20D + 17-85is & D70 + Sigma 18-50/3.5-5.6

photogene · 29th October 2004

There's a discussion on D70 & 20D image. The image is too big for display here hence I won't put it up but you can follow the link and discussion below.

20D + 17-85is vs D70 + Sigma 18-50/3.5-5.6 at 200ISO, 1/640 f8. Enjoy.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=10823634

http://photo-forum.net/boni/20d_d70.jpg

2100 · 29th October 2004

The sigma 18-50 is a very capable glass once stopped down. AF is fast too on a prosumer body like D70 due to short gearing, it is slightly faster than a 50/1.8 in good sunlight. Other than some very very very slight CA, it nearly matches my tamron 28-75 in terms of sharpness. If you want some contrast, just PP it, won't know it esp after you print it out unless you A/B comparison pixel peep with another pic.

Wide open it sucks.

But i 2nd hand it's about 150, i sold it to a guy at 130, so how bad can that be?

rainman · 29th October 2004

Originally Posted by photogene

There's a discussion on D70 & 20D image. The image is too big for display here hence I won't put it up but you can follow the link and discussion below.

20D + 17-85is vs D70 + Sigma 18-50/3.5-5.6 at 200ISO, 1/640 f8. Enjoy.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=10823634

http://photo-forum.net/boni/20d_d70.jpg

Surprisingly Sigma 18-50 is actually better in sharpness...Actually not that surprise also...The 17-85 never interest me...consumer optics packed with bells and whistles....

2100 · 29th October 2004

Originally Posted by rainman

Actually not that surprise also...The 17-85 never interest me...consumer optics packed with bells and whistles....

It's actually very good if it's priced at $500-600. The IS is good to have at 85mm and 17mm is useful. Even the Nikkor AF-S 18-70 is only $450.

But too bad, it's 2X more expensive.

mpenza · 29th October 2004

is the review comparing the lenses or comparing the cameras? Presumably the same post processing has been done. but I do find that generally, 20D requires a bit more sharpening (i.e. camera does not apply much) to bring out the details. also, the 17-85 IS isn't that good optically, as seen from the high level of CA and softness.

hongsien · 29th October 2004

Too bad they used two different lenses! Not such a good test after all, they should have used both the same Sigma lens. Now it is not a test comparing cameras (different lenses used), neither comparing lenses (different cameras used)......

Hong Sien

zhangyb · 29th October 2004

i tend to observe tt in certain pictures, there seems to be slight camera shake for the 20D... or my eyes blur...

kiwi2 · 29th October 2004

Has the 17-85 IS been extensively used by some of CS members here? I seem to read all about CA and some softness but not sure if it's some unconfirmed bad label stuck to the lens. Anyone can put this label to rest once and for all?

Cos there are others too who say it is not such a bad lens.

mpenza · 31st October 2004

have not used it but CA seems to be a problem for the lens. but think it's over emphasized though. I have other lenses (e.g. 24-85, 50/1.8) with CA but they had not been a problem.

29th October 2004	#1
photogene Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Nikon Embassy Posts: 230	20D + 17-85is & D70 + Sigma 18-50/3.5-5.6 There's a discussion on D70 & 20D image. The image is too big for display here hence I won't put it up but you can follow the link and discussion below. 20D + 17-85is vs D70 + Sigma 18-50/3.5-5.6 at 200ISO, 1/640 f8. Enjoy. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=10823634 http://photo-forum.net/boni/20d_d70.jpg

29th October 2004	#2
2100 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 3,116	The sigma 18-50 is a very capable glass once stopped down. AF is fast too on a prosumer body like D70 due to short gearing, it is slightly faster than a 50/1.8 in good sunlight. Other than some very very very slight CA, it nearly matches my tamron 28-75 in terms of sharpness. If you want some contrast, just PP it, won't know it esp after you print it out unless you A/B comparison pixel peep with another pic. Wide open it sucks. But i 2nd hand it's about 150, i sold it to a guy at 130, so how bad can that be?

29th October 2004	#5
mpenza Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: New York City Posts: 13,397	is the review comparing the lenses or comparing the cameras? Presumably the same post processing has been done. but I do find that generally, 20D requires a bit more sharpening (i.e. camera does not apply much) to bring out the details. also, the 17-85 IS isn't that good optically, as seen from the high level of CA and softness.

29th October 2004	#6
hongsien Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 2,904	Too bad they used two different lenses! Not such a good test after all, they should have used both the same Sigma lens. Now it is not a test comparing cameras (different lenses used), neither comparing lenses (different cameras used)...... Hong Sien

29th October 2004	#7
zhangyb Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 775	i tend to observe tt in certain pictures, there seems to be slight camera shake for the 20D... or my eyes blur...

29th October 2004	#8
kiwi2 Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 1,253	Has the 17-85 IS been extensively used by some of CS members here? I seem to read all about CA and some softness but not sure if it's some unconfirmed bad label stuck to the lens. Anyone can put this label to rest once and for all? Cos there are others too who say it is not such a bad lens.

31st October 2004	#9
mpenza Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: New York City Posts: 13,397	have not used it but CA seems to be a problem for the lens. but think it's over emphasized though. I have other lenses (e.g. 24-85, 50/1.8) with CA but they had not been a problem.