 |
|
|
cordellwillis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 24, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4848
|
|
Review Date: Jun 24, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very nice build especially considering the price paid. Image quality is very nice. Lens is sharp and focus is fairly quick in low light situations. I can't complain about it considering what I paid.
|
|
Cons:
|
HSM would make the focusing faster. I wish it had internal barrel movements instead of external.
|
|
|
I originally picked this lens up because I wanted something a little wider than my 35L 1.4 and to cover those times I didn't want to carry all of my primes. I almost turned it down but for $200 I could not resist.
I used it for a wedding a few weeks after purchasing it. I was hesitant especially during the first dance (low light), but it focused fast and the images are sharp.
I've read a couple of reviews about contrast, but who cares when you're dealing with digital.....just bump up the constrast to your liking.
Anyway, this is a very nice lens and I would compare it favorably to Canon's 24-70 2.8L and Tamron's 28-75 2.8.
BTW, I did have the Tammy but I needed something wider than 28. The build quality of the Sigma is much better than the Tammy and is VERY close or even with the Canon.
|
|
 Jun 24, 2008
|
|
wrwhite76
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 29, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 51
|
|
Review Date: Jun 19, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp (even wide open). Small, light. Good focal range. Build Quality. Cheap.
|
|
Cons:
|
no HSM
|
|
|
Highly recommended
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008
|
|
hakli
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 11, 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp from F4 at all focal lengts. Aperture F2.8 is usable, but lacking of contrast. Accurate, vivid colors, nice bokeh. My main lens for portrait snaps. Really cost-effective! And no vignetting&bad distortion.
|
|
Cons:
|
Bit sensitive for flare, lacking of contrast at F2.8
|
|
I bought this from second-hand-market. I was impressed about sharpness and color vividy. My main lens for partys, weddings etc.
This is full frame lens, so wide angle is not so wide, but lack of vignetting and distortion 
Really cheap F2,8 zoom lens and good one. At German market, lowest price is 224 euros (new), and I paid 200 euros, half year old from second-hand-market.
|
|
|
Jun 11, 2008
|
|
LUHAMER
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 2, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 40
|
|
Review Date: May 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $299.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp, even better than the previous version 24-70mm. Well built body.
|
|
Cons:
|
Opposite zoom ring direction, need time to get used to.
|
|
|
The image quality is much much higher than what you paid. I believe this is the cheapest f2.8 lens you can find in the market with good quality optic image and a well built body. I'm very happy with it using on my 400D. It also compatiable with full frame for your future upgrade. Highly recommand.
|
|
|
May 2, 2008
|
|
cDur
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: May 1, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp (even wide open). Small, light. Good focal range. Build Quality. Cheap. Performed admirably even next to the 24-70L.
|
|
Cons:
|
No HSM. Not as good as the Nikon 17-55....but that's to be expected.
|
|
|
This is the lens I use most often. It can sometimes be a bit soft at 2.8, but it's not bad. When it's past f/4 it's super sharp. It's also cheap. I've had the lens for about a year now, and it's been dropped a few times and used more than my other lenses, and it's held up quite well. Definitely recommended.
|
|
|
May 1, 2008
|
|
terry warne
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 27, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price build quality tack sharp copy
|
|
Cons:
|
none at the price
|
|
|
Happy at the price sure not a L lens but at this price who cares. Granted no usm but its quick enough for most shots some say the loss of 10 up the top end of this zoom is an issue but I say use your feet! This lens feels and makes the balance on my 30D feel right.
Image quality on my copy is sharp and even at 2.8 it produces good images I feel that this is a under rated lens by the photographic community. Yes I would like an L at this range but I cant afford it so I bought what I could afford
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2008
|
|
Andrew Ikeda
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 7, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $190.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build quality. Excellent value. Reasonably sharp, even at 2.8.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not very wide on a cropped body. Somewhat noisy when focusing, compared to HSM/USM lenses.
|
|
|
I purchased my copy of this lens through Cameta Camera and used it for about 6 months before selling it recently on eBay. Previously I had been using a EF 50 f/1.4 with my 10D. Once I got the lens, I found myself using it more frequently than the 50.
Overall, I was very happy with the lens in terms of build, image quality and responsiveness. And the price is hard to beat.
My gripes (other than the ones mentioned in the summary) are relatively minor:
1.The lock switch. Sometimes I'd forget to lock it, and find the lens extended in the bag. At other times, I'd forget to unlock it. So I'd have to fumble a bit to unlock it, which sometimes made me miss a shot.
2. The lens cap. It has a tendency of coming off. Sigma needs to rework the design so it stays on snugly.
|
|
|
Mar 5, 2008
|
|
Steffen L
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 13, 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, bookeh, build quality, colours, minimum focal distance
|
|
Cons:
|
heavy
|
|
|
This lens was rated very differently by different posters, so I was courious how the lens performs in real life. This lens showed up at different places at quite huge discounts, so I decided to order one for just under 240 Euro.
When I received it I was surprised by it's decent build quality. On a Pentax K10 the lens is not only sharp, it is SHARP! Even at wide open aperture the results are excellent - on both ends of the focal range. The maximum sharpness I've found was at f 5.6 - just like they said in the good old days: "maximum sharpness is 2 step down from maximum aperture" ;-)
The bookeh is very decent. All my testpictures have a naturally look and almost no CA. One poster mentioned a yellowish colour tint, which I can not reproduce. The colours are naturally and clear, but not as bold as with some new digital lenses. This is definitly a pro for the 24-60.
When I mention the weight as a con then this is compared to the lightweight lenses such as Pentax kit lens 18-55mm or the Sigma 3.5-5.6/18-50. But the weight of about 500 gram isn't anything to worry about for me. But for some people it might be a little heavy.
Together with the Sigma 10-20 and the Pentax 50-135 this lens is part of my every day equipment.
Maybe I've got a good copy of this lens, but I can recommend it to all photographers who prefere image quality to lightweight equipment.
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2008
|
|
Dirk Hiemstra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 22, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 28, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, bookeh, speed
|
|
Cons:
|
Range
|
|
|
Bought mine second hand for € 120. Cheapest new price is around € 240 in Europe. Fantastic lens for my style of family pictures (indoor portraits). A little soft at 2.8, sharp from 3.2, extremely sharp from 4.0 eevn in the corners ! The best I have seen in the priceclass up to € 500,- in this range. Allthough the range could be a little wider (+10 on both sides will do) I find this an extremely useful 2.8 lense. The little quality difference with Nikons 17-55 2.8 will be completely equalised by the big price difference. There is no cheaper way to enter the lightgroup of 2.8 users.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2007
|
|
Zsolt L.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 26, 2007
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 26, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Handy focal range, constant aperture, superb built and image quality for the money paid (350$).
|
|
Cons:
|
As a Pentax user I only have one: no aperture ring, so I cannot use it on my old film cameras such as MX or ME. I have though a suspicion that there are two version: an old with aperture ring and the new without. Anyone has info on this particular issue?
|
|
|
I bought this lens a couple of months ago giving up my resistance against AF lenses. I needed it for practical reasons so did not put much consideration into my decision. All I needed is a 24-something focal range, definitely Sigma lens with good, wide aperture for my Pentax *istD. After quickly having gone through a couple of reviews I opted for this lens (not if there was more option, as Pentax do not make these focal ranges any more, and Sigma offers only a few).
So back to this lens: nice performance, sharp pictures even on *istD (which is known to be a bit soft concerning its image processing) very good colours.
I cannot comment much on its AF performance as I have nothing to compare to. If I need pro level image quality I use old MF Pentax and Zeiss primes, but I can tell that this Sigma is surprisingly close to some of them. Seems that AF accurately supports the image quality of the lens.
One more thing: many people miss the extra 10mms compared to its big brotha', but not me. If you have ever used an old Helios 2/58 lens you know what I mean. 60mm is fair enough in most cases.
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2007
|
|
Kevin M
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1774
|
|
Review Date: Dec 18, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Image Quality
|
|
Cons:
|
None - considering the price paid compared to the competition
|
|
|
Recently acquired the Sigma 24-60 f/2.8 EX for travelling. All my other lenses are primes but so far I have been agreeably surprised by the 24-60's excellent image quality.
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2007
|
|
BenoitLAFAURIE
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 21, 2006
Location: France
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Aug 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Glass quality, sharp from f/2.8, 77mm diameter filters (like on my Sigma 10-20mm and my Canon 70-200mm), price, Sigma's after sales customer service
|
|
Cons:
|
Originally front focusing with my Canon 20D, slow and very noisy autofocus, limited focal range (24-60mm), the lens extends when zooming, no full time autofocus manual overriding, crap lens cap
|
|
|
I bought first the Sigma 10-20mm f/4.0-5.6 EX DC HSM for my Canon 20D because of the good reviews and awards it got everywhere. I have been very happy with that lens since.
So when thinking about buying a standard lens, I was keen to go for another Sigma. I didn't choose the 24-70mm f/2.8 because of the larger size of filters required, and I went for the 24-60mm f/2.8 EX DG instead.
Out of the box, it showed a noticeable front focusing. I brought it back to the shop, it was sent back at no cost to the factory to be calibrated on the 20D. It came back with a spot on focusing.
I have had no problem with this lens since, and the picture quality is very very good. It is sharp from f/2.8 and razor sharp from f/3.5, and the colours are natural.
The main concern is the autofocus, too loud if you want to be discreet to do some candid shots, too slow and sometimes hunting if you want to do actions shots. It also does not have any full time autofocus manual overriding. Sigma, please, HSM on ALL lenses!
In summary, this lens is a bargain and I the picture quality is not far behind the Canon L glasses... a pity the autofocus lets the lens down!
A very good lens to be highly recommanded!
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2007
|
|
Diane Bradley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $360.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good size for walk-around lens, nice bokeh, Super-sharp at f/4 and above, near L quality for 1/3 of the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not tack sharp at f/2.8, autofocus a bit slow, misses the mark sometimes.
|
|
|
The $1200 Canon EF 24-70mm L was just not an option for me, so I opted for this as a more compact option to the Sigma 24-70 when I bought my Canon Rebel XT body. It beats the kit lens hands down (glad I didn't waste my money on that). 90% of my subjects are non-moving, and for those this lens is a perfect walkaround, but for the few things I have to catch on the fly, I wish I had something with more reliable autofocus. But the image quality is great. I like this lens, but I wish I had looked at the Tamron 28-70mm 2.8 because I hear raves about it. Anyone considering the Sigma 24-60mm should look at both of these before deciding (or just get the Canon, if you can afford it--I couldn't)
BTW- Some might consider the 77mm filter size a drawback, but it works for me because I like to rent big glass & I can share my UV filter with my rentals.
|
|
|
Aug 9, 2007
|
|
ssnap
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 438
|
|
Review Date: May 26, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $460.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Great build quality and zoom ring feels tight
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft at 2.8-5.6, gave a yellowish tint to images, and the range is disappointing.
|
|
|
I tried this lens on my Nikon D70 and was very unimpressed with it. The images just were not as sharp as my D70 from 2.8-5.6 and from 5.6 and up image quality and sharpness matched. Color's were not as good as I hoped, all my images seemed to have some sort of yellowish tint that I'd have to correct for in PP even after pre-setting the white balance with my expo disc.
Build feels solid on this lens and much heavier than my 18-70.
I'd suggest anyone looking at this lens should take a look at other f2.8 lenses. This lens has a limited range and poor performance wide open.
|
|
|
May 26, 2007
|
|
Pete Chioanchi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
very sharp images, good contrast, vibrant colors, very smooth focusing and zooming, well built, barrel dos not wobble at all when zoom is fully extended.
|
|
Cons:
|
zoom tends to creep when walking around with it if the lock is not used, uses 77mm filters which seem to be a bit big for the lens, I would have thoght that they could get away with a 67mm.
|
|
|
I hesitated to by this lens at first because I thought that I needed to stay with a Nikon lens to get the quality that I wanted. Since I was getting ready to go to Vegas and the Grand Canyon I wanted to get something that was better then the Nikon 18-70 kit lens but was limited on funds. Based on the price and the qood reviews that I found here on FM I picked it up. Now I kick myself for not getting it sooner. It absolutely blows away Nikon's 18-70 f3.5 kit lens. The pictures from the Grand Canyon just blow me away. I posted a few of them on Flickr under pechichi if you want to have a look.
The lens is a bit heavy but with these results who cares, anyway I am used to lugging around medium format equipment so this is actually a breeze.
|
|
|
May 25, 2007
|
|
BlueDemon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 28, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Apr 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Build Quality,
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft af F2.8, Reverse zoom
|
|
|
This lens is soft at F2.8. Few stops down and it starts to perform. (maybe i have a soft copy)
Build quality for price is excellent and i like the size and weight of it. Has the look of a pro lens. Shocked when i first used it tho because when you zoom out it actually zooms in. Very strange.
Noise is not a problem and not to loud at all. After a day or two you forget about it and all though some people have moaned about the M/AF switch i find it to be just fine.
I have rated this as a 7 because i want to like it, i just find it a little soft wide open so i am going to send this of to sigma and try another copy. Worth sticking with in my opinion.
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
60
|
181317
|
Mar 31, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
92% of reviewers
|
$326.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.00
|
9.43
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
