When I had the same problem, I tried several. Several PJs, also
myself, tried the Sigma 17-35. We all agreed that it's bad. IMNSHO,
stay away from it. It's bad even on APS crop digital. The Sigma
3.5-5.6/18-50 is a cheap lens, not good optically until f/8. But it as
you can get it for about 50 euro used, it might be worth a shot until
you can get something better (which is why it ended in my bag, for
exactly that reason, and I get paid even for images from this lens...
gasp! I dislike using it though, and it was only unplanned additional
living expenses that kept me so far from buying a 2.8/20-35 Nikkor or
better a 2.8/17-35 Nikkor). Still, it was IMO better than the 17-35 DG
Sigma... The 2.8/18-50 Sigma is too new to tell anything about. I saw
just some sample pictures on the internet which had obvious corner
softness wide open, but I distrust internet samples, I prefer using a
lens myself. I have no direct experience with the rest (except the,
now discontinued, Tokina 3.5-3.5/20-35 which I used on film, bought
new, it broke on me three times before returning it for a refund...
the 19-35 Tokina is more plasticky than the older 20-35...). Vivitar
S1 is AFAIK a rebadged Cosina 19-35. I have saw several torn apart
cheap Cosina zooms. It seems they are bottom of the pack (unlike their
SL series and rangefinder series primes!). You can also consider used
Tokina ATX 2.8/20-35. Used it goes for around 300-350 Euro. I almost
got one, one friend from a big daily paper used it with D1X, and said
it was good. The only one I tried on my camera was very bad though.
Might be sample variance or bad usage by the previous owner. It was
very small for a fast wide zoom, but the used sample I tried was
optically very bad. Still, I know that judging used lenses is near
impossible, their previous life might have ruined it (and believe me,
I have myself ruined optically some - before I acquired them -
perfectly good lenses <vbg>)
>From what I heard, you could make best with the Pentax DA 16-45. No
personal experience with it though.
This is all very subjective, and thus my opinions may be totally
unusable for your situation. I do mostly photojournalism type jobs, so I need
best performance near wide open, and I don't care a bit about
geometric distortions. You might do more architecture, and geometric
distortions might make an otherwise fine lens unsuitable for you. Or
you might be better with a 20mm prime? who knows ;-) Try to get to a
good shop who carries most of them and ask them to test them outside
on your camera. They should cooperate. That's the best way.
Good light!
fra
