Canon 17-55mm or sigma 18-35mm ?

Keith Z Leonard wrote:

thamer08 wrote:

Keith Z Leonard wrote:

Not quite true, the Sigma has better center sharpness and the difference in build quality to me was significant. I used both of them for a week before making my decision. Still, the Canon is a great lens, no question.

thanks your posts is really helpful to me

i checked for sigma 17-50 on eBay and found smoe costs only 380$ include shipping !

really attractive price but i am afraid if there is difference between copies because it costs too much than amazon and us stores !

Yeah, it's interesting, it's the 3rd party lens stigma all over again in that they tend not to hold their value as much, though I was able to sell mine for a quite reasonable drop from what I paid. I think the main thing there is that I did a local sale so the guy could try the lens out and told me "this is the single best thing I've bought for my photography". He had his rebel kit (18-55 IS) and a Sigma 30 f1.4 before buying the 17-50 f2.8 OS from me. He also said that now he hardly uses any of his other lenses anymore, I think he was going to sell the 30mm prime. Obviously that has to do with specific uses though.

Anyway, that's probably why the price difference, with the 6D out a lot of people seem to be making the jump to a 35mm "full frame" camera which puts a lot of these Sigmas and Canon 17-55 lenses onto the used market. I don't think it's circumstance that both of these lenses have dropped their new prices during this time frame either. The Sigma used to be 670$ and the Canon was around 1000$, they are both cheaper now.

you are right

i figured third party lenses drop down quickly compared to canon but the canon take long time to drop down and some of them go up like 70-200 series !

that also make me think to not buy sigma 18-35 at this time because it is new and may be in the next 2 years   its price go 200$ down (just expect )