( 5 reviews )
-
( 3 of 3 found this review helpful ) Posted: 04-02-2007
I bought this lens because my REAL Nikon film lenses did not perform well with my new digital SLR. To make the whole story short, I had invested $1400 in a digital SLR in hopes that I could use my Nikon lenses. But to my surprise...those lenses didn't perform well at all. So I took a chance on this Sigma lens (after reading the reviews of course). It was the least expensive lens in my bag but it gave the best result. The images were very sharp with good colors and detail. Again, thanks to those who took the time to write the earlier reviews. They had helped me tremendously.
-
( 13 of 13 found this review helpful ) Posted: 01-12-2007
This is indeed a very good lens with strong reviews. It provides an affordable alternative to the unaffordable over-one-grand Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8. Why would you want to get an f/2.8 constant aperture lens like this when you could get a "superzoom" lense that goes from 18-200mm? Because a constant minimum aperture 2.8 lens like this one allows you to shoot nonblurry photos in low light conditions, AND because it allows you to create the most artistically blurred-out backgrounds in closeup photos. Zooms with variable minimum apertures higher than 2.8 cannot do either of those well. That's what you'll miss out on if you buy the Nikon 18-200mm VR lens, for exampe. VR (Vibration Reduction) can eliminate the effect of a wobbly hand on the camera, but it CAN'T help you "freeze the action" of the scene right in front of you. Only a higher ISO (noisy, grainy, poor resolution) or a wider aperture (confusingly, the low numbers like 2.8, 2.0, 1.8, 1.4 are the wider apertures) can solve the blurry action problem. BUT DON'T BUY IT. Why not? Because this autumn (Fall '06) Sigma introduced a version of this same lens that is slightly updated, and, importantly, allows you to get closer to a flower or other object (8"!) and magnify such objects up to 1:3 resolution, which begins to approach the Macro range (people define Macro differently, of course, but for many flower lovers 1:3 magnification is sufficient). The 1:3 magnification option adds a world of beauty to your walk-around picture-taking. To have a wide-angle lens, a portrait lens, AND a macro lens all on one lens? Terrific. And the price for the MACRO version is only a few dollars more. HOW TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE: The names of the lenses are basically identical except the newer version includes the word MACRO somewhere in its title. If the product name doesn't say MACRO, it's the older lens.
-
( 3 of 4 found this review helpful ) Posted: 01-11-2007
This is a good lens to have in the bag for an amateur photographer like myself. The lens is relatively fast with a constant 2.8 aperture throughout the zoom. The lens is sharp at f-stops 4 and above and workes quite well even wide open. I use it on a Nikon D50. Focusing is fast. Overall I am quite happy with the purchase. Check out pictures at [.....]
