I voted keep it...it's an FX lens AND a stop and a third faster Really depends what you shoot
but I use the hell outta mine...for peeps/bands in low light! Stunning IQ, just sayin'
A wide fast prime is always useful.... I'd keep one around, and save up for a zoom if you need it.
I have a Nikon 24G and a Sigma 35A and I love them both Of course, I have zooms for when I use them too Over time (years and years), my collection grows...
I'm going to make two assumptions: you have no other lenses, and your referring to the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS...
I've had / have both lenses and my suggestion will buck the trend... I really like the 28mm f/1.8 on FX. But on DX it's neither here, nor there. And since you considering the 17-50, I suspect FX isn't in your nearterm future.
The 17-50, on the other hand is a fantastic lens for DX; sharp wide open, good range, stabilization works well, and can be used for events, landscapes and even portrait in a pinch. Autofocus is enough to track children at indoor playground party centers. My only nit was the wrong way zoom (twists opposite the "Nikon way").
I am still on the fence...only because like QWT SVT said I don't plan on moving up to fx anytime soon.
I'm going to assume that the new 18-35 1.8 Sigma will be at least $1000, which is more than I'm willing to pay. Thanks everybody for the input. I am going to try to get ahold of a 17-50 see if I like it more than my nikon 28 1.8g.
I would go for the Sigma. The reason is it's a good lens, and it's really hard to beat the flexibility of a good zoom in the field. With camera ISO going ever higher, there's less and less times an f2.8 won't be fast enough.
Two23 wrote:
I would go for the Sigma. The reason is it's a good lens, and it's really hard to beat the flexibility of a good zoom in the field. With camera ISO going ever higher, there's less and less times an f2.8 won't be fast enough.
Kent in SD
Last year due to personal circumstances, I sold all of my Canon gear that consisted of several high quality zooms and then I bought an Olympus OM-D and a 40mm FF equivalent pancake prime lens . And I have to say I found it very enjoyable shooting with that one focal length. I didn't have to worry about which lens to use or which focal length to zoom to. I normally kept the lens around f2-2.8 , unless i needed more DOF, and then I simply walked backward or forward to frame the shot I was looking for. Now I am buying into a new Nikon system and I am starting out with a 35mm prime. The 28 1.8 is about 42mm on APS-C and i think that is a great do it all focal length with a fast aperture to boot. For general shooting you just can't beat it.
I voted to keep it. On DX I always always wanted larger aperture. I eventually sold my D300s and 17-50 2.8 to fund the FX switch. Now that I've been on FX a while I find I am almost always shooting around 2.8 to get enough DOF - considering selling some primes to fund a 2.8 standard zoom. I'm sure once I make that decision I'll start complaining about lens size... nothing like chasing your own tail.
Really depends what you shoot
Of course, I have zooms for when I use them too 