I chose between Canon 17-40 f4L and Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS and of course Sigma. Before buying, I carefully tested all the lenses and concluded that even if Sigma cost 50,000. I would still choose her. When I compared it with 17-40, I literally immediately realized that 17-40 was complete slag not worthy of a red ribbon. Sigma at 1.8 shows greater sharpness than 17-40 at f4. In general, comrades, to say that I was shocked is nothing to tell But from 17-55 there were little doubts, I thought if I needed a stub if Sigma had a 1.8 hole, but after several days of testing, I realized-17-55 Sigma is not a competitor. Firstly, 2.8 Sigma is sharper than 17- 55. Secondly, the canon has a trunk (I personally don’t like trunks, given that 17-55 is not protected, I’m sure that in a year it will suck up a lot of dust). And thirdly, HA and distortion at canon completely finished off . In general, I highly recommend to everyone!
New Nikon 18-105mm Vibration Reduction 📷 Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLRs
104 Review
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lens - Fixed Black (6310B002) for US Cameras
76 Review
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G Auto Focus Lens for Nikon DSLR Cameras - Black (Model 2183)
125 Review
Canon EOS SLR Camera Lens EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
124 Review