Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/aviation_photography/read.main/356353/

Topic: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: JakTrax
Posted 2010-06-27 03:30:27 and read 7423 times.

Hi all,

Picking the brains of anyone who owns either of the above.....

I've seen many reviews - the 17-70 in the main gets excellent write-ups, however opinions on the 18-50 EX vary. Some say the latter isn't as good, others say it's absolutely wonderful.

The 17-70 costs more, despite not being an EX, and of course has an HSM and OS. I'm assuming that the EX is cheaper because of a lack of these features? In which case, does the EX deliver superior image quality?

The range on the 17-70 is more useful but I'll take whichever produces the best images. Unfortunately reviews of the 18-50 are so varied that I cannot at the moment make an informed judgement.

Also, anyone with any other recommendations? I have looked at Canon's EF17-85 IS but ruled it out due to quite a few mediocre reviews (a couple of which compared it directly to the 17-70).

Thanks,

Karl

[Edited 2010-06-27 03:31:21]

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: LGW340
Posted 2010-06-28 00:43:35 and read 7353 times.

Well, the 18-50 is f/2.8 all the way through and working in a camera shop, I have used both. The sigma 18-50 has a better build quality and the 17-70 tends to get internal dust quite easily. The 18-50 is quieter to focus but your not getting the extra 20mm of zoom. In terms of overall image quality, they are near as damn it the same. Hard one really   
Cheers
Chris

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: dendrobatid
Posted 2010-06-28 03:48:11 and read 7337 times.

I think it also depends which end of the zoom range you need most.
I have a Canon 17-40L which is superb but not overly wide when a 1.6 factor is taken into account.
I also have the Canon 24-105L IS which is excellent and with a 1.6 factor it makes it a very small lens and a very, very useful one for aviation. I have to say that the IS is not that useful though, barely needed at the wide end and with only the one mode, useless for panning.

Mick Bajcar

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: Dvincent
Posted 2010-06-28 06:29:15 and read 7312 times.

This isn't one of your two options, but I'd suggest the Tamron 17-50 all the way, Karl.   It's one lens that's been so universally positively reviewed that you can't go wrong with it.

True, it has no IS and it's not USM focus, but the images speak for themselves.

[Edited 2010-06-28 06:29:36]

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: JakTrax
Posted 2010-06-29 04:24:00 and read 7266 times.

Thanks chaps.

I have just ordered the 17-70 f/2.8-4.0 OS HSM from Amazon - that way if I have any issues I can return it for a swap or refund.

Photozone.de pretty much compare the 17-70, the 18-50 EX and Canon 17-85 IS; with the 17-70 coming out on top overall. It isn't without faults but they are only minor and the hoards of good reviews swayed it in the end.

Dan, I looked at the Tamron 17-50 range and although reviews are generally pretty good they are no better than those for the Sigma. One thing that the Tamrons did get slated for was build quality, and the Sigma does of course have OS, plus HSM and an f/2.8 at the wide end.

Hopefully we should see some images taken with it here soon.

Karl

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: vishaljo
Posted 2010-06-29 10:17:40 and read 7229 times.

Good to hear that Karl.

Btw, hows your bigger f4 Sigma glass handling ?

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: JakTrax
Posted 2010-06-29 11:51:24 and read 7220 times.

Hi Vishal,

The Sigma's doing well, after a wobbly start. Having never used such a bulky lens with that kind of focal length before it took a bit of getting used to before decent images started rolling out. I was aware that there was a difference between shooting at 200mm and 300mm but I didn't realise it was so great!

I've been looking also at Sigma's 120-400 recently but came to the conclusion that a £600 lens simply can't be as good at those priced at £1,000+. Or can they.....???

I'll probably buy the 100-400L unless there really are comparable alternatives; otherwise the 400mm f/5.6 prime is very tempting! The Sigma 100-300 is pretty good but it has no stabilisation and is a bit short at the long end.

Interestingly I bought a 1.4x Extender recently. In my opinion it isn't quite as good as the 100-300 and of course is 20mm shorter. Having said that, it's okay and I have images in the database taken using it.

Cheers,

Karl

Topic: RE: Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 OS HSM Or 18-50 F2.8 EX?
Username: vishaljo
Posted 2010-06-29 23:03:06 and read 7188 times.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 6):
I've been looking also at Sigma's 120-400 recently but came to the conclusion that a £600 lens simply can't be as good at those priced at £1,000+. Or can they.....???
Paulo Santos has been shooting some rippers with that lens but, then i'm not sure the lens is really tested in the pristine air of Azores.

I've always desired the 120-300 f2.8, maybe its something you can look into ?

You can keep the converter in that case, 168-420 @ f4 the envy of Manchester  


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/