Is the 17-55mm f/2.8 worth it for DX?

[nedy77]

The tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non vc will be more worth it. Value for money

 

[rain5533]

The tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non vc will be more worth it. Value for money

Tamron non BIM should be much faster lens than BIM / VC.
The 17-50mm BIM VC, just only slow AF & CA quite bad on wide open. All you can shots just don't zoom in and see the object

Sigma 17-50mm OS should be better performance, but I never own before.
For the 18-50 HSM is best also faster AF, but if need the sharpest have to stop down on F4 onward.

For the 17-55mm I have no comments, cause too pro for me and never think to have one.

 

[Blur Shadow]

The Sigma 18-50mm is hardly good at all.

It is the new Sigma 17-50mm OS HSM that is capturing the attention of today's consumers.

 

[BokehMaster]

Lets say I'm pairing up a wide angle lens for DX, (17-55 f/2.8 + 11-16 f/2.8) Or (12-24 f/4 + 24-70 f/2.8)? For all those who say 24-70 f/2.8 is simply not a good range for DX?

 

[Blur Shadow]

Lets say I'm pairing up a wide angle lens for DX, (17-55 f/2.8 + 11-16 f/2.8) Or (12-24 f/4 + 24-70 f/2.8)? For all those who say 24-70 f/2.8 is simply not a good range for DX?

You lose the f/2.8 if you use the 12-24mm.

 

[Fudgecakes]

Lets say I'm pairing up a wide angle lens for DX, (17-55 f/2.8 + 11-16 f/2.8) Or (12-24 f/4 + 24-70 f/2.8)? For all those who say 24-70 f/2.8 is simply not a good range for DX?

I use a 24-70 with a 11-16. Works well for me. The extra reach offered by the 70 end of my lens really helped me many a time. The loss in the wide end I usually make up by walking back a few steps or just simply swap out to the 11-16.

 

[wakaowalao]

I use a 24-70 with a 11-16. Works well for me. The extra reach offered by the 70 end of my lens really helped me many a time. The loss in the wide end I usually make up by walking back a few steps or just simply swap out to the 11-16.

Yo can't get the wider angle perspective by taking a few steps back nor you can get the same compressed perspective of a long tele by walking a few steps forward.

 

[Fudgecakes]

Yo can't get the wider angle perspective by taking a few steps back nor you can get the same compressed perspective of a long tele by walking a few steps forward.

True. I didnt say you can get the same perspective but it gets you near there.

 

[Luminare]

Lets say I'm pairing up a wide angle lens for DX, (17-55 f/2.8 + 11-16 f/2.8) Or (12-24 f/4 + 24-70 f/2.8)? For all those who say 24-70 f/2.8 is simply not a good range for DX?

Well, Not Good being defined as "Not useful to the user in terms of how often he/she could/would have the opportunity to use it for their means".

For me, when i am walking around in Singapore photographing, I (Me, Not others) rarely find anything interesting to frame between 36mm to 105mm. It could be the places i go or the perspective i have so the 24-70mm (36-105mm DX) would not be a lens i would buy as i could otherwise use the same money to buy something else that i can use immediately. Perspective being entirely subjective, really depends on the end user.

** Interesting to me means: Able to tell a story to my audiences of how a place is like, the color, scene, building, populous at that point of time.

 

[yqt]

I've both the Sigma 17-50 1 year before I bought the Nikon 17-55 and my thoughts are, I should have bought the Nikon in the first place.