stevet5808 Loc: Indianapolis

Has anyone had any experience using this lens on a Nikon D90?

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM

Thanks in advance

Steve

dnathan

I've used it on a D200 & D5100. It was acceptable until it came apart in my hand as I focused. Sent it to Sigma & they offered to replace it with the newest upgrade for only the full price that I paid for the broken one. Buy Nikon. Still using Nikon lenses I bought in the '70's.

mrpentaxk5ii

I use Sigma and Pentax glass on my three Pentax DSLR'S, I have the 17-50 F 2.8, 17-70 F 2.8-4.5 and the 120-400 F 4.5-5.6. They all work great I have never had any lens come apart in my hands or any such thing. Here are two photos taken with the 17-50 Sigma and a Pentax K5ii....Jim M

mrpentaxk5ii

These two photos were taken with a Sigma 17-50 F2.8 and a Pentax K5ii, they were part of a work project.

(Download)


(Download)

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I have no experience using the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 but the images I have seen have been of excellent quality.
I favor lenses made specifically for my cameras by the manufacturer. Nikon has a 17-55 f2.8 (No VR) of excellent quality but it is big and heavy and it only sells as a used lens that I know of.
If you do not need the f2.8 aperture the 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AF, VR kit lens by Nikon should produce very good quality images at a very reasonable price, assuming you do your part using the lens. The 18-140 is pretty popular and has a very good VR function from what I know.
A lens that can only be bought used is the 18-70 f3.5-4.5 (No VR) which also has very good quality, is small and light and very convenient for traveling. I know your primary interest is Sigma but I thought that perhaps other choices could also fit your needs.

lhardister Loc: Brownsville, TN

I do not have a Nikon D90 so cannot really answer your inquiry. However, FWIW, I have the lens in Canon ef-s mount and use it on a Canon 7Dii and, with an adapter, on a Sony a6000. I feel that the lens is well built and provides good image quality. Personally, I find that I do not use the shorter focal lengths as much as I anticipated, and that I am more inclined to go to my Canon 24-105 f/4L for general shooting.

Best regards,

TKT Loc: New Mexico

I used one for about 8 years while doing photography for a local newspaper and church newsletter. Images were sharp and the f2.8 very handy for available light shots. The only probem I had was with the autofocus which quite working after a while. The problem was in the heat of battle I sometimes hit the manual focus ring while shooting in AF which is a big no-no with this lens. You cannot correct autofocus with a manual move, it's either full manual or full autofocus and not both at the same time! Good lens for the money but you get what you pay for.