Sigma Wars: 17-70mm or 18-50mm?

[suj]

Hi everyone,

I was looking like I was getting the 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5
But now have seen the 18-50mm f/2.8

Now I don't know which one to buy lol

Any experience with either of them please?

Thanks in advance

Suraj

 

[stan the man]

Hi everyone,

I was looking like I was getting the 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5
But now have seen the 18-50mm f/2.8

Now I don't know which one to buy lol

Any experience with either of them please?

Thanks in advance

Suraj

i've had both,and still have the 18-50 F/2.8.they are both excellent lenses and was very happy with the 17-70,but swapped to the 18-50 for the constant F2.8 aperture for low light stuff.

so...i guess it depends on wether you need the constant 2.8 of the 18-50,or if you're gonna miss the extra reach of the 17-70...only you can answer that Suraj

 

[suj]

Hi Stan,

Thanks for the reply, exactly what I was after!
I shoot a lot at low light situations, and now will be shooting at a few basketball games, so the constant 2.8 would be awesome, but at the same time, the extra 20mm (32mm on my crop) will help in the shots

Oh decisions decisions lol, I'm going to have to try the 18-50mm to see how it fairs, as I have tried a friends 17-70mm before, and it was great, not tried the 18-50mm

Thanks again for reply Stan

 

[stan the man]

no problem mate...a nice 70-200 2.8 would complement it very nicely

 

[IanC]

Another thing to consider would be the closeup capabilities of the 17-70 its not macro but it does focus close.

Most of my pics on my flickr were taken with the 17-70. Its the perfect walkabout lens for me but if your thing is lowlight stuff then get the 17-50 2.8

 

[suj]

no problem mate...a nice 70-200 2.8 would complement it very nicely

Haha, I bet it is, at that price Stan lol

Another thing to consider would be the closeup capabilities of the 17-70 its not macro but it does focus close.

Most of my pics on my flickr were taken with the 17-70. Its the perfect walkabout lens for me but if your thing is lowlight stuff then get the 17-50 2.8

Thanks Ian for reply, tbh I think the 17-70mm has won, as it has macro and the extra zoom, it might lack the aperture, but it wasn't too bad when I used it previously

Thanks for the input boys, much appreciated