buy kitlens and uwa...no need pening2...

another gearhead in the making perhaps? 

mum present take most expensive lor..

what range do you need in the 1st place now?

1680 cz teros...no need pening2 d...

what is your mum's budget la?

you said your mom buying it for you...might as well get top of the range...if gila enuff,teros 2470...

just get the 1750...the MFD is fun to play with...

so what are you going to do now? buy panacanikon and pay the premium so that every lens you get in the future have to have built in IS? when EVERY single lens u buy for alpha system from 8mm fisheye to 500mm tele is stablized..

my honest advice, get the 17-50.. you have the 55-200 to cover your tele range. and sooner or later you will feel that the dark aperture at the tele end of the 16-105 will bother you (at least for me it will). its a pretty easy desicion to make actually..

flash is not the answer to every low light scenario... imagine in a high class candle lit restaurant... you're there to cover an event. are you going to blast the night away with flash? 1stly everyone will be annoyed... 2ndly, you can say bye bye to your ambient already

---

Added on February 23, 2011, 5:41 pm

i wouldnt worry about that too much. if u look into your viewfinder, on the bottom right, there will be a graph that shows how much the camera is moving about, thus how much harder the SSS is compensating for the shake. snap when the bars have the lowest amount...

This topic had been discussed alot.

IS in lens would be slightly better as you can see a steady view from the OVF/EVF compared to stabilization in body which depends solely on the tilt-shift sensor to snap the accurate moment.

Pardon me if I did not explained correctly.

not only the 'view' in the OVF of course... its main reason that in-lens IS is better is because IS, VR, OIS, they are all designed and tuned for optimized stabilization on the very lens they are in. whereas SSS is one setting fits all... so you do the math..

If you are using A700, then the original BG is better for you

If you are using cheapo camera like me, Phottix one also boleh jadi la.

Expect to pay at least RM 4k for that lens. It's not cheap! Saw the RRP on Sigma's website and it's listed at USD 1,400 

Hi, pro here,
I am planning to buy a A33, can i have any opinion and advice from you all ?
like maintenance, shutter count or battery life...
thx a lot in advance

fell sick and bedridden for a whole day.... and so many post to read haha, skip a few and reply which is important.

newbie: if its your mum buying, the 1680, else, get the 1750. base on some review online, it could be either a little bias or they are comparing to a invisible unknown lens,... how can that even be a proper review? base on azamunekurone take, with all due respect, i find it misleading at some point.

here's my take on 1750 after more then a year using it (upgrade from sal1870). my review is base on actual using it, rather then review base on spec or bias talk. (and a used 16105 for a month (before i plan to buy it))

it is a lot heavier, in fact heavier then 1680 and as heavy as 18250!

the image is not worst in lowlight, optically, its not relevant. and most ppl has misconception, because once handed a F2.8 lens, they will think "wow, F2.8, means i can shoot at really low light condition", hence bring the lens to shoot at lowlight. if u were to bring a 16-105 to the SAME lowlight condition, knowing u will need another 1 stop of shutter speed(or iso boost), i think ur photo wont be any better then the 1750 at lowlight.

F4 give a HELL of sharpness, more then 1680 (sorry CZ fanboy) even more then 1680 at any aperture. not only that, the F4 will able to let u grab a shot maintaining bokeh vs 16105 @F8 to archive the same sharpness. BUT, even at F4, the corner is soft (compare to CZ, CZ wins at it has good sharp corner at all range) not sure if compare to 16105, coz i didnt thought of doing this test when i got the 16105...

noisy AF, no comment, to me, my A300 mirror slap is louder. normally, the mirror slap attract more attention then "noisy" af..... so how noisy can it be? i am not sure if dyxum review actually tested it or they just copy it from other website, but on other website review, they reviewed the canon/nikon unit which is A LOT noisier, so it does not apply to A mount unit.

the 1750 hunt better in the dark then 16105!
reason: during focusing, ur aperture is wide open all time, F2.8 whole range on 1750 vs 16-105 (let put it at F4 since the F3.5 dont last). meaning u have 1 more stop of light goes into the af sensor, which mean u can focus at 1 stop darker. and YES it is. switch back to my 1870 (and 16105) i do feel it has more difficult to AF(test both lens in my room, same lighting). to prove it future, i switch to 50 F1.4, it can focus even BETTER then 1750 at the same lighting.

F2.8 is not that soft, most review site, seriously, i do not know which F2.8 lens they comparing to... they say sigma F2.8 also soft, then how? dont tell me they comparing to another lens at F8?

the bokeh is indeed more then F4 of 16105.

rubber grip loosen over time, what i do, use doubleside tape, tape inside and warp back the rubber grip. dont worry, there is no screw under the rubber grip so they wont have to remove the rubbergrip for opening up the lens. u can even permanent glue it down if u wan. for 16105, it too will loosen up overtime, but u cant glue it down, because there is screw underneath the rubber grip require to unscrew if u ever send it for servicing.

the 16-105 soft at tele end, is not that soft. its softer to the 16-70 range, but not as soft as what u think.

both 1750 and 16105 has bad CA control vs CZ

newbieeeeee : Personally I own the 1680Z and I kinda own the 1750 tammy (its my housemates, paired with her 60D). Let me list some pros and cons of those lens in my own perspective.

1680Z
Pros
+Super sharp across the frame at its biggest aperature (f3.5-f4.5)
+Sharpness is maintained even when the aperature is stopped down
+colours are neutral and vibrant.
+Very good range (24-105mm) on cropped sensor.
+Small filter size = cheaper filters (make sure you get a good 1 to complement it, I'll personally kill someone who uses a cap ayam filter with this CZ and says that the IQ sucks!)
+Focusing is quite fast and accurate on this lens (and its less noisy compared to tammy 17-50)

cons
-Build quality: feels like an upgraded version of the 18-70mm kit lens, there is no "zeiss" feel to its build. Zoom ring will loosen considerably after heavy use (very heavy use).
-I'm being picky here but there is light fall off at biggest aperature (f3.5-f4.5) must be careful not to shoot landscapes when using these aperatures. light fall off dissappers 1 stop down.
-Not f2.8 
-Bokeh kinda harsh, don't really like it when taking portraitures, prefer the bokeh on my minolta 50mm.

1750 tammy
Pros
+f2.8!
+I hate to admit is, but like what ieR mentioned before, this lens has jawdropping sharpness at f4. (its jawdropping because its sharper than the 1680Z 
+zoom lock (good for preventing zoom creep)
+build quality is generally good (as expected from a RM1k lens as compared to the 1680Z which was and still is a big letdown!)
+better bokeh compared to the 1680Z at the same aperatures.

Cons
-Hunts the same or much more in low light when compared with the 1680Z (personally I think it hunts more compared to the CZ)
-The photos produced by this lens has a yellowish tint to it (very aparent in landscapes where the leaves on the trees appear more yellowish compared to the photos shot using the CZ)
-Has less reach compared to the CZ.
-72mm filter diameter [VC version] (huge ass lens compared to the CZ which only uses 62mm filters) = expensive filters, be it CPL or UV filters.

p.s. Take my views with a grain of salt. There are lots of variables on my judgement as I'm only using a350 which uses PDAF compared to my friends canon 60D which uses CDAF in live view, hence the slowness in AF. I always shoot using liveview so that explains the slowness in AF speed of the tammy.

I have the Tammy 17-50 as well...i would say its a good lens generally....but from my experience of using it, here is what i notice:

1) Its not sharp at F2.8
2) Its hunts for focus under low light sometimes even in normal light condition.
3) Color wise, its not as contrasty as a CZ or a G lens...so need to touch up in PP.
4) Bokeh is so so la...
5) Range is short, when u need it the most.... 
6) AF is noisy, but i don't care ler...
7) Its not so suitable for potraits ler...cause when i shoot lets say at 50mm, F4...the bokeh not so nice (like halfway thru... )....its ok though if u shoot at 50mm, F8 - F11...but i still feel the picture is abit soft.

I've been using it as my primary lens, since i only got that lens and the kitlens (18-70)  which i dont use! Hahahaha....but if i have the finances, i would get the 50mm F1.4 (for potraits) and the 70-200mm F2.8 G  for long range tele on a separate body (maybe an A850) so that it can complete the range. Tammy 17-50 on APSC is 25-70mm and 70-200mm on FF......hahahahaha.....i know abit ambitious...  
I shoot events and weddings alot...that's why i choose the set up as the above....so anybody wanna sponsor me?   

Sifusss, how much te street price for Tammy 1750 now??? Might get it later...TQ

Thx bieeee, this lens need to try kau kau, the warranty by uncle chin??

not encountering any of your statement issue...everything is built for what is was designed for...

AF? =  Loud, but who cares? video? mute it....for SLT...barely heard the AF in video in outdoors....indoors...kinna obvious la

NO yellowish Tint....filter prob?

Hi pro, i am just bought a A33.
I found a question is that, when i adjust my shutter speed faster or the aperture smaller, the sceren will become a black screen ....
I noticed this when i m trying to shoot panning....it does not work...
I am sure I am wrong on techic or setting, guys Pls help me ,teach me....
thx a lot in advance.

heard rumors...but not mine...mine pass the test...

Back focusing is d tendency for ur AF to focus on the back of the intended subject...But I've been using this lens for quite a while and I don't find this a problem. Maybe I prefer to choose my local AF points so I won't go wrong with my focusing...But this lens do find it hard to focus on some low contrast objects or scenes. U'll find this a trouble.

Bout the noise it generates during focusing..I think it's alright. Not really audible outdoor.

No need use spot also can la.

Local AF also same.