Instruction: Answer the given question by extracting information from the supporting document.

Input:
Question: The lens does not have IS. Is this critical? My camera is a Nikon D3300 which does not have IS.
Document: Sharper than any Nikon lens I've used.On a 6000 x 4000 px shot, full crop, the sharpness is amazing. There is some distortion and vignetting, but anyone who would care about such a thing should be shooting in RAW format, and therefore would be able to fix the issue in camera RAW with one click.
Also the hood is provided and easy to use, but the lens cap was very difficult to put with the hood on or off, especially in the dark. If I were to buy this lens I would get a Nikon cap just because it is better designed and easier to use. The lens flange doesn't have any sort of weather sealing either which was a bit concerning in dusty environment (I wrapped my camera and lens in a plastic bag before deploying).
There are several in depth reviews available so I just wanted to add a few impressions after using this lens compared to to my Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS lens since the two lenses might be competing for a spot in someone's camera bag.Advantages of the 18-35mm:Both are sharp lenses but the 18-35mm may have the edge. While the 17-55mm has IS, I prefer the wider aperture since it is also helpful for moving subjects and can provide shallower depth of field.
NOTE: This is a review for the Nikon mount of this lens mounted on a Nikon D7000, from an astrophotographer's perspective. The lens was rented from a local camera store, and I confirmed with them that I was the first customer to rent it. Therefore the review is accurately based on a new and unused lens as one would receive from Amazon.I recently rented this lens for a 5-night observing run on Mauna Kea in Hawaii.
Build is nice, zoom is smooth. However wish it had IS built in. This lens works well with my T2I for video.
I do like my Zeiss more, as it is an amazing lens, but I use this one 10x as much due to the focal length.I wish it had IS - but hey, can't have everything.
I thought not having IS might be an issue but it is not. I am still working to perfect my use of the zoom range for non-landscape shots but I just need to spend more time with the lens.
I was very excited when I was informed that the lens was available and I would get it in a few days. This excitement quickly turned into disappointment after taking a few shots with this lens.The first shot is very blurry. It is so bad up to the point that it is like out of focus. I said to myself: Ok, this was probably because the lens doesn&#8217;t have IS, and the shutter was just 50.
I own a 70D and purchased this to essentially replace the 18-35mm IS II. Sigma's lens of course murders the kit lens. It does indeed feel like a handful of wide primes, in optical quality and over all weight. As others have commented, it's a heavy bastard, a drastic departure from the kit lens. But I have grown accustomed to the heft.
Not sharp enough to out- resolve a 24 megapixel sensor but close enough..... Closer than any Nikon lens will take you.I have Sigma 18-35 on backorder with Adorama that I will have to cancel and I will never do business with those morons ever again.
Answer: It is not needed as this is a fast lens. You will love it.