Hope this is the right place to post this. I just got myself a Sigma AF 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 DC Macro HSM Lens. Cost me just under a hundred bucks. I have been using the 18-55mm kit lens for my UE photos. Anyone else use this lens? I stumbled across it on accident and just went for it as the other auctions on the same lens were a lot more expensive. Like $220 upwards. I am really wanting to take my UE photography to the next level and wondering if this lens was a good buy?

You generally can't go wrong with anything Sigma.

Posted by mookster You generally can't go wrong with anything Sigma.

I agree with this completely. I work for an ebay store that sells camera equipment so I get a lot of free reign with whatever I wanna use. My go to lenses in my bag are my Sigma 24mm, Tokina 11-17mm and Nikkor 105mm (this lens has a large scratch on the rear element and it's still fantastic). So off-brands are still damn, good, for sure. Sigma is a good brand, although I have never used that lens. I generally don't use anything that's Nikkor/Nikon. The 105mm is the only lens I have left that's Nikkor. I have 2 or 3 Sigma lenses, though.

Is there something specifically wrong with this lens for it to be so cheap or a fluke?



When shopping for lenses, though, I would suggest you figure out what you want in a lens, ie wide angle, bokeh, macro, etc, and shop from there. I bought a bunch of glass when I first got my camera and ended up not needing or wanting most of them, so they were a waste of money. You got a steal of a deal on that one if everything in it is fine, though.

Posted by Astro I agree with this completely. I work for an ebay store that sells camera equipment so I get a lot of free reign with whatever I wanna use. My go to lenses in my bag are my Sigma 24mm, Tokina 11-17mm and Nikkor 105mm (this lens has a large scratch on the rear element and it's still fantastic). So off-brands are still damn, good, for sure. Sigma is a good brand, although I have never used that lens. I generally don't use anything that's Nikkor/Nikon. The 105mm is the only lens I have left that's Nikkor. I have 2 or 3 Sigma lenses, though. Is there something specifically wrong with this lens for it to be so cheap or a fluke? When shopping for lenses, though, I would suggest you figure out what you want in a lens, ie wide angle, bokeh, macro, etc, and shop from there. I bought a bunch of glass when I first got my camera and ended up not needing or wanting most of them, so they were a waste of money. You got a steal of a deal on that one if everything in it is fine, though.

The lens has 2 small marks on the coating. The auction said that it doesn't impact the photos so I just went for it. Been on flickr most of the night looking at the groups that show the lens and I think it looks awesome! I also just managed to get me a Tamron 18-200mm for $78 dollars from the same seller. This has some dust inside the lens. Not much but seems like dust really doesn't make so much difference. I guess time will tell

Posted by urbansmans The lens has 2 small marks on the coating. The auction said that it doesn't impact the photos so I just went for it. Been on flickr most of the night looking at the groups that show the lens and I think it looks awesome! I also just managed to get me a Tamron 18-200mm for $78 dollars from the same seller. This has some dust inside the lens. Not much but seems like dust really doesn't make so much difference. I guess time will tell

YEah, if you take your time and look around, you can find some gems that have slight imperfections. Are the marks on the front or the back?

Posted by Astro YEah, if you take your time and look around, you can find some gems that have slight imperfections. Are the marks on the front or the back?

The sigma lens has 2 small marks on the front element. The seller states that they are both less than 2mm. And to be honest I cannot hardly see them on the images.

Posted by urbansmans The sigma lens has 2 small marks on the front element. The seller states that they are both less than 2mm. And to be honest I cannot hardly see them on the images.

You can usually get away more with damage on the front than the back. The 105mm I have is just a fluke on how big and deep the scratch is and it's unnoticeable.


The only thing that the front element seems to do when it's damaged is create flare sometimes. But not really an issue when exploring.

Posted by Astro You can usually get away more with damage on the front than the back. The 105mm I have is just a fluke on how big and deep the scratch is and it's unnoticeable. The only thing that the front element seems to do when it's damaged is create flare sometimes. But not really an issue when exploring.

That is good to hear. I love a bargain and I am very much looking forward to having something other than the kit lens!

That sigma will be good. Sounds like that Tamron lens will probably be garbage though.

Maybe keep your eyes out for auctions on prime lenses next. Or a zoom that goes a bit wider.

I had a sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 and I loved it. the only downside was that it was big and bulky. I sold it and got a 20mm f/2.8 nikkor that I use constantly and a 50mm f/1.8 for extra bokeh/depth of field shots and then I have a tokina 100mm f/2.8 macro that is currently collecting dust.

I had a tamron 18-50mm something or other but it just wasn't sharp enough for me, could have been that particular lens though.

Sounds like you got a good deal on that sigma!