstanding of the old series.
Pros:handling, stabilizer, cost is not excessive, good sharpness macro good, more than anything else to focus ravvicinatissimo with 70 mm focal useful block of 17 mm for transport. nice bokeh. not flare fastidioso.rn
Cons:vignetting at 17 mm especially if fitted with a uv and a sky, or a uv and a c-pl, even if the brightness is not constant from the top, perhaps there was also constant, motor not very fast, sometimes difficulty in emssa focus diameter filter costs high enough to cause the filters.
Opinion:I own this lens bought on ebay at about 410 euro, mounted on nikon d90.rnrnper be a handyman standard I would say that I find the best compromise between quality and price for its catoegorie and focali.rnla range of brightness is good, so far has run behaved well, and I've taken most of my foto.rnil included petal-type hood is very useful and as many targets makes its lavoretto.rnun a little flaw that makes vignetting at 17 mm, and when you want to do something close to wide can be seen, mainly in direct sunlight, or outdoors. rnlo'm good for portraits, 50 mm you make good shots of all rispetto.rnrnpiacevole bokeh. fastidioso.rnqualche not flare in the night time and with little effort the light focus, but sometimes, and it also does a nikon 16-85 vr I tried to confronto.rnil made of the macro is a good thing, but if you pictures of insects is a better focal longest why you should get close to 5 cm type with 70mm focal to make "important" in the subject foto.rnlo stabilizer does its job withefficacia.rnrnah another small flaw is the diameter of the filters that are already 72 mm, and then the price goes up, but even I to avoid vignetting of the c-pl mounted sull'uv I took adapter ring setp-up from 72 to 77 and take the filters more "important" double your sliding the c-pl and ND to 77, leaving the UV 72 mm, but it is a purchase that I have yet to fare.rnutilissimo block to 17 mm focal length for transportation. and I have no ntato moivmento unexpected focal pointing up or basso.rnrnconsiglio this lens for easy handling, portability and variety of utilizzo.rnrnin compared to the 16-85 vr nikon I find a good rival, but more for the brightness for stabilization, the Nikon is better equipped but of course a matter of taste then ...
Pros:Stabilization, good range of focal lengths, good image quality, good value for money.
Cons:Af not fast, not constant aperture, focal ring with a non-regular flow, lack of full time manual.
Opinion:Bought used at € 280 and sold a little less than a few months, for inutilizzo.rnL 'I preferred to 17-50 for more focal length f and a faster. The autofocus is responsive enough, but not to the level of real engines usm; also is very uncomfortable lack of full time manual.rnBuon range of focal lengths and good image quality, which by tests seems equal to that of the Tamron 17 - 50 8.2 vc.rnBuono stabilizer, which comes to about 2.5-3 stop (certainly not 4!). rnIl my copy was perfect in terms of sharpness (within the limits of the price range of the lens), and precision of 'f, but the dial was focal in some places and in some hard too soft; taking the lens down, without entering the lock nut of the focal 17mm, this tended to lengthen, ie to vary the focale.rnPer conclude, considering the price I consider it a good goal, consider what you prefer between brightness (Tamron 17-50) or speed and focal length f.
Pros:Quality / price ratio, HSM, bright considering the range 17-70mm, excellent construction and weight balanced, stabilizer that compensates well-tried 3 stop (4 declared by Sigma)
Cons:More details of back-focus but with small micro AF (on bodies where possible) resolves all
Opinion:For the 17-70mm focal length and aperture f2.8-4 I consider the best in its range of focal lengths, I preferred the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 for the pros listed building ... very good, quite heavy but balanced , quality is not the best but obviously if it is used at f5.6 or f8 gives the shots beautiful, amazing surrender to 17mm and almost no vignetting ... problems solved with back-focus Canon 7D and AF micro-adjustment and about 60mm then lose a little around the edges but nothing dramatic. Macros good even if it is not a true macro lens. For the rest recommended without a doubt.
Pros:Compactness - construction - price - especially sharpness from 17 to 55 - stabilizer and fast focusing - lens hood - Bright + 18-55 or 17-85
Cons:stabilizer a bit noisy - the focal ring a little hard
Opinion:bought yesterday. Excellent performance at 17mm focal length and 2.8 to this focal sharpness is really good, you lose a little at the edges from 55 to 70 but void of that. Even macro functionality is good and interesting in my opinion. Design, solid construction you can feel the difference with the 18-55 and costs less than the 17-85 and 15-85. the motor hsm is fast and precise stabilizer. is between all do what until now I was more satisfied in everything.
Pros:money indiscutibbile bona making kelp sharpness at all focal good petal-type hood including very versatile ultrasonic motors hsm
Cons:a little heavy stabilizers noisy
Opinion:acqistato only in July 2011 and I've taken 1500 pictures as a lens (every day) and very versatile compared to the canon 17-85 paid 100 euro less with image quality equal if not superior but slightly higher. a good lens to buy for APSC sensor cameras, with a bit of familiarity becomes fun usarlo.amio opinion is a lens that works very well.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
