about | support
home
 

Search Used

Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
135 425007 Apr 3, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
88% of reviewers $380.93
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.75
9.40
8.3
24_70EX_med_1_

Specifications:
The Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF is one of several new products to be introduced at PMA 2001 by Sigma Corporation of Japan (2-3-15, lwado-Minami, Komae-shi, Tokyo) This lens covers focal lengths from 24mm ultra wide angle to 70mm medium telephoto and provides a large f2.8 aperture at all focal lengths. Its design employs three (3) aspherical lens elements to minimize spherical aberration, astigmatism and sagittal comma flare. The use of two (2) SLD (The Special Low Dispersion) glass elements results in excellent correction of chromatic aberration and provides a high level of optical performance and 24-70rnm F2.8 EX ASPHERICAL DG DF has high contrast and resolution. The lens also incorporates Dual Focus mechanism. It is easy to hold the lens, since the focusing ring does not rotate during auto focusing, and yet provides a wide focus ring for easy to use manual focus. Since the front of the lens does not rotate, it allows the use of a flower shaped "Perfect Hood" and facilities the use of polarizing filters. The lens materials used in this new lens are lead and arsenic free ecological glass.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9  next
          
Sung Kim
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 12, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Apr 12, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $390.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Fixed F2.8, Fair Resolution and Sharpness, Great Build Quality
Cons:
Heavy and Big, Rather small Lens Hood, AF noise quite loud, Rather soft at 2.8-4.0, weak contrast.

My first lens except 350d's bundle.
Amazing product compared to Genuine Canon 24-70 in price to performance rate.
Except the fact that the lens is quite heavy and big,
this is a great canon substitute sigma lens for general use of your photography.

However, you should be little bit skilled at photoshop retouching because this lens does lack some saturation and contrast.
After retouching, your image will look just great.

I highly recommend this lens for any person who's into the photography with tight budget.


Apr 12, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Sung Kim to your Buddy List  
kenshin
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 31, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 669
Review Date: Jan 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $220.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: relatively cheap, good build, sharp and contrasty enough for my needs
Cons:
loud AF, not an internal zoom, 82mm filter size

I've owned 2 different copies of the newer Macro version and both were quite sharp wide open at both ends. Build is quite solid and since both my copies were purchased used from the B&S boards, I never had a problem with a tight zoom ring.

AF is fast even in low-light, just have to make sure that you focus on something with contrast or it will hunt but most lenses will do that so I don't think it's a limitation of this lens in particular. No front or back focusing issues either. AF is loud though. I wish they would add HSM to this lens, would make it so much nicer.

I sold my first one cause I replaced it with the Canon 24-105L but recently picked up another one at a nobrainer price cause I decided I still needed a zoom in this range for relatively low light indoor shots. Only other ping against it is the large 82mm filter size. Good filters for this size ain't cheap unfortunately.

But for its range and capabilities I think it's a fantastic value. Sigma does have an issue with quality control though but once you're able to get a decent copy (or have one recalibrated by Sigma), you won't be disappointed.


Jan 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add kenshin to your Buddy List  
Max Err
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 2, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 2
Review Date: Dec 30, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: good image quality
Cons:
i wish the hood were bigger.

a very good alternative to the canon version if you are money conscious or just think that 800 bucks you saved could buy you another good lens.

1st copy i tried was defective, 2d perfect. the reportedly slow AF is quite good nontheless (on 400d).

82mm filters (uv and cpl) will add 150+$ to the price.

i give it a 9 which it well deserves as 10 I normally reserve for really outstanding lenses (which its canon counterpart wouldn't get from me)


Dec 30, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Max Err to your Buddy List  
Prodigal Son
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 56
Review Date: Dec 17, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $465.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Price, built quality, image quality
Cons:
push-pull manual focus, somewhat soft at 2.8

I received a bad copy of this lens (front focusing) and decided to save my review until it was fixed. When I received it back from Sigma, it was perfect. This lens is sharp and has very good contrast. I know the focusing is a little slower than lenses without HSM (USM), but not as slow as some would lead you to believe. The focus noise has not been an issue for me (and I shoot at church events). The minor quirks about this lens are just that, minor. The lens really wins when you consider that it's Canon equivalent is about $800 more. That makes this lens a great value. I had a chance to shoot the same subject in the same lighting, with the same camera with both the Sigma and Canon versions of this lens. The Canon version had the edge over the Sigma by a very slight margin (not enough to justify the price difference). Before I saw the results, I was all prepared to sell my Sigma and purchase the Canon, but the image quality is so close that I decided to spend the money on another lens. I recently took this lens on vacation on a cruise, and the pics from it are just fabulous. If I were a professional and required every little edige that I could get to take good pictures, I would have purchased the Canon, but since I'm a amateur who just enjoys taking pictures, the Sigma is a terrific lens for the money. If you are a person who simply enjoys taking and sharing pictures instead of a pixel-peeper, then this lens is certainly worthy of your consdieration.

Dec 17, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Prodigal Son to your Buddy List  
Steven Myatt
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 29, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 29, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $389.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very sharp lens. Outstanding price. Excellent build.
Cons:
Size & weight. Front focusing is a common problem with this lens.

I've read other reviews that complained about the "softness" of the lens wide-open. I've also seen reviews that identified performance at the 70mm setting as being "sub-standard." I've had the lens for about 8 months and I've never experienced these problems. So, to find out "what's what", I tested the lens against the Canon 50mm 1.8 II on a nice sunny day using my Canon 30D.
At f1.8 the Canon was terrible... no surprise. At f2.8 it sharpened up a bit... but was still inferior to the Sigma (at 50mm) wide open. At f4 the Sigma was still better and the image was becoming VERY sharp for both lenses. At f5.6 and beyond, it was hard to tell them apart. It appeared that both lenses were pushing the resolving limit of the 30D sensor.
I then checked out the performance at 24mm & 70mm. I didn't see much difference from the 50mm performance. At f2.8 the image was nice. At f5.6 to f11, the image was stunning.
This lens has great contrast & color and I've never seen signs of vignetting at any aperature. Focus speed is good and it never seems to hunt... even in low light. CAs are well controlled also. Others may not be pleased with their copy of the lens, but I'm totally satisfied.
The only problem I've had with this lens is the "front-focusing" issue. The first thing I did when I got the lens was test the focusing accurracy. Yep, my copy was focusing in front of the target. I sent the lens back to Sigma for calibration and I'm happy to say it came back in about a week AND it was fixed correctly. I think Sigma knows about this problem and knew exactly what to do to fix it.
Bottom line: For the money, this lens is VERY hard to beat. The optics are supurb (on my copy) and the build quality is very nice. The biggest problem I have with this lens is just that: it's big and it seems to draw attention when I walk around with it. Oh well, I can live with it.


Nov 29, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Steven Myatt to your Buddy List  
David Plummer
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 11, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Excellent build quality - very sharp from f4-22, good contrast.
Cons:
A little soft at f2.8. 82mm filters.

I've been using this lens for about 6 months now and on a Canon 5D it certainly has impressed me. Build quality is excellent and the definition isn't far behind the Canon L glass. OK it's a little soft at f2.8, but from f4 to f22 the resolution is excellent, with the optimum being f8-11. Contrast is punchy, giving images that look vibrant and detailed. Autofocus is quick and accurate with hardly any hunting. The 82mm filter size is a bit of a pain, but this is a lot of lens for the money so I will forgive Sigma on that one.

Nov 11, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add David Plummer to your Buddy List  
Jim de Kort
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 29, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 29, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: f2.8, zoom range from wide-angle to portrait. Sharp in center and also very good to the edges on a FF.
Cons:
Slow AF compared to Canon USM lenses and is stopped easily when you touch the focus ring. Zoom ring is too rigid between 30 and 24mm.

I've had a canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 for about 4 years on my 10D and was very happy. I have just switched to a 5D and have been playing with available-light shots where I wanted more than the 4.0/4.5 of the canon and still have wide-angle so I could use it as an all-round lens.

I was weery at first about sigma, but I was not willing to spend $1000 extra for the 24-70L or $400 more for a second-hand 24-70L. After getting home I setup the tripod and tested the 24-70EX to my 28-105 at 28/35/50/70mm and also my 17-40L at 28 and 35mm. Openings at 4.5/5.6/8/11...

The 24-70EX was very noticeably sharper at 4.5 than my 28-105 canon. No challenge. The 17-40L beat the 24-70EX in terms of sharpness and contrast, but the difference was not so great as with thr 28-105. This lens will stay in my bag for the next few years and the 28-105 will be sold off. A good step up for me.

Only downside is build quality. Although it is an "EX" it is still plasticy to feel. The zoom ring is very tight around 24-30mm and I always have to remove my hand from the lens when the AF is seeking, else if a finger is laying on the focus ring, the AF will not move anymore.


Oct 29, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Jim de Kort to your Buddy List  
Ian Sayers
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 15, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 15, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Well built, Sharp from f4 onwards, Reliable focusing
Cons:
Weight, 2.8 at the long end too soft

I have had this lens for about a year but have recently bought the Tamron 28-75 2.8, with the intention of selling the sigma. My main complaints are with the softness at 2.8 at 70mm, and the weight, which often means a lighter, less able lens is on my camera when it matters. I know I am asking a lot for sharpness at 2.8/long end but I now have both lens to compare, and can confirm that the Tamron is sharper wide open.

The Tamron is also unbelivably light and compact, so I can carry it (atached to my 20D), my 3 year old daughter, her toys, and whatever my pregnant wife needs me to carry when we are out. Perhaps if I were a profesional photographer with the time to go out on my own I might use the Sigma a bit more.

However I have decided to keep both lenses as the Sigma scores over the Tamron in a number of ways. Most importintly the focusing on the sigma is much more reliable, the tamron can be a bit hit and miss. Additionally the photos taken with the Tamron have a slightly harsh, non flatering quality compared with the sigma. This may be because of the colour transmission, the light over the past few weeks, or possibly the sharpness itself. Finally the build quality of the sigma makes using it a joy, and sometimes people just expect you to turn up with a big lens (nobody ever takes me seriously with my 50mm f1.4, even though it gives the best shots).

I can recomend this lens to any serious photographer, but would suggest looking at the Tamron 28-75 for those wanting portabilty, or maximum sharpness wide open at the long end.


Oct 15, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ian Sayers to your Buddy List  
Christopher-J
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 9, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 320
Review Date: Oct 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: PRICE!!! BUILD!!! Includes a hood! Nice matte black color.
Cons:
As everyone has said 82mm filter size! Sometimes unable to focus in dark.

At less then half the price of say a Canon 24-70 f2.8 L lens this lens is a pretty good alternative. It is not the best alternative but pretty much the only for the camera brand alternative with exception to maybe the 28-70 from Tamron.

The lens is well built and does provide very good images. It does however have to search in low light. A condition that isn't all that rare to non Professional series lenses.

Sharpness is not a question with this lens. It is very sharp. The ease of use is good also. And I like how the lens starts off at 70mm and goes down to 24mm as usually I zoom to the longer end more then the wide end, it saves me micro seconds! That's right microseconds!

Overall it is a very good lens for anyone who either doesnt use this range much (eg picky pixel peepers) or a AWESOME lens for beginner or photographer on a budget. Even a advanced photographer should most likely like this lens.

In Canada the warrenty is 10years! In the USA I hear it is only 4 but amazing to get anything more then 1 year in this day of age from anyone. And their customer service I hear is also supurb!

A great alternative to the expensive lenses from Canon or Nikon. Try it out, you might just like it.


Oct 8, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Christopher-J to your Buddy List  
RayHenry
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 8
Review Date: Oct 6, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Price, value for dollar
Cons:
Heavy, noisy

Been shooting with this lens on my 30D for about a week now. Purchased it based on (and despite) reviews found on this forum. I had the opportunity to shoot with the lens and review the images prior to purchase. I love this lens. Sure, it's heavy and noisy. But it focuses fast, even in low light.

I have no problems that others have had with their lenses. This thing is crisp & clear, and colours are very good. There is very little quality loss at either end of the zoom, regardless of f-stop. What little loss there is I've been able to easily clean up in Photoshop. My largest print at the tiem of this writing is 24x36, and that's crip & clear.

This is rapidly becoming my walk-around lens, despite it's weight & noise. I find it's a joy to use, and love the images it produces.

I had planned on purchasing the Canon EF 28-135 F3.5-5.6 IS USM, but when I compared image qaulity, this won hands down (both were about the same shelf price).

Price was a factor in my purcahse, and I don't think that I could have gotten any better qaulity for my dollar. I now recommend this lens to anyone that brings up the subject of gear.

The negatives of this lens (heavy & noisy) are more than offset by quality and price. The funky MF/AF issue and the reversed zoom never bother me in the least. I find I can go back and forth between my Canon lenses and this Sigma without even thinking about it.

If you're considering this lens, find a store that will let you fire a few shots off on your camera, and see the results yourself.


Oct 6, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RayHenry to your Buddy List  
geezer
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 3, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Review Date: Oct 3, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: 2.8, price, build
Cons:
front focus times 2 copies, weight, flare

two copies now and both front focus exactly the same. are others having this same problem and how do you get sigma to fix it?

i'm in australia.

i got this lens cause i wanted a good portrait lens and wedding lens and 2.8 was a good idea, now i'm thinking of getting something else but dont know what??? any sugestions welcome


Oct 3, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add geezer to your Buddy List  
ukcolin
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 12, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 30, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp images, very sharp when stopped down a bit, built like a tank. Good value for money.
Cons:
Built like a tank. Big filter size, noisy motor.

I tried this as an alternative to my first choice Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. It is not as sharp as the Tamron but had the advantage of focusing where it was supposed to! It is big and heavy with a large filter ring of 82mm and the a/f motor is noisy. But it delivers very good sharpness overall and I find am using it more and more. Recommneded.

Sep 30, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ukcolin to your Buddy List  
td4wg
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $429.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: 2.8 good for low light, solid feel, good price, sharp.
Cons:
big filters, noisy AF.

I have the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF.

The 24-70 is usually on my camera for walkarounds. The lens is sharp and the contruction feels nice and solid. The AF is noisy but for the price i don't care. This is a great lens for the price, you won't be dissappointed with this purchase.


Sep 28, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add td4wg to your Buddy List  
Masterlook
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 17, 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 25, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent zoom at an very reasonable price. I use this lens with Fuji S2 and Nikon D2X Body's with great performance, beats even some of my (older) Nikon lenses..A bargain!
Cons:
A bit bulky.



Sep 25, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Masterlook to your Buddy List  
E Kafka
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 7, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Review Date: Sep 21, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 3 

 
Pros: Inexpensive, sturdy, well built,nice fit and finish
Cons:
Very Stiff Zoom!!! Soft, soft, soft at 2.8 to 4. Relatively noisy AF. Reasonably sharp after F4.Better than a kit lens.

Very nice looking lens and excellent finish...looks impressive. However the performance of my copy was less than stellar. AF was always hunting...a little noisy as well. My shots, even on a sturdy tripod were soft between 2.8 to 4. Very disappointing. Sharper from F4 onwards but still not great. My first Sigma and my last...for now ( I'll try to keep an open mind). 82 filter is a drag. Perhaps I got a bad copy but I cannot keep sending it back to get another one. Just ordered a Canon 24-70 2.8 L...we'll see how that one does.

Sep 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add E Kafka to your Buddy List  
marklarry28
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 20, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Review Date: Sep 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Really sharp, f2.8, nice zoom range and wide angle
Cons:
AF stiff, Filter costly, 82mm filters, AF very noise (when cannot get focus).

I got this for my Canon 20D. I just love it.

Advice --- go and buy.


Sep 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add marklarry28 to your Buddy List  

   



Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
135 425007 Apr 3, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
88% of reviewers $380.93
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.75
9.40
8.3
24_70EX_med_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9  next