 |
|
|
R. Francois
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4722
|
|
Review Date: Jul 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Rather cheap. Built like a tank. imo tack sharp even at 2.8. great colors. i don't have any problems with this lens at all. The AF sound isn't so bad...
|
|
Cons:
|
no HSM, since all my other lenses do have that, i really miss it on this lens. The zoom ring is rather stiff. Again: no HSM zo manual focus is a pain in the ass, you have to pull back the focus ring and switch to manual on your camera and vice versa to turn af on again.
oh well not much of a deal i guess.
|
|
|
I'm using this lens on my D70 and D2x and in both cases it performs great. I use it for wedding photography and the sharp pictures at 2.8 give me that nice intimate image i'm looking for.
great value for money...
Raymond
|
|
 Jul 19, 2006
|
|
eirikhj
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 3, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jul 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap 24-70 f2.8, extremely sharp at all apertures. Fast and accurate focusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
No HSM, but I don't mind.
|
|
|
I bought this lens because of it's build quality, price and some of the examples I have seen of this lens. i went for the third copy of this lens. Soft at 24 2.8 and after a test I saw that this one had the front focusing problem as other have told about. I sent it in to Sigma and 4 weeks later it came back stellar. I'm very pleased with this lens VERY!!!
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2006
|
|
bigg1es
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 22, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Jul 5, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $225.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, f2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft at all apatures. Imge results poorer than the kit 18-55mm that comes with the 300D 20D etc.
|
|
|
I bought this to upgrade from my 18-55mm kit lens, but unfortunatly it wasn't as good. I sent it back to Sigma who sent me another one which was exactly the same. I saved up and boought a Canon 24-70 f2.8L which was much better.
Its a shame becasue I have had other Sigma lenses that have been excellent (the 70-200 f2.8 )
|
|
|
Jul 5, 2006
|
|
six100
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive for a 24-70 F/2.8. Sigma EX = Great build quality. When the AF works fine you can achieve impressive results. 82mm hood included.
|
|
Cons:
|
If you have a bad copy you will ocassionaly have front focus problems. No HSM. 82mm filter thread. A bit big and heavy.
|
|
|
After using it for portrait photography for a while I realized that about 35% of the pìcs I took with the lens where out of focus. In my case there was not a defined pattern for this behavior, some times it was obviously front focused while some others it was back focused.
That seems to be the Aquiles Heel of this particular lens from Sigma, everything else is great for the price paid. It`s a deal as far as you get a good copy.
On that 65% of perfectly focused pictures the quality was impressive.
Sold the lens a couple of months ago. After analizing the different options I decided to switch to primes for portrait photography.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2006
|
|
Mere_Image
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 19, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jun 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor sharpness, deep contrast, f2.8 (fast).......................................
This lens is inexpensive for the build and picture quality (i.e. a lot of lens for the money or at any price!) mfg# 548306 - EX DG macro version, 4 year warranty.
|
|
Cons:
|
Full frame glass is a little bigger and heavier. Non HSM motor (noise really isn't a problem.) No major complaints/problems to describe.
|
|
|
This lens shoots incredible pictures with a Nikon D50. Highly recommended! 82mm UV multi coated EX DG filters can be purchased directly from Sigma for $60 shipped.
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2006
|
|
Zagisis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 30
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Good Bokeh, Works with 5D, 2.8, Price good.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF stiff, Filter costly,
|
|
|
After recently purchasing the Canon 5D for its full frame qualities, I was disappointed that I could not use my 24-70mm 2.8L lens. It showed barrel distortion and vignetting.
I don't know yet if its the camera or lens. Luckly, I had the Sgima 24-70 2.8 in my bag. It works even better on my new Canon 5D.
The images are sharp and the backgrounds are soft. The colors are natural and crisp. It is a little slow finding the focal points, but it still works well.
The UV filter was very costly in comparison to the lens itself. I could only find it for $120.00, new. Its a Heliopan UV, and its does provide a great filter for UV rays that sometimes hamper the lens and color tones of certain images.
I would highly recommend this lens to others.
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2006
|
|
eneref
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 26, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 178
|
|
Review Date: May 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $390.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super-sharp, excellend bokeh, solid build, macro focus (in the newer DG model), price
|
|
Cons:
|
82mm filters
|
|
|
I wasn't honestly expecting much when I purchased this lens. I wanted an inexpensive 24-70 2.8L equivalent, and the reviews I'd seen on this and the tests showed that it was at least as sharp if not sharper. I was more than pleasantly surprised.
At 24mm, it's soft wide open, but is very sharp by F/4. Starting about 35mm and up, it's very sharp wide open. The colour is incredible, and the contrast is excellent. Macro focus is very handy, and the bokeh is excellent, making this a wonderful portrait lens as well as an excellent lens for indoor shoots.
82mm filters can be a bit of a pain, but if you look around, you can find used ones rather inexpensively priced, so I've managed to stock up on the basics (SMC UV, IR(67mm with step-down), and CPL) for less than $100 in outlay.
I still don't see why people have issues with the Sigma manual focus clutch. It's neither difficult to get used to nor really ambiguous, but I've heard this complaint with every Sigma lens I've seen.
The focus motor isn't too quiet, but I'd hardly rank it as loud. The shutter on my 20D is a far louder noise. It is NOT the fastest focus, however, but it seems fast enough for the sorts of things one's using a 24-70 (i.e. not birds in flight at great distances).
For the price, it simply can't be beaten, and having used both this and a Canon 24-70 2.8L, I can honestly say I'd choose this lens for quality. The Canon focuses a little faster, but not considerably, and certainly not enough to warrant an extra $800 in added price.
|
|
|
May 23, 2006
|
|
joeanty
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 17, 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 18, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
One of the best lens I have: sharp at wide aperture, zooming ring hard to turn (I think it's good!)
|
|
Cons:
|
subject to flaer also wit lens hood, noisy, cost of filter, no focus override on Nikon
|
|
|
A very good lens! Also if it's a little big anf heavy (and not so ergonomic on my Nikon D50), after a little practice it became nice to use. Build quality is good but not excellent. I've got some flare problems. AF noise doesn't bother me, but may be a problem in some situation. Good colors on all shots.
A "must have"
|
|
|
May 18, 2006
|
|
Chris_ST
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 7, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 268
|
|
Review Date: May 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Adequetely sharp wide open,very sharp by f/4.Nice build quality,looks real nice.Over $1000 less then the Nikon equivalant with nicer range(24mm compared to 28mm on the wide end.)
|
|
Cons:
|
None for the price.
|
|
|
I really like this lens!I think it's a better option then the Nikon 28-70mm AF-S,but then I'm not a lens snob either.I do find it irritating that a person can rate a whole line of lenses because they recieved a bad copy,even Canon or Nikon is not perfect,but they often get the benefit of the doubt whereas Sigma doesn't.I honestly recommend this lens to anybody wanting to save $1000 and still get great optical performance.
|
|
|
May 13, 2006
|
|
sdgphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 14, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 145
|
|
Review Date: May 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $395.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super colors and sharpness, bokeh is nice.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF noise is a little buzzy.
|
|
|
My most used lens now (replaced 28-70L).
|
|
|
May 13, 2006
|
|
hemidesign
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 2, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: May 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
great lens,nice finish,f/2.8,good price,sharp images!!!
|
|
Cons:
|
little heavy (dont care)and a noisy focus (i dont care again!!...the image can't produce sound anyway)
|
|
|
i have that lens for 2 months now...and i can say is WOW!
very sharp images....and the body of the lens is build like a tank!....good job sigma!
|
|
|
May 12, 2006
|
|
cdryall
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2005
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $395.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
To be honest this is a it of a sleeper lens review. At first I felt the focus ring was too stiff, the clutch mechanisim very strange and the autofocus a little hit and miss - all probably still very true but when I review the quality of the good / very good / great pics I get from time to time I have to be honest and say what more could one expect from such a lens? F2.8 capability, very well built, stunning resolution and contrast at times at such a price!!!
|
|
Cons:
|
Bulky, strange design? no HSM - why Sigma?
|
|
|
A real conundrum.....
|
|
|
May 4, 2006
|
|
rfernatt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $360.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Constant 2.8 aperture, reasonable price, solid construction, good image quality, includes hood.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost of filters, zoom is a little difficult to get used to, a little heavy.
|
|
|
I wanted a wide to short zoom lens that would be usable for indoor sporting events (karate, etc.) and was reasonably priced. This lens fits the bill.
|
|
|
May 3, 2006
|
|
BlueEyesPhoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 25, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 461
|
|
Review Date: Mar 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Pretty good lens. Sharp from what I've seen, not near my 50 1.4 or 70-200 2.8 IS, but definetly sharp enough. It's pretty lightweight to me (used to Baby White) and has a pretty good macro capability.
|
|
Cons:
|
Focus ring, though not a real pain, is a little akward.
|
|
Bought this off ebay in exchange for my 28-135 IS. I needed something in the 2.8 range and a little wider than 28. So this came in the perfect range, including price. I could sell one and buy the other and be a perfect trade. Luckily the copy I got I think so far has been a little sharper than my 28-135, but I'm not a pixel peeper. I know when my images are soft, and when they're sharp. I've very picky about my images, and this lens is holding up decently so far.
I've tested it against flare in situations where I'd be using it, and none so far. From a 300$ lens, I'm quite impressed and happy to say the least. I still plan to upgrade to the Canon version, but this makes a nice intermediate lens and a great handdown to my fiance. 
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2006
|
|
canonlight
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Feb 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 42
|
|
Review Date: Feb 27, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
About as sharp wide open as a standard zoom gets at f2.8, Superb by f4.5, Very good color and contrast, Nice bokeh for a standard zoom, Good focal range (starting at 24mm), Only slight CA, Good flare resistance, Robust EX build, FF compatibility, Very fast AF on 20D and 1DMKII, Steal at its price.
|
|
Cons:
|
No HSM, Noisy AF, DF clutch mechanism takes getting used to, Some copies need flexboard update (especially on 20D).
|
|
I've used a lot of standard zooms, and this is one stands out, all things considered. See http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/2470
|
|
|
Feb 27, 2006
|
|
bob877
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $229.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, bright, and cheap! I lucked out and got a very, very good price on it though. Decent build quality (not L class, but it certainly feels more durable than most lenses in its price class)
|
|
Cons:
|
Flare control is mediocre, zoom ring is a little bizarre, though I got used to it.
|
|
|
This lens is very usable at all apertures, and extremely sharp stopped down a bit. AF noise doesn't bother me, but I have the Minolta mount version so the AF motor is in the body anyway. Fast AF, in my experience. Good colors, too. I used a 24-70L (rented) on a 20D for a wedding a few months ago and having this lens on a KM 5d doesn't make me feel like I'm missing anything (and I get AS, a very very big plus!)
|
|
|
Feb 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
134
|
410358
|
Oct 21, 2010
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
88% of reviewers
|
$380.93
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.75
|
9.40
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
