# Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM VS Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM??



## gl600 (Jun 22, 2010)

Hey,
Does anyone have experience with both of these lenses? 
I have the 18-50 but I require a bit more reach which is the main reason why I would want the 17-70.
I understand the obvious differences b/w the 2 lenses (18-50 is a 2.8 throughout the range while the 17-70 isn't, and the 17-70 is an extra 20mm)
What I want to know is: is there any other significant quality difference between theses lenses, or a difference in performance, that would keep me from selling the 18-50 and buying the 17-70?

Thanks in advance


----------



## D-B-J (Jun 22, 2010)

geta 1.4 teleconverter. Bam, now you have a 25.2-70mm lens.


----------



## D-B-J (Jun 22, 2010)

with an effective aperture of four throughout the entire range.


----------



## desertdave (Jun 22, 2010)

I have the 17-70 as my walk-around lens and love it. The only hassle is the filters can be pricey (72mm) My polarizer was over a hundred buckaroonies. It is a very versatile lens and not to pricey.


----------



## Nod (Jun 22, 2010)

I just bought the 17-70 and it will be my walk around lens for sure.  I cannot beleive how sharp it is. Yes the filters are pricey, just paid $86 for a polarizer today.  Here the 1st picture I took with it just last Friday. No editing (except for sizing) right out of the camrea.  You won't be disappointed with this lens.


----------



## gl600 (Jun 22, 2010)

It all sounds good, thanks


----------

