Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 0r Sigma 17-50 f/2.8


karikodan

New Member
Oct 16, 2010
8
0
0
#1
Hi,

I am a newbie starting on to dslr. My interests are landscape and low light photography. After reading through tons of web resources I think I need a fast lens with a good range. Do you think that the above lenses are suitable for me? Is 17-50 f2.8 much better over the other? If I use a lens at 50mm zoom for landscape at f/2.8 will the depth of field be shallow? At what circumstances I need f/2.8 at 50 mm? If large aperture is not very useful at long focal lengths I could go for 17-70 which is cheaper?;p

Thanks:)
 

strikeback4

Deregistered
Apr 14, 2010
726
0
0
#2
the 17-70 is so-so, it is not as fast as the 17-50 due to the change in aperture when zooming, but still, its quite decent with a reproduction rate of 1:2 so u can do decent macro shot with it as well

if you want something with good image quality, go for the 17-50, or else the 17-70 will work just nice as a walkabout lens :)
 

Jan 16, 2010
552
0
0
Singapore
#3
17-70 is a decent and capable lens. It was one of my favorite lens.

I know it is becoming typical thread but still can not resist in suggesting EFs 17-55. Probably the best lens (not beer) for cropped :thumbsup:
 

karikodan

New Member
Oct 16, 2010
8
0
0
#5
I think now I will go for 17-50. Thanks for your suggestions.
:)
 

Top Bottom