can Sigma 50-150 match my 17-55 2.8 & 105VR?

Hi all,

I own D80 with 17-55 2.8 & 105VR for my wedding project, both lenses are serve me very well, but sometimes i hope to have fast tele zoom, but 70-200VR is out of my budget and I don't have plan to go FX in the near future, so in the term of IQ, what do you guys think about Sigma 50-150 2.8, could the sigma match both of my gold ring lens??

Thanks for your input
CJ

--
'See with your eyes - Shoot with your heart..'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/c_junarto/

I cannot compare it I only have the Sigma 18-50 2.8 which is not the best.

But the 50-150 is really a very good lens especially from 50-130mm

jano

I can not say anything about the sigma, but the Tokina 50-135/2.8 was a match for my very good 17-55/2.8

Tokina colors are a bit cooler, but the sharpness at 50mm/2.8 was the same and the bokeh on the Tokina is very smooth.

--
http://photos.berny.at

For just a little bit more, you can buy Nikon 80-200 f/2.8. Secondhand can be had for less than a new Sigma 50-150.

If you move to FF, you can still use it. If you stay with DX, just consider it as a bonus that you can use the lens wide open with very minimal vignetting .

Thanks for the input, I'm thinking the Tokina as well, but I have bad experience with 2 Tokina lenses (10-17 & 12-24) both have a fringe and flare more than i can justify. That's why I thinking more to the Sigma.

As the 80-200 2.8 is one of the nice candidate, but after seeing a good review of Tamron 70-200 2.8, I think i will go the tamron direction if i want to consider FX lens. But if i go to FX, i will wait and save up for the 70-200 VR

Thanks & Regards,
CJ
--
'See with your eyes - Shoot with your heart..'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/c_junarto/

Tamron's new 70-200 F2.8 is supposed to be tack sharp...as sharp as the Nikkor 70-200VR. However, AF is supposed to be a little slow especially in areas which are not well lit. On the plus side, it is a lot lighter and very much cheaper...

I own both the 17-55 and the 50-150. Love the 50-150mm, very fast, small and easy to carry. bokeh is a bit busy, but not terrible. It's a lens that you "will" carry and use, very compact and about the size of the 17-55mm. It is actually sharper than the 17-55 at 50mm and stays that way up to about 135mm (as other poster said), but tht doesn't mean that it is terrible. You will get a bit of vignetting wide open at 150mm.

A lens that goes in the bag and you can actually carry and use. Haven't looked lately but goes for about $600 new, well worth it. You might check out photozone and his review and resolution figures---ron s.
--
Keeping it sane in an insane world is an inconvenience at an inconvenient time!!
http://www.pbase.com/ron9ron

I think you'd be pleased with the 50-150, probably enough to leave the 105VR at home unless you need the VR.

It's far smaller than any of the 70/80-200 lenses, the focus is quick it's sharp up to around 130mm wide open and sharp at 150 stopped down to f/4. The sharpness at 150mm f/2.8 is perfectly acceptable it just sticks out in comparison to the rest of the range.

One more thing...focus and zoom ring is very smooth

I can zoom it with the same hand I hold the camera (D300 not small), and that is great because with my other hand I can hold a flash and fire it with CLS )

I cannot do that with any other lens.

Thanks for the input guys, I think i will lean my budget to the Sigma Lens
Regards & all the Best,
CJ
--
'See with your eyes - Shoot with your heart..'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/c_junarto/

The Nikon 17-55 and Sigma 50-150 cover about 95% of what I shoot. For me it's an excellent combination. I looked at a 70-200 and decided they were too large and heavy.

My experience has been that this lens can be incredibly sharp, easily matching many of the Nikkors. Some photos showing what it's capable of: http://www.kevinokephotography.com/galleries/gallery/Sigma_APO_50-150mm_EX/
--
Kevin Oke
Web Site - http://www.kevinokephotography.com
New photos of France - http://www.francephotos.info

I use the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 lens for wedding receptions on a DX camera where this lens is less obtrusive and much lighter to carry around than the 70-200mm lens that is twice the size and twice the weight. During the ceremony though the extra reach of a 70-200 or a 80-200mm lens works better and the VR is a tremendous help when shooting hand held at 1/20th at the 200mm zoom setting. For this reason I would not recommend the 80-200mm ED IF lens which is otherwise an excellent lens and a used one for $400-500 an excellent value.

At 50-150 on a DX camera providing 75-225mm FOV the Sigma lens provides a more usable zoom range in most reception settings.

The 105mm lens is of questionable value on a DX camera for wedding photography. Even the 85mm at a FOV equivalent to a 135mm lens is too long in most situations, and the VR of the 105 does not compensate for subject movement - better to have the f1.4 of the 85mm or a 50mm lens.