Large aperture standard zoom lens provides superior performance both for Digital SLR Cameras and 35mm Film SLR Cameras
To achieve an F2.8 aperture at all focal lengths, it employs three Aspherical lens to provide optimum Aberration compensation. Two Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass elements are provided for color aberration compensation, to assure high image quality.
- -
Optimized for digital SLR cameras
It incorporates "Super Multi Layer Coating" to reduce the influence of harmful light caused by reflections from the digital image sensor.
Excellent correction of aberrations
Two SLD elements, one Glass Mold Aspherical plus two Hybrid Aspherical lenses provide excellent correction of various aberrations and a high level of optical performance.
Minimum focusing distance of 40cm
The lens has a minimum focusing distance of 40cm at all focal lengths and is capable of macro photography with a maximum magnification ratio of 1:3.8.
DF (Dual Focus) System
This lens incorporates a Dual Focus (DF) system that is designed to make the lens easy to hold during autofocusing, and yet provides a large focus ring for easy manual focusing.
Petal Type Hood
Since the front of the lens does not rotate, a Petal-type hood and circular polarizing filters can be easily used.
This is a very good fast lens for the price, it is sharp almost all though the range and. The build quality is excellent.
More in-depth review to follow shortly.
Why should you care what I think?
My relationship with this item: Editor review
Conclusions at a glance
Would you recommend this Item: Yes Pros: Sharp, price Cons: build, can be heavy
User Lens Reviews
Average user rating from: 34 user(s)
Overall rating (weighted)
3.6
Sharpness
3.7
Build Quality
3.6
AF Speed
3.6
Value for Money
3.5
Add new review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
It's hit and miss, Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
3.3
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
2.0
Value for Money
4.0
When this lens is on... it's really sharp! Problem is, when it misses its completely blurry and the pictures are worthless (which comes out to about 20% of the shots). I don't use this lens very much because I just can't rely on it. Several nice crisp shots followed by one or two really soft ones. That changes when I'm shooting with a flash... it focuses great and consistently.
I have never had much success with this lens, it will either back focus or hunts and hunts and then when it locks in the subject it is blurred and out of focus. At first I thought it was something I was doing wrong, but after many attempts to use it, I can't afford the risk of it not focusing as fast and accurately as I need it. I have kept in my bag, but now I need this lens and hope to get it fixed if at all possible while it is still under warranty. I would not recommend this to a friend, I would not purchase this lens again.
I had researched this lens for almost 4 months before actually deciding to purchase. Like a lot of people that just bought their 7D with the kit lens, I was secretly wishing I had the funds to purchase the Canon 24-70 f2.8L. Unfortunately that lens is a sizable investment when building your kit on a budget.
Thats when the Sigma came in. Sigma has a few lenses in this focal length, all with the same speed (f2.8). One at about a $350 price point, one with an $800 price point, and this one at about $550. The lower price point could be compared to the low end Canon lenses. Fairly quality glass for the price you pay, but very under built (plastic). The higher end lens can be compared to almost the L. Very well built, internal zoom, and HSM for quiet and fast zoom. This lens could be compared to a mid level Canon EF lens. Very well built, just lacking the bells and whistles of the high-end version.
I had a chance to test this lens out on Manhattan Beach in California, and the first thing I noticed was how sharp the lens is between f4-5.6. The focus at f2.8 is clean as well, but does have some soft edges shooting closer to the 70mm range. Still very much a quality image coming out of a lens at less then half the price of the L.
The Sigma 24-70 EX DG Macro has an interesting way of getting into Manual focus. There are two switches, one near the base of the lens and the is the focus ring itself that you pull back to engage. Not too big of en issue when shooting video really since you have no need to engage the auto-focus in video mode, but can take some getting used to when switching back forth from video to still.
This also is big. Not quite as big as the L, but very close. It also has matte-like finish that really looks slick. I love the shape of this lens as well. Really looks kickass on the 7D body. Be prepared to drop a little extra cash on the filters however as the thread is 82mm. The upside though is all the filters you buy for this lens, you could actually use a step-down ring and not have any worries of Vignetting as far as I know.
PROS: Very solid build, fast focus, fast speed (constant f2.8) CONS: No IS (but neither does the current L), slightly soft edges at 2.8/70mm, Large filters needed
If you don't have enough cash to drop on the L series lens, but still want a quality lens, absolutely go for this lens. Very happy with this purchase.
Great range, but a touch on the soft side, Friday, 12 March 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
3.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
5.0
i purchased this lens for the lower aperture, and the range of focal length. I use this lens exclusively on my canon 5d, shooting RAW and using the back button to control focus points, and the first time i used it for a shoot, i noticed that the images came out a tad Bit soft. after working with it some more, and getting a feel for how it performs best, i have come to trust it more. however, i would not recommend using this lens when shooting in a low-light situation, unless you plan on shooting manual focus.
I did only about 30 test shots with this before deciding to return it. Not one picture was in focus. I do know enough about depth-of-field to rule that out as the problem. Even at f/2.8, there should be some sharp feature somewhere within the focus rectangle in the viewfinder. There wasn't. Not even once. I've never had this problem with any other lens, ranging from expensive Nikkor primes and zooms to inexpensive Tamron ultrazooms. Lenses have to work, straight out of the box. This one didn't.
At 70 mm the quality diminishes dramatically, Wednesday, 02 September 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.3
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
5.0
I am reasonably content with this lens. But beware, at 70 mm is virtually unusable if you are wishing to take quality portrait shots i.e., "fringing" or a cloudy haze around the edges is very noticeable at f2.8 (If you close the aperture down to f +5. less fringing but also less "bokeh" effect) But i suppose that is to be expected from a zoom lens. If you are concerned with detail or low abberations don't trust the lense after about 55 mm
Have taken 20 by 30 poster shots e.g.,(400 ISO 40mm f3.2 1/30 canon XT rebel) for a local theatre where the colors and detail were very impressive e.g., can see picked threads/fiber in the costumes (almost too good). If you really desire to see how this lens performs, go to the pbase website... you can search by lens/camera used etc.
After 2 copies, I've given up on trying to get a sharp copy. Both copies I had came with focusing issues. If you have a d300 or a d700, or a d3, you can tune the lens with the camera itself, but without those bodies, you're basically out of luck!
I understand it is hard to compare a 580 dollars lens with the nikon's 1600 dollar 24-70mm equivalent, but unfortunately, just based on sharpness or build quality, this lens doesn't hold a candle with the nikon.
Instead, I'm going to try to get my hands on a 35-70mm f2.8 Nikon push pull.
A couple positive things I noticed about this lens: -The colors seemed pretty nice -The focusing mechanism seemed pretty good, and quiet -The zooming was horrible on the 1st copy, and nice and smooth for the 2nd copy -The 82mm front element looks pretty intimidating and impressive
Although I am clearly not happy with this sigma lens, sigma does make great lenses. I had a sigma 10-20 in the past and it was great. And, I am drooling about getting my hands on the sigma 50mm f1.4.
I purchased this lens on my way out of town to shoot a wedding. I had some of my equipment stolen and my Canon 16-35mm f2.8 L, Canon 24-105mm f4 L and Canon 1Ds Mark II were among some of the higher end items taken. I used my 5D back up body but needed a low app. lens for this indoor wedding with a mid area of coverage. The lens is ok in day light but once you begin to test the evening and darkness of a church, the picture quality decreases. The lens is not a crisp picture at all, but the biggest problem I found was the lens creep. If you are shooting up at a building and have it extended, it will quickly push itself back down. Same holds true when it is being held facing down or around your neck. You will notice the lens has crept out to full extension. I have since had my business insurance cover the cost of my lost equipment and I have this lens on craigslist now. I gave it a 2 because of quality and build. If you are not worried about your picture quality all the time than save the money on this lens instead of getting a L series Canon lens. I have tried not to venture from Canon lenses themselves and now I know why. Hope this helps. If you are new to photography and have a budget it is a good range, but if your selling a 8x10 print for over $70.00, it needs to be justified.
This lens is great for the price. It's sharp, fast and the colors are excellent. The only draw back is it is heavy. After wearing it around your neck for a few hours you can really feel it. But it's all worth it. It produces perfect pictures.
As a wedding photographer, I've rented the Canon version but can't afford to buy it at over $1,100. So I bought this less expensive lens without testing it first.
The problem I'm having is focus. About 40% of the shots are not in focus. I only use the lens for low light situations and prefer the 24-105mm IS lens for most other situations. I'm not sure if there is a problem with the lens I received or if it's an inherent problem with all the 24-70mm lenses by Sigma.
Now the lens stays in the bag while I use a 50mm prime for most low light situations, it focuses better in low light situations and it's always sharp.
Not a bad lens, a little soft, but very affordable, Thursday, 19 March 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
3.0
I bought this lens for exactly what it is. An inexpensive, fast, wide to normal zoom. This was my first non-Canon lens and I was pretty impressed overall by the value of this lens. I'm obsessed by sharp photos though, so in the end, it didn't meet what I needed and I sent it back to Amazon. Please read on though. Although this lens isn't right for me, it might be right for you! Everything camera related is subjective. I really like this lens' color output, you may hate it. I think it's soft, you may find it perfectly sharp. There's also differences between copies of lenses. Just because I rate it a four star does not mean it's not going to be exactly what you are looking for.
The build quality seems good, it feels solid in your hands and the focus and zoom rings have enough, but not too much resistance. I see no zoom creep, but that may happen after some usage. There's a zoom lock though so that will not be too much of a problem. It's substantial, but not nearly as heavy as other lenses in this range I've used. I'm not a huge fan of the finish, it seems like it will wear off easily, but only time will tell. Comes with a case and petal-type hood, which is always nice.
On viewing my first shots with this lens, I was immediately impressed by the color output. Reds especially seem to pop. Supposedly this lens has special coatings that make images look better taken with digital cameras, I can't argue, I like what I see. I was using custom white balance set with each lens I tested this against and I preferred the color from this lens the best.
It was in looking at the sharpness of each lens where this one didn't come close. Again, sharpness is subjective, and it will also vary from copy to copy, but the output from this lens was not even close to to the Canon EF-S 17-55 IS when both were stopped down to f8 and f11. What I found is that this lens is fairly soft wide open; no surprise there, most lenses are soft wide open. It's actually sharper than I would have expected wide open. However, stopping it down to f4, f5.6 and f8 did very little to increase the sharpness. The lenses I tested it against typically got sharper though this one stayed fairly soft.
So, to me, that means it's very usable at f2.8 if I have to shoot at wide open to capture motion or work in so-so light. The problem is, it doesn't get any sharper in better lighting conditions where I can stop it down. I can deal with it being not so sharp wide open, but I don't accept the fact I can't get it any sharper by stopping it down.
Is that a problem with the copy I got? Maybe. I tested both on auto focus and manually focusing with the same result. Was I willing to take the chance to send it back to Sigma to be calibrated and possibly miss the window to return it? No. I've now accepted the fact I'm going to have to spend the big bucks on an "L" lens to get the sharpness I want.
Now I need to mention something. What I see as sharp and what you see as sharp may be quite different. I run my monitor at 1680x1050 and it's 18" from my face. If you run your monitor at 800x600 you will probably be perfectly happy with this lens.
4x6 prints from a photo from this lens vs the $1200 "L" lens by Canon are not going to show a dramatic difference, and I doubt 90% of people would ever notice a difference in sharpness. I happen to be in the 10% so I returned this lens and will buy the expensive one. Please understand, that's just me and I'm not you.
Although I returned this lens, I can tell you that it's a very good lens that almost anyone would be happy with. I give it four stars because I think the vast majority of people considering it would be happy with it. I take away a star because those wanting tack sharp photos will be disappointed.
Having used both the Canon 24-70L and this lens, I can safely say the Sigma wins hands down. The optic quality is as good, if not more sharp than the Canon. The focus is fast, and no where near as loud as I was expecting based on other reviews; it's much quieter than the shutter of my 40D. Shooting directly into the sun, or with the sun somewhere in the frame has produced little to no flare. This is a must have lens; save yourself several hundred dollars and get a copy of this rather than the 24-70L.
price great... quality... not so much, Tuesday, 03 February 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
3.5
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
3.0
One of six of my lenses... The clutch is stupid. Seriously, it hunts and flares/ghosts in the weirdest way. I mean I use it for travel and wedding stuff, the images when the work are great. and I can't really complain overall, but rethink, maybe spending some more for a better build quality is a good idea. Sigma just announced the second edition of this lens... Look it up, its HSM, with better coating. I will say this, its a really ruggid lens. I took a spill and caught myself only on the glass, off the dirt in Africa. I had kids licking, throwing rocks and dangling off the lens. Its still best kind. So for travel or a beater lens, absolutely perfect, (minus the HSM) but for weddings, or portraits... room for improvement. I've been using this lens for over a year
Nice lens. Although a little bit heavy, it is sturdy, fast, and looks good on your camera. However, mine had some serious front focusing problem.
Considering price/performance, this is a great lens. But keep in mind that you might have to send it back to Sigma for Calibration which takes about over two weeks.
