Sigma 17-70 vs Nikon 16-80

Seeking comments about these two lens. Please don't factor in the price difference.
[h=1]Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS[/h][h=1]Nikon 16-80mm f/2.8-4E AF-S DX ED (VR)[/h]
Does the Sigma need the docking unit?

Thanks!

For starters, I'd prefer the extra length, which would be 120mm on the Nikon vs 105mm on the Sigma.

When I had the D5100 I had a Sigma 17-70 almost permanently attached to the camera. I found no problems with it and to me, it was a big step up from the kit lens I had. I havent seen/tried the Nikon one so I have no comparison to make.

Do you have a local camera shop you can go in and try them both?

Did you have the docking unit for the Sigma?

One store has a Nikon. No Sigmas locally. Likely because of the cost I've seen very little photos posted using the Nikon. But results using the Sigma that I've seen have been great. But I like the little bit more length of the Nikon.

No docking station. My lens is about 4 years old, and my daughter uses it now.

I have a 17-70 C with the docking station. It needed a minor tweak at 70mm and that was it. Fantastic walk around lens for a DX camera.

I found this with pics taken with the Nikon 16-80. Looks good to me.
Sample galleries: Digital Photography Review

I too have the 17-70 C but no dock. It's a superb lens, big improvement over the kit 18-55. I find its focus accuracy and speed much better, it's much sharper (when discussed correctly) and on my d5100 at least it produced better colour clarity.

Definitely gets my vote. It's my go to lens of choice. In fact my 35mm f1.8 Dx hasn't had a look in since getting the 17-70 and we all know how great a lens that one is.

two nikon 17-55mm f2.8 lens you say you should try to not look at you any more..


D300s + nikon 17-55mm f2.8







iPhone 'den Tapatalk aracılığı ile gönderildi