Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Corduroy" data-source="post: 516937" data-attributes="member: 41304">Hello.This is my first post in these forums and I'd like some help.I have a Nikon D3200 and the following lenses: 18-55 3.5-5.6 (the kit lens), 55-200 (3.5-5.6) and two primes 50 1.8 AF and 105 2.8 AF. The two primes are used only with MF in my camera.I'm an amateur-enthusiast photographer, I love taking photos, but it's just a hobby.Recently, I decided to upgrade my kit lens. It's not bad, I like many of my pictures with the kit lens but I just want to have better IQ and a faster lens.I can't spend a huge amount of money and I was looking mainly for 3rd party lenses. Mainly Tamron and Sigma 17-50 and the Sigma 17-70C which is the one I decided to get.Most of my pictures are near the wide range of my kit lens (18mm) for landscapes, but having a versatile lens like the 17-70 would help in other situations too (sometimes 55 was a bit short and by going with a 17-50 it would be even shorter).Is the Sigma (or as a matter of fact any of the other lenses mentioned) a true upgrade to the kit lens? Are the differences noticeable in a D3200 and to someone with a not so professional eye like mine?&nbsp; Is it worth it to spend around 400+ for it or is the kit just fine?Sorry for the long post, just tried to give all the info.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Corduroy, post: 516937, member: 41304"] Hello. This is my first post in these forums and I'd like some help. I have a Nikon D3200 and the following lenses: 18-55 3.5-5.6 (the kit lens), 55-200 (3.5-5.6) and two primes 50 1.8 AF and 105 2.8 AF. The two primes are used only with MF in my camera. I'm an amateur-enthusiast photographer, I love taking photos, but it's just a hobby. Recently, I decided to upgrade my kit lens. It's not bad, I like many of my pictures with the kit lens but I just want to have better IQ and a faster lens. I can't spend a huge amount of money and I was looking mainly for 3rd party lenses. Mainly Tamron and Sigma 17-50 and the Sigma 17-70C which is the one I decided to get. Most of my pictures are near the wide range of my kit lens (18mm) for landscapes, but having a versatile lens like the 17-70 would help in other situations too (sometimes 55 was a bit short and by going with a 17-50 it would be even shorter). Is the Sigma (or as a matter of fact any of the other lenses mentioned) a true upgrade to the kit lens? Are the differences noticeable in a D3200 and to someone with a not so professional eye like mine? Is it worth it to spend around 400+ for it or is the kit just fine? Sorry for the long post, just tried to give all the info. [/QUOTE]

Verification