Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

Started Jul 3, 2013 | Discussions
kcamacho11 Senior Member • Posts: 1,529
Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

I need a lens suggestion.

I sold my 18-105 kit lens and the other lens left in my bag is the Nikon 70-300.

I am torn between the Nikon 17-55 F2.8 and the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 as my new walk-around lens which can also serve quite nicely in low light.

I like the Nikon because it is extremely well built, has absolutely great reviews (5 stars in Amazon) and it has extra reach at the long end while still being F2.8 constant.

I like the Sigma because it is F1.8 across the entire focal range and it is cheaper.

The thing is Sigmas have a great rep for not being all that sharp on the edges on most of their lens...Sigmas always fall short when compared for overall sharpness to the competitor's same lens.

Also, I think the Sigma seems like a superb lens, but the 35mm is a bit short for me. Both lens do not have image stabilization....the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is $799 and I found a factory refurbished Nikon 17-55 F2.8 for $1000.

I am actually leaning more towards the Nikon. Any suggestions???

RobCMad
RobCMad Regular Member • Posts: 354
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

kcamacho11 wrote:

I need a lens suggestion.

I sold my 18-105 kit lens and the other lens left in my bag is the Nikon 70-300.

I am torn between the Nikon 17-55 F2.8 and the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 as my new walk-around lens which can also serve quite nicely in low light.

I like the Nikon because it is extremely well built, has absolutely great reviews (5 stars in Amazon) and it has extra reach at the long end while still being F2.8 constant.

I like the Sigma because it is F1.8 across the entire focal range and it is cheaper.

The thing is Sigmas have a great rep for not being all that sharp on the edges on most of their lens...Sigmas always fall short when compared for overall sharpness to the competitor's same lens.

According to reviews the Nikon is not in the same league as the Sigma for sharpness, not at the edges, not in the center - the Sigma is way better at 1.8 than the Nikon at any aperture. The only reason to get the Nikkor would be build, range or an excess of money.

Sigma vs Nikkor

Also, I think the Sigma seems like a superb lens, but the 35mm is a bit short for me. Both lens do not have image stabilization....the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is $799 and I found a factory refurbished Nikon 17-55 F2.8 for $1000.

I am actually leaning more towards the Nikon. Any suggestions???

BillD7000 Contributing Member • Posts: 960
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

The thing is Sigmas have a great rep for not being all that sharp on the edges on most of their lens...Sigmas always fall short when compared for overall sharpness to the competitor's same lens.

Every Sigma I've owned has been tested by numerous reviewers as being very sharp wide-open, diminishing only slightly on the edge.

The Sigma 50/1.4 is by most accounts, a better performer than the Nikon equivalent.

The Sigma 150/2.8 OS macro is an incredibly sharp lens.

The Sigma 50-150/2.8 OS is sharper than most lenses in the range made by anyone.

LensTip.com has a great review of the Sigma 18-35/1.8, and it will show that Sigma can compete with anyone, if they so choose.

 BillD7000's gear list:BillD7000's gear list
Nikon D7200 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Nikon 85mm F1.8G Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +1 more
Nexu1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,746
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??
1

Depends if you value the longer tele end or not.  Do you like to shoot wide or get in close?

The Sigma 18-35, at the moment, doesn't interest me much at all because of it's limited, wide, focal length.

Sigma makes great stuff.  Might as well consider their 17-50 f2.8 as well.

 Nexu1's gear list:Nexu1's gear list
Nikon D750
Brent Allen Thale Regular Member • Posts: 486
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

I love the Nikon 17-55 2.8, have rented it many times and have considered buying it, but I pre-ordered the Sigma 18-35 1.8 instead. Looking through the EXIF data on my cosplay shots (http://www.wingedmammal.com/dragoncon_2012/dragoncon_2012.shtml#.UdOS9_nvt8H ) I only rarely shoot above 35mm because the crowded conditions prevent getting enough distance, so I figure the 1.8 aperture will be a bigger benefit to me than 36-55mm.

 Brent Allen Thale's gear list:Brent Allen Thale's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR +6 more
anotherMike Forum Pro • Posts: 10,023
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??
2

The new Sigmas - the Art series, are NOT your daddys old Sigmas, and so far, seem to be *exceptional* lenses. And I say this as a guy who 2 years ago (before the Art lenses were available) wouldn't have taken a Sigma lens if you had given me one for free, never was a fan. That changed when I evaluated the 35/1.4 Art series lens from Sigma - and then bought it and sold my Nikon 35/1.4G and chose the Sigma even over the Zeiss 35/2, which should tell you something.

But the new 18-35, from what I'm reading, blows the Nikon 17-55 out of the water... so I'd have to say you consider it. Unfortunately I have not had a chance to try one yet, been busy, out of town a lot. Hopefully some day.

-m

Hisma Regular Member • Posts: 154
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

I wonder if anyone could justify getting the sigma 18-35 f1.8 when they already own the 35 1.4. Obviously, you get more WA capability at 18mm, but is 18 really wide enough?

I was in this predicament recently, where I was debating over the sigma 18-35 or a "wider" lens for my DX body.  Ended up getting the tokina 11-16 f2.8 after reading countless reviews on it.

In your case, the 18-35 f1.8 makes absolute sense.  But it makes me wonder if one is simply better off with a solid prime + a solid true wide angle instead.

the Mtn Man Regular Member • Posts: 153
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

18-35mm and even 17-55 is narrow range for a zoom.  As the above poster suggested, you might be better off with a prime.

San Carlos Studios Regular Member • Posts: 314
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

I am in the same situation...should I purchase a 17-55 Nikon for around $1000 or WAIT until one of the shops gets the Sigma 18-35 in stock.

A lot of my shooting is done in hotel rooms and small studios, so my 50mm 1.8g is a little long for anything other than 1/2 length portrait photos.

On the other hand I am also looking for a walk around lens for general street photography and vacation photos, and I'm concerned that 18-35 is too short of a focal length.

Will I notice a difference in the DOF at 1.8 in the 18-35 focal length vs 2.8 at the same focal lengths? I think the DOF at anything greater than 40mm at f2.8 will be narrower than f1.8 at 35mm.

Right now I can get the Nikon for $1000 in stock, where as nobody knows when the Sigma will be available.

Opinions welcome, I don't "need" this lens until the last week on Jan 2014

 San Carlos Studios's gear list:San Carlos Studios's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G
mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

San Carlos Studios wrote:

I am in the same situation...should I purchase a 17-55 Nikon for around $1000 or WAIT until one of the shops gets the Sigma 18-35 in stock.

A lot of my shooting is done in hotel rooms and small studios, so my 50mm 1.8g is a little long for anything other than 1/2 length portrait photos.

On the other hand I am also looking for a walk around lens for general street photography and vacation photos, and I'm concerned that 18-35 is too short of a focal length.

Will I notice a difference in the DOF at 1.8 in the 18-35 focal length vs 2.8 at the same focal lengths? I think the DOF at anything greater than 40mm at f2.8 will be narrower than f1.8 at 35mm.

Right now I can get the Nikon for $1000 in stock, where as nobody knows when the Sigma will be available.

Opinions welcome, I don't "need" this lens until the last week on Jan 2014

It is already out and this lens is very vey good, in fact, it IS built very good, it is not a cheap plastic lens. For what i do that lens is completely useless, i might as well just use my 35mm 1.8 and move back and forth, for only $160 bucks

For others i am sure is superb, but not for me. The 17-55 focal range is much better, although i would have prefer a 16-85 F4, which it doesn't exist. Is that nikon lens USED for $1000? I am selling mine for $800. That's how much they go for on the street, and i don't think you have to pay more than that.

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
San Carlos Studios Regular Member • Posts: 314
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

The $1000 is a refurb unit, my past experience with Nikon refurb was not good, the last refurb unit I purchased went back to them for poor picture quality.

 San Carlos Studios's gear list:San Carlos Studios's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G
San Carlos Studios Regular Member • Posts: 314
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

Do you have any photos you can post that are taken at f2.8?

 San Carlos Studios's gear list:San Carlos Studios's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G
mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

San Carlos Studios wrote:

Do you have any photos you can post that are taken at f2.8?

I don't have that many in my gallery but you might ask others.

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
Nexu1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,746
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??
1

I posted this in another thread but I think it really depends on what you shoot.

I shoot the 35mm f1.8G Nikon a lot for those indoor pics of family members, Christmas, birthday parties, special events, etc...  Love it.  But the wife is always asking me to "get closer".  Most of my shots of our kids are too wide.  To much black, background.  You have to get really close to "fill the frame" with the 35mm even indoors.  I picked up the 50mm f1.8G and love it.  Absolutely love it.  Some say that 50mm is a crap focal length on DX and I completely agree.  If you like to shoot indoor pics of the kids or family members where you really get the one person isolated from the rest of the mess or chaos then the 50mm on DX is awesome.  I'm perfectly happy to shoot the 35 & 50 primes but if I had to choose between the 18-35 and a 17-50 I'd choose the 17-50 (p.s. I wouldn't buy the Nikon, either the Sigma or the Tamron, just price and being "good enough").  Good enough leads me to my last point... too many people IMO fret over that last 1-2% of sharpness which, at the end of the day, probably doesn't matter unless you are printing super huge or staring at pixels on your computer.  Getting the shot in focus, exposed correctly, good light & an interesting subject is all way more important than those last few % points of sharpness.

 Nexu1's gear list:Nexu1's gear list
Nikon D750
Jake64
Jake64 Contributing Member • Posts: 742
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

kcamacho11 wrote:

I need a lens suggestion.

I sold my 18-105 kit lens and the other lens left in my bag is the Nikon 70-300.

I am torn between the Nikon 17-55 F2.8 and the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 as my new walk-around lens which can also serve quite nicely in low light.

I like the Nikon because it is extremely well built, has absolutely great reviews (5 stars in Amazon) and it has extra reach at the long end while still being F2.8 constant.

I like the Sigma because it is F1.8 across the entire focal range and it is cheaper.

The thing is Sigmas have a great rep for not being all that sharp on the edges on most of their lens...Sigmas always fall short when compared for overall sharpness to the competitor's same lens.

Also, I think the Sigma seems like a superb lens, but the 35mm is a bit short for me. Both lens do not have image stabilization....the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is $799 and I found a factory refurbished Nikon 17-55 F2.8 for $1000.

I am actually leaning more towards the Nikon. Any suggestions???

I'd go with Nikon because you will get a better portait focal length on the far end and for a walk-around lens, you really want the lens to do a bit of everything, wide and telephoto. 1.8 vs 2.8 is not a big deal for me.

 Jake64's gear list:Jake64's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon D610 Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM | C
cadomniel Forum Member • Posts: 92
Re: Nikon 17-55 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ??

I have been thinking about these two as well lately for my D7100.

I had the Sigma 17-50/2.8 EX OS but I am in the process of exchanging it for 50mm/1.8G and an 85mm/1.8G.

The Sigma has a problem with the D7100 that has been documented elsewhere on these forums. AFter shooting a picture the autoimage review screen stays up for 60seconds. Yes you can turn it off by pressing the shutter button. But that also engages the focus motor so whatever you do using the lens drains the battery about 3 x faster than normal. Thats not something I'm willing to live with.

I also have the D5100 and the Sigma 17-50/2.8 worked great on that camera but I bought it for the D7100. I contacted Sigma Service in Canada and there is currently no fix for this issue with the autoimage review. If you can live with it then its a great lens for the D7100.

I think Sigma makes superior lenses for the DX Nikons right now, the 17-50/2.8 and 50-150/2.8 are awesome, the 18-35mm/1.8 well no one has anything close to that...but unfortunately I'm a bit hesitatant to get another Sigma if there will be compatibility issues...

Think I'll just get the 17-55/2.8 but will probably look for a used one. I don't think they are worth the price new...

 cadomniel's gear list:cadomniel's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads