I took it to replace a similar sigma (see my review about it) - I decided that I needed a lighter and more compact fifty dollars with a more uniform resolution across the field. I took some pictures, here are my impressions (Nikon compared to Sigma, on the D800): the contrast on an open hole is worse; edge resolution is better; XA is noticeably worse - there are more of them, and they are more problematic in post-processing; the background blur pattern is different, more "dense", the sigma has a more "marshmallow", both of which are to their liking; the workmanship and the feeling in the hand are more "cheaper" (for example, both threads for the filter are plastic, but Nikon has it scratched and jammed with its own lid, while Sigma does not); autofocus tenacity is the same or slightly worse; autofocus speed and volume are about the same; completely clumsy hood a la canon; I did not check how it behaves in the backlight. So far so. However, most likely I wonβt change it back to Sigma - I rarely use this FR, and Iβll lose a decent amount of money on a replacement, itβs not worth it.
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens - Compatible with Canon DSLR Cameras (Lens Only)
73 Review
Canon EOS SLR Camera Lens EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
124 Review
New Nikon 18-105mm Vibration Reduction π· Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLRs
104 Review
Black Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens - Model 1380C002
78 Review