Nikon Rumors Forum » Topic: nikon 16-85 vs sigma 17-50

mony on "nikon 16-85 vs sigma 17-50"

mony — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 16:00:21 +0000

THANX tcole

tcole1983 on "nikon 16-85 vs sigma 17-50"

tcole1983 — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 13:28:35 +0000

That sigma is super sharp and a great lens. Focus was fast and I thought it felt pretty well built. There is a thread somewhere with a couple pics from someone that has it. It isn't Nikon, but IMO better then the 16-85. I had it for a day before I returned it due to financial reasons, but I still plan to get it again.

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2337

mony on "nikon 16-85 vs sigma 17-50"

mony — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:48:42 +0000

i thought the sigma might be sharper
need the 2.8?? i dont really know since i have also the 35 1.8 and sigma 50 1.4, but it might come in handy.
as if i can afford the 17-55 :)

thanx jeral

jerl on "nikon 16-85 vs sigma 17-50"

jerl — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:32:28 +0000

The 16-85 is hardly what I'd call a soft lens, so I doubt that any different in performance will be more than subtle. Still if you need the 2.8 and don't want the Nikon 17-55, then the Sigma is not a bad option. I would say that you should rent the lens first to see if it suits your needs.

mony on "nikon 16-85 vs sigma 17-50"

mony — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:24:29 +0000

hi guyz
currently i have the 16-85 i was thinking of replacing it with the sigma 17-50 f2.8 since i read that the sigma is much sharper + its a 2.8. any thoughts

thanx