Wanting new Lens. Help: I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8.

clewis104 Loc: Rapid City

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Hmmm,$399 vs $1886. I'm curious to see some responses other than go to dxomark.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

I have and use the 17-70 on Canon ......It is a very good lens ! I am ordering an older sigma 24-70 2.8 for my new Sony system ( $275)

traveler90712 Loc: Lake Worth, Fl.

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

Sigma 17-70 is a DX lens, the 24-70 is a FX lens. Using the lens on your D7100 would give you the equivalent 36-105. I have a 24-70 (Tamron) on my 610 and it works well in low light.
Not being familiar with the 17-70, I might decide to go with that. I would suggest that if it is possible rent the lens and try it for yourself.

tomeveritt Loc: Fla. + Ga,NY,Va,Md,SC

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

My Sigma 17-70 works super with my D7100, very solid lens.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

An aperture of f/2.8 throughout the zoom range should be the minimum to look for. Don't rule out used and refurbished. The latest Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 costs about $2,400. I got the previous version, the 80-200mm f/2.8 from KEH. It was New Old Stock, so I was the first one to buy this new old lens - for a little over $600. It gives up 10mm and VR to the newest lens, but that's fine with me. Read comparisons of lenses.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/lenses
http://lenshero.com/lens-comparison
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx
http://www.lenstip.com/lenses.html
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare

MarkD Loc: NYC

I think that you should also consider the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS HSM and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC. I have the Sigma and it's very sharp with good contrast.

I haven't used the Sigma 17-70, but I've heard and read a lot of good things about it.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

What low light shots are you attempting? Indoor? Landscapes? Street? Knowing that would help in giving advice.

The 70mm seems important to you, why?

For your camera one of the best lowlight zoom lenses is the Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art lens.

clewis104 Loc: Rapid City

I shoot a lot indoors in larger rooms (often a church setting). That is why I would like the longer reach. I would also like to start doing more low light nature photograpy. I have been doing a little research and both lenses have their advantages and disadvantages. Reviews are one thing but hands on users are my prefered source.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

clewis104 wrote:

I shoot a lot indoors in larger rooms (often a church setting). That is why I would like the longer reach. I would also like to start doing more low light nature photograpy. I have been doing a little research and both lenses have their advantages and disadvantages. Reviews are one thing but hands on users are my prefered source.

Are you shooting events in churches or the churches as architecture? Are you trying to gets close-up shots of sections of arches?

If events, the 18-35 will work. If the building, then a wider lens is good. If close-up of architectural detail, the 70 may not be long enough and you might want to consider something that gives a 2.8 at 200mm.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

I sold my Nikon 24-70. Its a good lens but I thought it is over rated. $1.8K is a tough nut to crack. There are better values available.

A better option is the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 Art if the range suits you.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

I have and use it on my Canons, bit heavy if you carry it all day, at least compared to an 18-55 kit lens, doesn't focus as well in low light as my Canon 40mm prime but then it's a Sigma Zoom not a prime, Bob.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

If you are shooting architecture without people or moving objects, your aperture should be not less than f/7.1 and up to f/22. In that case a faster lens (f/2.8) is of no value. Just put it on a tripod and work magic with the shutter speed. If you are shooting people the reverse is true and you might need off camera lighting.

clewis104 wrote:

I shoot a lot indoors in larger rooms (often a church setting). That is why I would like the longer reach. I would also like to start doing more low light nature photograpy. I have been doing a little research and both lenses have their advantages and disadvantages. Reviews are one thing but hands on users are my prefered source.

JPL

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

Those are good lenses, but not so good for low light. If you have a kit lens it is probably f3.5 at its widest and those lenses are not so much better for low light. Look at something down to f1.8 or f1.4 or f 1.2 if you want a good lens for low light.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

clewis104 wrote:

I am looking at buying a different lens for low light situations without flash. I use a Nikon 7100 and am looking at the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 or the 24-70 f2.8. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses. Thanks in advance for the help.

When you say "low light" what do you mean?

How low?

What conditions?

f/2.8 to f/4 aren't that low light in the scheme of things.

Also, there are LOTS of ways to get pictures in low light other than buying a fast lens.