Swap: 17-85mm for 17-70mm?

suj

suj

Suspended / Banned
Messages
188
Name
Suraj
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone,

Been offered a 17-70mm f/2.8-4 sigma lens for my canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6
Is this a good deal?
Any experience with the sigma lens/pics if possible?

Thanks in advance!
 
I had the Siggy while my Brother has the 17-85. I was always convinced the Siggy was a bit sharper. He, on the other hand wanted the IS of the 17-85. Search Flickr for 17-70 shots. I'm sure you'll find plenty.
 
Never used the 17-85, but I had the Siggie 17-70 and found it to be a cracking lens.
 
thanks boys, I love my 17-85mm, but I wouldn't mind a bigger aperture for my shots when doing indoor sports/lower light pics

will I miss the IS much?

thanks again

PS, is it a good deal doing a straight swap for my lens? or money which way? not really clued up with pricing? thanks
 
Last edited:
Remember it'll only be 2.8 at short focal length. Whoever gets your lens will probably think he's got the better end if the deal. Used Siggy will probably fetch £165 or so. 17-85 closer to £225
 
so the 4-5.6 is better then trevor? thanks mate, i thought it was too good to be true

never really used one, but read it is a good lens, so should I ask for money my way if I swap?

thanks appreciate all this input :)
 
If you can get cash your way you'd be making it fairer financially. But I reckon you'd be getting a better lens. I really loved mine. I used to have it mounted to a 40D also.
 
I got my 17-85mm as a kit lens, intending to sell it and buy something better, but I decided to keep it. The build quality is toy town, barrel distortion is pretty bad (you can correct it in post processing) and it's slow at the long end, but mine is sharp and the zoom range is very useful.

I might retire it in favour of the 17-55mm F2.8 one day, but there's no way I can afford it right now, and I've read a few criticisms of the build quality in view of the price.
 
thanks boys, I really appreciate the advice, looks like the deal is off, wanted straight swap, and after looking on ebay and seeing my lens go for like £40-60 more, asked for an extra £40 he doesn't wanna put a penny on top, so it's off :)

may try and buy one outright, and sell mine at a later date, is it 100 posts and 30days on here? or one of the 2?
 
I was looking at both lenses when i went to buy my 17-85. I did like the idea of f2.8 however as been said, that quickly goes to f4. The IS is a godsend in certain situations ie churches...

My 17-85 is sharp, sometimes it supprises me and it equals my 100-300 in the sharpness sector.
 
trevorbray said:
Remember it'll only be 2.8 at short focal length. Whoever gets your lens will probably think he's got the better end if the deal. Used Siggy will probably fetch £165 or so. 17-85 closer to £225
Click to expand...

17-85 are down around the £175 mark at the moment secondhand :)
 
thanks boys, I love my 17-85mm, but I wouldn't mind a bigger aperture for my shots when doing indoor sports/lower light pics
Click to expand...

If all your wanting is 2.8 your choice seems a waste of time to me, unless youre going to shoot between 17/20mm all the time. If you'd said the Tamron 17-50 or the canon 17-55 then i'd agree.
 
thanks again boys, i guess you are all right, but as someone said when it becomes f/4, on the equivalent focal length on mine wouldn't be more than 4? (couldn't guess a f-stop lol)

like I said it is off anyway, so doesn't matter, but this info can be handy when I do decide to change my lens in the future :)
 
I love my 17-70, especially as it also allows you the choice of trying Macro out.
 
thanks everyone for the input, I am going to go to jessops/photography places and try the 17-70mm out, as I am in 2 minds lol

appreciate all the comments, anyone got any pics they have taken with their 17-70mm please? thanks

jayesh no problem mate
 
Hi, I have owned both and to be honest ignoring the IS on the 17-85 the 17-70 is a much better lens and if I was offered a swap I would be more than happy. Dont be put off because you are expecting cash added to yours the canon lens is very heavily sold and to be honest its not worth 225 and plenty sell for well under 200. A straight swap would do me ;) The Sigma is sharper, better contrast and superior colour. The only reason I sold mine was that when I held it on the camera I didnt like the lack of hsm and my hand always landed on the focus ring which spun and twisted my grip. Other than that I would pick it over the Canon every time. The later golf pics with the great blue skies were taken using the sigma. See pages 4,5 and the first 6 images on page 6 of my Golf gallery to see the Sigma lens at work. Mike.
 
Last edited:
Thanks mike, that is a great post, and the pics are excellent!

Coincidently, I met a friend who I went college with, haven't seen them in 3-4 years, he came to my friends basketball game, I didn't have my camera as it was last minute to go watch it. He had his 450D and he had the 17-70mm sigma lens, so he let me take a few pics on it, and it really does fit my needs for lower light situations

So I have PM'd the guy I was gonna swap the lens with, but he said it is sold pending payment, but he will let me know soon if it he is up for swaps (as he has to honour the sale that happened first which I can understand perfectly) so fingers crossed :)

Thanks again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top