Not satisfied with Sigma 17-50mm f.2.8 hsm

zburatoru · 02-11-2017, 05:37 AM

Hello! I have shot a lot with my Sigma and I'm not impressed... Sharpness it's OK but not outstanding! Contrast very poor in comparison with my Tamron 28-200mm and Pentax 55-300mm... Colors are washed up and I have to pp a lot to be satisfied. I have a bad sample? Pentax 16-45mm or 16-85mm would be better? Any thoughts?

**MortenV** · 02-11-2017, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by zburatoru

Hello! I have shot a lot with my Sigma and I'm not impressed... Sharpness it's OK but not outstanding! Contrast very poor in comparison with my Tamron 28-200mm and Pentax 55-300mm... Colors are washed up and I have to pp a lot to be satisfied. I have a bad sample? Pentax 16-45mm or 16-85mm would be better? Any thoughts?

Hello!
Have you tried to reduce exposure a little? My own Sigma 17-50 is over exposing a bit and that gives those washed out colors.
I like my copy a lot, so give it a try.

zburatoru · 02-11-2017, 06:12 AM

It's a solution but won't give those contrasty and colorful pentax like images...

dave2k · 02-11-2017, 06:59 AM

I think you might have a poor copy. My 17-50 is one of my very best lenses. The reviews on this forum have an average sharpness rating that is about as high as I've seen. It's the best APS-C lens that I have, and it was vastly superior to my 55-300, which I no longer own.

zburatoru · 02-11-2017, 07:48 AM

Dave2k! What about contrast and colors?

mee · 02-11-2017, 08:34 AM

If you don't mind the variable aperture, the 16-85mm could be a nice replacement.

That said, look at this chart from lensrentals.com :

This is showing 8 copies of a 70-200m f/2.8 lens. This is sharpness test -- blue sharper, red softer.

There are no 2 identical copies. This is the variation we deal with with our lenses (esp zooms).

So you might very well have a poor copy.

zburatoru · 02-11-2017, 08:38 AM

That's very interesting but scary too! So many sample variations!! Thanks I should be satisfied with what I have...

)

dave2k · 02-11-2017, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by zburatoru

Dave2k! What about contrast and colors?

I have no complaints about contrast and colors. These aspects are just as pleasing to me as is the sharpness. Like I said, it's probably my best APS-C lens.

pentasonic49 · 02-11-2017, 11:23 AM

I think I'll stick with my early Pentax 16-50.

zburatoru · 02-11-2017, 11:29 AM

Well, 16-50 2.8 it's a solution, because prices dropped a lot for a used copy...

**JimD** · 02-12-2017, 11:41 PM

I've got a 16-45 and it's very, very good but my Sigma 17-50 is in a different league again. I think you must have a poor copy.

Sandy Hancock · 02-12-2017, 11:51 PM

I sold my Sigma 17-80 in favour of the DA*16-50. I have never regretted it for a moment - even when the SDM died.

zburatoru · 02-13-2017, 12:06 AM

I've had to correct the focus to -8 and now the sharpness is good, but colors and contrast, same story...

**MortenV** · 02-13-2017, 07:18 AM

I've just taken those two photos to compare my Pentax HD DA 18-50mm WR to my Sigma 17-50mm.
I see no lack of contrast in the Sigma, bur I see a lot lack of sharpness in the Pentax.
The last one is the Sigma.

**pres589** · 02-13-2017, 08:05 AM

What are Tamron 17-50's running in your neck of the woods?

02-11-2017, 05:37 AM	#1
zburatoru Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 266	Not satisfied with Sigma 17-50mm f.2.8 hsm Hello! I have shot a lot with my Sigma and I'm not impressed... Sharpness it's OK but not outstanding! Contrast very poor in comparison with my Tamron 28-200mm and Pentax 55-300mm... Colors are washed up and I have to pp a lot to be satisfied. I have a bad sample? Pentax 16-45mm or 16-85mm would be better? Any thoughts?

02-11-2017, 08:38 AM	#7
zburatoru Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 266 Original Poster	That's very interesting but scary too! So many sample variations!! Thanks I should be satisfied with what I have...)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM	ChuyQ	Sold Items	6	12-16-2015 09:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 17-50mm f/2,8 EX DC HSM - Excellent Condition!!	esrandall	Sold Items	4	09-01-2015 07:31 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM	comprock	Sold Items	7	07-10-2015 04:11 AM
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 HSM	hiep2503	Pentax Price Watch	6	06-18-2012 04:47 PM
Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM v Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF]	lmd91343	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	05-25-2011 07:04 PM

02-11-2017, 05:49 AM	#2
MortenV Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 41	Originally posted by zburatoru Hello! I have shot a lot with my Sigma and I'm not impressed... Sharpness it's OK but not outstanding! Contrast very poor in comparison with my Tamron 28-200mm and Pentax 55-300mm... Colors are washed up and I have to pp a lot to be satisfied. I have a bad sample? Pentax 16-45mm or 16-85mm would be better? Any thoughts? Hello! Have you tried to reduce exposure a little? My own Sigma 17-50 is over exposing a bit and that gives those washed out colors. I like my copy a lot, so give it a try.

02-11-2017, 06:12 AM	#3
zburatoru Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 266 Original Poster	It's a solution but won't give those contrasty and colorful pentax like images...

02-11-2017, 06:59 AM	#4
dave2k Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery Posts: 419	I think you might have a poor copy. My 17-50 is one of my very best lenses. The reviews on this forum have an average sharpness rating that is about as high as I've seen. It's the best APS-C lens that I have, and it was vastly superior to my 55-300, which I no longer own.

02-11-2017, 07:48 AM	#5
zburatoru Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 266 Original Poster	Dave2k! What about contrast and colors?

02-11-2017, 08:34 AM	#6
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	If you don't mind the variable aperture, the 16-85mm could be a nice replacement. That said, look at this chart from lensrentals.com : This is showing 8 copies of a 70-200m f/2.8 lens. This is sharpness test -- blue sharper, red softer. There are no 2 identical copies. This is the variation we deal with with our lenses (esp zooms). So you might very well have a poor copy.

02-11-2017, 08:44 AM	#8
dave2k Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery Posts: 419	Originally posted by zburatoru Dave2k! What about contrast and colors? I have no complaints about contrast and colors. These aspects are just as pleasing to me as is the sharpness. Like I said, it's probably my best APS-C lens.

02-11-2017, 11:23 AM	#9
pentasonic49 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: weston-super-mare Posts: 395	I think I'll stick with my early Pentax 16-50.

02-11-2017, 11:29 AM	#10
zburatoru Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 266 Original Poster	Well, 16-50 2.8 it's a solution, because prices dropped a lot for a used copy...

02-12-2017, 11:41 PM	#11
JimD Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Newport, South Wales Posts: 187	I've got a 16-45 and it's very, very good but my Sigma 17-50 is in a different league again. I think you must have a poor copy.

02-12-2017, 11:51 PM	#12
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	I sold my Sigma 17-80 in favour of the DA*16-50. I have never regretted it for a moment - even when the SDM died.

02-13-2017, 12:06 AM	#13
zburatoru Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 266 Original Poster	I've had to correct the focus to -8 and now the sharpness is good, but colors and contrast, same story...

02-13-2017, 08:05 AM	#15
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,529	What are Tamron 17-50's running in your neck of the woods?