photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
Miljenko Devcic | profile | all galleries >> tech >> Lens reviews and tests >> Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 F-S DX vs Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 DC tree view | thumbnails | slideshow

Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 F-S DX vs Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 DC

18-50vs17-55.jpg
18-50vs17-55.jpg		 Real life pic comparison @ f/2.8
:: Real life pic comparison @ f/2.8 :: 		Resolution & CA charts
:: Resolution & CA charts :: 		Real life pic comparison @ f/5.6
:: Real life pic comparison @ f/5.6 ::
Bokeh.jpg
Bokeh.jpg		 Close.jpg
Close.jpg		 Morning.jpg
Morning.jpg

comment | share
Guest 24-May-2011 11:02
I just switched from a Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS to the Nikkor 17-55/2.8 on a D7000. The difference is like night and day. The Nikkor is perfectly sharp right at f2.8. The Sigma needs stopping down to become really sharp. It never reaches the absolute sharpness of the Nikkor though. It also has a very poor corner performance with very dark edges at the wide end.
Guest 04-May-2007 21:39
Miljenko, you should try out the new Macro version of this Sigma. Quite impressive.
Miljenko Devcic07-Nov-2006 22:10
It is possible that Nikkor was sub-average quality sample, but OTOH you don't expect 1300$ lens to be a lemon, right?! To be honest, Sigma 18-50 was one out of 3 samples tested, maybe the best among them. And finaly, why dormant Nikon can't be beaten by constantly improving Sigma that made long way from "just a third party lens manufacturer" to a respectable lens design and production company ?!
Guest 06-Nov-2006 10:48
I'm confused because the Sigma looks better in almost every photo. The close up of the flower really shows it, as well as the 5.6 images. The bokeh is better with the nikon, however. I think there is a problem with the nikon tested, it should not get its butt kicked by a sigma.
click on thumbnails for full image