about | support
home
 

Search Used

Sigma 17-35mm f2.8-4 EX Aspherical

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
24 161437 May 25, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
54% of reviewers $401.38
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
6.82
7.55
5.3
17_35f2_8_4EX_1_

Specifications:
Sigma's 17-35mm f2.8-4 EX is one of the EX Series lenses. It combines a fast f2.8-4 maximum aperture with ultra wide angle zoom lens of 17-35mm. It incorporates aspherical lens elements in the front, as well as rear lens groups, to correct spherical aberration. It also incorporates internal focusing to prevent deterioration of the optical quality at close distances and to eliminate rotation of the front barrel during focusing. A "perfect hood" is provided. The AF drive for Sigma SA and Canon AF S.L.R. cameras is equipped with a silent, responsive and fast Micro Hyper Sonic Motor (H.S.M.). The lens materials used in this new lens are lead and arsenic free ecological glass.


 


Page:  1 · 2 
          
Unregistered
Review Date: Jul 14, 2003 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 2 

 
Pros: Focal range. Construction seemed nice.
Cons:
Image quality. Total absence of sharpness. Heavy chromatic aberation.

I had bought this lens with my Canon 10D and a Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX DF. During the first week, I was wondering why about half of my pictures were lacking sharpness. I'm not talking about focus which was perfect. I'm talking about sharpness.

After I found out that the bad images were always coming from the 17-35, I decided to test both lenses. I took the same shot with both lenses at every single focal lenght marking and aperture combination. The 17-35 was unsharp all over the place. Not a single focal lenght-aperture combination produced decent results.

When I saw the results, I checked for reviews and found photozone.com where the 17-35 is rated pretty low. I found other reviews and comments that stated that this is probably Sigma's worst lens.

I wrapped it up and returned it.


Jul 14, 2003
Edit/Delete Message
steviem
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Review Date: Jun 15, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Quality of pics, the handling of the lens and I always wanted a ultra wide zoom lens at a near affordable price.
Cons:
82mm UV/Skylight filters are very expensive - £50 - to protect front element.

I am not a pro photographer and don't do 'big' enlargements of print film pics I take, so the quality on slide film for a pro may not be 'good enough', but if you want a 'cheap' ultra-wide angle zoom lens and won't be using it in a 'pro' bash it to bits inside a week-type of thing then this could be the lense for you.

Jun 15, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add steviem to your Buddy List  
lziering
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 20, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 746
Review Date: May 24, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Price, Light gather ability at 17mm
Cons:
Slow & noisy focus, big filter, only average sharpness

A nice lens for use on a DSLR but the focus is slow and very noisy. Sharpness is acceptable but no competion for a Canon 17-40mm. I don't know why Sigm doesn't build an "EX" lens that is really pro-quality instead of just taking an average lens a using crinckle paint on it.

May 24, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add lziering to your Buddy List  
gl47
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 20, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: May 20, 2003 Recommend? no | Price paid: $389.00 | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: Price and features
Cons:
Image and build quality, also seems to underexpose on D30/ D60

Price and features


Image and build quality, also seems to underexpose on D30/ D60

New out of the box my lens exhibits a ‘Clicking’ and scraping sound between 21mm to 30mm. Also very soft and at some distances (about 2m) auto focus seems to land about .5m beyond the focal point.

Also most images seem about ½ to 1 stop underexposed.

Overall seems on a par or less then a Tamron AF 19-35mm (only $178).

When I returned it I found three out of four lenses to have the same clicking or scraping sound. and two customers complaining about similar problems with soft focus or zoom problems.


May 20, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add gl47 to your Buddy List  
colinr
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 10, 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 105
Review Date: May 14, 2003 Recommend? no | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 2 

 
Pros: Lens quality
Cons:
Build quality

I have had this lens for over two years and the HSM motor has failed twice.

I have 5 other Canon lens in use, all 'L' series' on the same cameras, over this period without any problems.

I won't have the lens repaired but will use the money towards a Canon wide angle lens.



May 14, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add colinr to your Buddy List  
dobrodude
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 256
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $245.00 | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: cheap, fair results with proper use
Cons:
kind of soft wide open, but at 5.6 or better at the wide end,it's a good lens 5/25/03- sharpness, color issues

I rated this lens great because of the price and quality of the lens itself.
The photos I've taken with it have all been acceptable, sharpness and color wise. Some even excellent, under ideal conditions. What I would expect from any well made, high quality lens.
The body and mechanical parts probably won't hold up under a photojournalists demand for years of happy use, but for an average to frequent shooter, it's fine.
It focuses quick and accurately at all focal lenths and the glass is aspheric and multicoated. At 17mm it's a bit "barrelly", but I sort of expected that.
It's good enough for pro use, but it's toughness is still a question???

5/25/03- update.... The lens, after more regular use, has proven to be shy on the sharpness with my d-slr. Color rendition is pretty sad as well, in spots?!?
It's pretty fair for film use, but has some real issues for digital for some reason.
I'm selling it and buying the nikkor 18-35. I don't think the loss of 1mm will make a difference, and I know the quality should make a big difference.
As far as recommending it, I'd say if you find one under 250, it might worth taking a look, but 300+, forget it. Save a few bucks and get the real thing.


8/6/03 update.....it's good for 5x7 color/b&w print work, but one of the worst wide angle lenses I've ever used for shooting chromes. I gotta get rid of this thing......


Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add dobrodude to your Buddy List  
stan_g
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 8, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 232
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $439.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Fast focus, fast aperture, small & light
Cons:
82mm filter

Ordered this lens when it came out 3-4 years ago but was on back order for so long, I settled on a Canon 17-35L. Later upgraded to a 16-35L.
My son got a used D30 and asked me to get a lens for it and I got a Sigma 17-35HSM. Haven't tested it on a film camera yet but on my 10d it is great.


Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add stan_g to your Buddy List  
GrizzlyMike
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 23, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 403
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? no | Price paid: $725.00 | Rating: 2 

 
Pros: Compact and light weight
Cons:
Cheap feel, soft and not the best color rendition

I purchased this lens over a year and a half ago from Adorama. My first sample was very soft and the images murky. I returned the lens and received another copy which was just as bad. I finally went through the hassle of returning the lens and went with the Canon 17-35 instead.

The main problem was with the detail and color this lens produced. The colors were runny and murky and the sharpness was more in line with what one would expect from a cheap $125 consumer zoom. I was very dissapointed. Perhaps I just got 2 bad samples and this is the exception rather than the rule but it left a bad taste in my mouth for Sigma lenses. Never again.


Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add GrizzlyMike to your Buddy List  

   



Sigma 17-35mm f2.8-4 EX Aspherical

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
24 161437 May 25, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
54% of reviewers $401.38
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
6.82
7.55
5.3
17_35f2_8_4EX_1_


Page:  1 · 2