Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM

I just ordered one of these to add to my sd Quattro.

I realize that it's an older lens, but it spans a nice focal length range for my tastes, and with a fixed f/2.8 aperture, seems to lend itself nicely to sd Quattro shooting. Also, it has some modest macro capabilities I can certainly take advantage of.

I've scanned the forum for opinions, but it's not easy to find a consensus.

What say you? Worth $369?

David Eastwood said:

I just ordered one of these to add to my sd Quattro.
I realize that it's an older lens, but it spans a nice focal length range for my tastes, and with a fixed f/2.8 aperture, seems to lend itself nicely to sd Quattro shooting. Also, it has some modest macro capabilities I can certainly take advantage of.
I've scanned the forum for opinions, but it's not easy to find a consensus.
What say you? Worth $369?

Click to expand...

David,

It's a very good lens and works well on the sd Q.

S

David Eastwood said:

I just ordered one of these to add to my sd Quattro.
I realize that it's an older lens, but it spans a nice focal length range for my tastes, and with a fixed f/2.8 aperture, seems to lend itself nicely to sd Quattro shooting. Also, it has some modest macro capabilities I can certainly take advantage of.
I've scanned the forum for opinions, but it's not easy to find a consensus.
What say you? Worth $369?

Click to expand...

I have one - I preferred it to 17-70mm which I sold when I had both.

True macro it ain't - nowhere near 1:1, but it's pretty sharp at 50mm.

Quite a Curved focus field at 17mm:


$369 is much too much. Available new for $283.92 here:


Used on eBay I'd guess $200-250 would be about right.

David Eastwood said:

I just ordered one of these to add to my sd Quattro.
I realize that it's an older lens, but it spans a nice focal length range for my tastes, and with a fixed f/2.8 aperture, seems to lend itself nicely to sd Quattro shooting. Also, it has some modest macro capabilities I can certainly take advantage of.
I've scanned the forum for opinions, but it's not easy to find a consensus.
What say you? Worth $369?

Click to expand...

I have that lens and I like it.

It does apparently have an auto focus issue on the Q cameras, and that issue is noted by Sigma on the list of lenses that work withe Q AF. The result is occasional missed focus, which can be mitigated, apparently, somewhat, I guess, by using the smallest focus "box" in the q focus settings. Why am I reluctant to be more positive about "fixing" that issue? Because I have had some AF focus issues in real life situations, but when I try to test the lens AF inside and on targets it works great. I am not sure exactly what that means? Operator error? Something else?

On my camera the focus peaking seems to function on the AF setting, and so you can see the red "peaking" outlines when the camera is auto focusing. As far as I can tell that red peaking area is correctly in focus.

As for "sharpness," it does well. As noted above, I think the lens has some issues at 17mm, but that is much reduced at even slightly longer settings. And I think the OS is extremely helpful if you want to shoot in lower light levels.

I think you can get a better price for the lens.

I rarely use any other lens.

Thanks to all who responded - sounds like I'm going to be happy with this choice.

xpatUSA said:

I have one - I preferred it to 17-70mm which I sold when I had both.

True macro it ain't - nowhere near 1:1, but it's pretty sharp at 50mm.

Quite a Curved focus field at 17mm:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sigma/17-50mm-f2.8-ex-dc-os-hsm/review/

Click to expand...

Nicely written review there.

xpatUSA said:

$369 is much too much. Available new for $283.92 here:

https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50m...=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B003A6H27K

Used on eBay I'd guess $200-250 would be about right.

Click to expand...

Alas, that price is for the Canon EF mount only - the Sigma SA version is also $369, like B&H's current price (where I ordered it from).

I have a copy. It is one of the most underrated lens. One superb lens if you ask me. Sharp, light and very swift AF. It has a permanent place in my bag.

Never mind. I decided to cancel the order after I realized that this lens is not compatible with the MC-11 adapter, so I can't use it on my Sony a6500 as well.

I'll keep an eye on the used market - if I can find one for $200-250, I'll probably pick it up.

David Eastwood said:

Never mind. I decided to cancel the order after I realized that this lens is not compatible with the MC-11 adapter, so I can't use it on my Sony a6500 as well.

I'll keep an eye on the used market - if I can find one for $200-250, I'll probably pick it up.

Click to expand...

David ,

Who says. It works fine with MC11 on my Sony A7 ii, Quick snap taken with the 17-50 f2.8 attached, hand held in low artificial light, 1/13 sec. @ f4.5. ISO Auto 6400.

S

Ceistinne said:

David ,

Who says. It works fine with MC11 on my Sony A7 ii, Quick snap taken with the 17-50 f2.8 attached, hand held in low artificial light, 1/13 sec. @ f4.5. ISO Auto 6400.

S

Click to expand...

i'm just relying on Sigma's website and their list of compatible lenses. Is Sigma wrong?

If that's the case, how on earth does anyone decide what is or is not compatible?

David Eastwood said:

Never mind. I decided to cancel the order after I realized that this lens is not compatible with the MC-11 adapter, so I can't use it on my Sony a6500 as well.

I'll keep an eye on the used market - if I can find one for $200-250, I'll probably pick it up.

Click to expand...

You should note as well that Sigma does not recommend this lens on the Q cameras, in the sense that they have noted some lens AF issues with the Q cameras.

The lens works quite well on manual focus with the sdQ cameras, and I think it works well enough with AF in most cases. Just use the smallest focus box and pay attention to the focus you are seeing. All the tests I did showed the AF working just fine, regardless of Sigma's concerns, but I also had some real life AF issues. But I think it is a mistake to think that every AF shot is going to be perfect.

(And of course, if we want to be somewhat difficult, we could note that Sigma has introduced a new OS consumer zoom lens, the 17-70, which they say is compatible with the Q cameras... What is one to think??)

I think I will stick with the 17-50 for now.

David Eastwood said:

Ceistinne said:

David ,

Who says. It works fine with MC11 on my Sony A7 ii, Quick snap taken with the 17-50 f2.8 attached, hand held in low artificial light, 1/13 sec. @ f4.5. ISO Auto 6400.

S

Click to expand...

i'm just relying on Sigma's website and their list of compatible lenses. Is Sigma wrong?
If that's the case, how on earth does anyone decide what is or is not compatible?

Click to expand...

David,

Sigma can be trusted, what they said about the 17-50mm f2.8 and other lenses was that "AF may not be accurate in some cases due to the conditions of the subject or shooting distances"

That was for non GV lenses on the Quattros and what applies to them also applies to the MC-11 on the Sonys.

Much older lenses like the old 28-105mm will work with Manual Focus only on the Quattros and Sonys.

See their published chart below.

S

I don’t see anything in the chart you posted that addresses MC-11 compatibility.

If I’m going to drop serious money on a new lens for my sd Quattro, it has to be able to do double duty with the MC-11 converter and my Sony a6500 - and not overlap much (if at all) with capabilities that I already own.

I don’t have a ‘proper’ macro lens. Right now the 70/2.8 prime is looking like the best bet to fit my criteria, and I’ll be able to use it without restriction on both cameras.

David Eastwood said:

I don’t see anything in the chart you posted that addresses MC-11 compatibility.

If I’m going to drop serious money on a new lens for my sd Quattro, it has to be able to do double duty with the MC-11 converter and my Sony a6500 - and not overlap much (if at all) with capabilities that I already own.
I don’t have a ‘proper’ macro lens. Right now the 70/2.8 prime is looking like the best bet to fit my criteria, and I’ll be able to use it without restriction on both cameras.

Click to expand...

The older lenses all work with the MC-11 in the sense it gives you aperture control. But AF seldom, if ever, works correctly.

David,

You ask a question, you get answers based on user experience, make your own mind up. Over and out.

S

Ceistinne said:

David,

You ask a question, you get answers based on user experience, make your own mind up. Over and out.

S

Click to expand...

Which is what I'm doing. My sincere apologies if my comments came off in any other way.

mike earussi said:

The older lenses all work with the MC-11 in the sense it gives you aperture control. But AF seldom, if ever, works correctly.

Click to expand...

Thanks - that's good to know.