Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro

[PHeller]

Any new updates to this lens?

I'm kind of interested...I haven't been taking pictures much lately, and when I do I think I need this lens!

[Visual Reality]

What type of shots do you take?

If you won't be using this lens for grabbing focus on fast moving subjects (most don't with this focal length) get the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, it is known to be better optically.

[tekriter]

The Sigma lens now has an HSM focusing motor, and I have that version.

This lens is incredibly sharp and has become one of my favorites. It's not small, the f2.8 ensures that you need a fat barrel. Focus is very quick, much faster than any of my D-type screw drive lenses.

[herc182]

I have this lens and am thinking of selling it. Its the old version (without HSM). Its a fantastic lens but I dont find myself using it at all.

Very sharp and good contrast. However, I have heard that the Sigma line can be hit and miss sometimes.

If interested, PM me.

cheers

[Paradox]

I too have it and am happy with it. Has proved to be a good all rounder for a reasonable cost.

[PHeller]

2 month old bump?

Still looking for a wide angle close range fast zoom for portraits.

[erichlund]

2 month old bump?

Still looking for a wide angle close range fast zoom for portraits.

Why? It seems an odd choice for portraits. The long end of an 18-50 is adequate for some portrait work on APS-C, but the wide end would give a portrait more of a "street" look, and the potential distortions could be unflattering.

I'm not saying you don't have a use. You could be doing something new and unique. I'm just curious what you plan.

[tim11]

Why? It seems an odd choice for portraits. The long end of an 18-50 is adequate for some portrait work on APS-C, but the wide end would give a portrait more of a "street" look, and the potential distortions could be unflattering. ....

Coincidently, I just notice that the studio portrait shots from 50-150 seem to be brighter and lively; while the ones from 18-50 seem darker and mostly flat? :confused:

[erichlund]

I would attribute that to exposure, not lens length. Wide angle lenses used on people tend to put the photographer right in with the people. That's kind of the point of "traditional" street photography, but "traditional" portraiture is all about the subject.

Of course, not everything must be traditional, unless you are in Fiddler on the Roof.

Color and image quality will reflect the quality of the lens used, and brightness is a photographer choice (exposure).

[PHeller]

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f252/PHeller/MegSet1_1.jpg

I did this with my 18-55 at around 18mm. I like the feel of it.

[PHeller]

I've got a 50-150 and I hate using it indoors because it's just too long. I've gotta stand in the next room or have a full-sized studio in order to get full body shots.

[trackin951]

Would any of you suggest one of these lenses in place of my nikon 35mm F/2. I love the IQ! The af is a little slow and I am missing wide-angle capabilities. But am in no rush at all am just wondering about af speed, IQ... Thanks in advance!

35mm IQ at work...I love the IQ:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3134/3148684212_a66cf38f9d.jpg

[mugsisme]

I love mine, and keep it on the camera almost all the time. It is bigger and heavier than the other 18-55. I think it takes a 72mm filter if I remember correctly. (Can you tell it has been a while since I have been out shooting?)