|
|
AHPZuazua
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 24, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 96
|
|
Review Date: Jul 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, performance, build quality, colour rendition, accurate focus, Weight and constant 2.8 throughout zoom range.
|
|
Cons:
|
its not as fast as USM or Sigmas own HSM version.
|
|
I bought it on ebay BNIB from a Canadian dealer on aBest offer for $200 & free shipping... UNBELIEVABLE!
freakishly I also won the famous (in famous!)
Canon EF 28-105mm F/3.5-4.5 II USM
Love them both.
I owned the Sigma 24-60mm F/2.8 and Enjoyed that lens. So when I had the opportunity to own another EX series lens, I jumped at it.
Good lens, pictures are Sharp. The Focus is faster than what I was used to in Tamron Lenses, but now I saw what Canon USM can do and Im on the fence.
Colour is always excellent, and focus is always spot on. I could have hoped (well we all can Hope for "L" Lenses now cant we) for a better lens (note: for the money I had)
Hope you enjoy also.
Zuazua
You can check out images shot with the lens at my website:
www.afterhoursproduction.com
|
|
 Jul 9, 2009
|
|
bvallier
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 10, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 10, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great value for what you get - fast f/2.8 lens, solid build quality considering the price point, with low weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy and somewhat sluggish autofocus compared to Canon's USM, not an internal focus/zoom like the Canon equivalent.
|
|
I used to shoot with a Canon 28-70 2.8 L lens, and it was on my camera a good 70-80 percent of the time (the 70-200 2.8 would've been on it the other 20-30 percent).
Unfortunately, the old lens was dropped, and the autofocus stopped responding, and the mount was a little warped (the 20D it was on had nothing but a mere scratch on the pop-up flash).
So I needed a replacement.
For 200 dollars, this Sigma lens gives practically the same results that I found I got with my 1400 dollar Canon lens.
That fact alone is remarkable.
With that said, I miss the ergonomics and small subtleties of the larger and heavier Canon lens;
- Like the Canon it replaced, the Sigma does not focus or zoom internally. However, the Canon was a smarter design in that its' lens hood attached on threads located on the outer lens barrel, not the end of the end element. This lens hood protected the extended part of the lens, which when used on a rough and tumble daily basis was definitely a plus.
- The ultrasonic motor. Every time that AF-ON button is pressed, you (and moreso your subject) notice a distinct insect-like buzz. I use the 28-70 for weddings, and I purchased the Sigma to replaced the broken Canon. I dread autofocussing with this lens in a tiny country church during what should be a solemn sacred ceremony... chances are, I'll be manually focussing during such an event.
With those two points aside, the main thing this comes down to is price. 200 flippin' dollars CDN is what I paid for this in a clearance sale from a Sigma distributor. That's 550 dollars less than what I paid for my old Canon 28-70 used, which was half of the 1499.99 retail it's successor goes for now. If you photograph as a business, this lens will pay for itself in a job or two.
I highly recommend this lens as an alternative to the much more expensive (but better) Canon equivalent.
|
|
|
May 10, 2008
|
|
fj749
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 6, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality and F2.8 for the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow and noisy autofocus, especially in low light conditions, slight flare during night photography
|
|
I have use this lens for approximately a year and it's been on my 350D almost permanently. It was also the first lens I bought when I went to digital from my old Minolta...
After taking around 4000 pictures with it, I can say that the image quality is very good. Not quite at the same level as the L lenses I got after but, considering the price, how could I complain?
Image quality was good, no BT, colour was excellent. No complaints about the built quality or the glass.
However, this lens has a mind of it's own! It took some serious taking use to. The auto-focus is noisy and slow. It searches for focus in low light. That's why I took most of my low light pictures manually...
But like I said, at that price, you can't complain.
Considering that it costs about a quarter of an L F2.8,
it's a great lens for the price.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2007
|
|
Emre
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 9, 2005
Location: Turkey
Posts: 20
|
|
Review Date: Apr 5, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast image quality f2.8 price
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit heavy
|
|
Well
its time to write something about this lens after I waited 1 year to be able to buy this lens.
This is the best lens that a proffessional or enthisiast must have.Its fast .It has amazing picture quality its 2.8 good for low lighting stiuations and everything you want.
I used this lens on my Eos XT rebel .There has been no problem so far.I shocked due to quality.This lens will be a monster on a full professinal cameras but even on a rebel its best you can find.
Finally I used this lens on my eos 30 date and everything was ok for also this camera.
i highly recommend this lens you can buy it without thinking because it s suitable for everything
|
|
|
Apr 5, 2006
|
|
ittekudasai
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Good image quality. Fast f/2.8 throughout zoom range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy. Slow/inaccurate focus in lower light situations. Heavy (though I don't particularly mind)
|
|
Considering that the Canon equivalent lists for almost double the price, I consider this lens a great starting lens for any photographer. It's fast and versatile. I use it almost exclusively for indoor (theater) and outdoor (sports) shots.
The noise is one thing I don't like about it. Combined with the relatively limited zoom, it's hard to get incognito shots in crowds or shots in the theater up close without being distracting. Manual focus is possible, but for most purposes it's not an option.
I got a pretty good deal on this lens because they released an updated version, but I think the lens is worth the price.
|
|
|
Feb 3, 2006
|
|
Emre
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 9, 2005
Location: Turkey
Posts: 20
|
|
Review Date: Jan 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Im gonna use this lens on my digital rebel.
may I experiance any problems? has anybody used this lens on digital rebel ?
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2006
|
|
Prodigal Son
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 56
|
|
Review Date: Dec 31, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Color rendition, sharpness, price when compared to the Canon model
|
|
Cons:
|
soft at 2.8, had to be sent back for recalibration to use on my 20D
|
|
I purchased this lens because the Canon 24-70mm L was way out of my price range. I did a lot of research and read a lot of reviews on alternatives such as the Sigma 24-70mm and the Tamron 28-75mm. I chose the Sigma. When I got the lens, I noticed some focusing issues, and sent the lens back to Sigma for re-calibration. Now that I have the lens back, I don't regret the purchase at all. It is a little soft wide open (but I have read this problem about other lenses, and it seems to be a common issue with fast zooms). When stopped down, this lens will produce gorgeous results at a fraction of the cost of the Canon 24-70mm. This lens is a must have for anyone wanting to take great pictures, but can't spend the $$$$ for the L.
|
|
|
Dec 31, 2005
|
|
toonman1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 14, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 6, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp. F2.8! Solid build, comes with lens hood. Good colour
|
|
Cons:
|
Very poor focus motor. Misses focus sometimes. A minor bit of CA.
|
|
Picked it up used in mint condition. Paid a bit too much, but came from a reputable local camera shop with a 90 day warranty. I'm very impressed with the optics, true bargain optically. A tad soft wide open, but still useable and miles better that what Canon offers in it's price range. I had been using a Canon 28-105 USM f3.5-4.5 and found the Sigma to be miles ahead in sharpness at all focal lengths/aperatures.
But the focus motor is a real dissapointment. It's slow and noisy. My lens motor started to get stuck so I took it in for service and found that it basically would cost as much as I paid to replace the motor. Argh! I took it apart myself and lubricated the brass motor gears (it's a very old fashioned mechanical design) and it seemed to solve the issues.
It's a love hate thing. I just love how the photos from it come out. They're stunningly crisp and contrasty for a low range zoom. If you don't mind taking time to pose your shots then this is an optical wonder. It's dissapointing if you try to use it for action sports. It's just too slow. Canon USM is dreamy in comparison. It doesn't support manual while auto focus is on. You need the SG version.
Lens hood (comes with) is a better design than Canons. Sturdy and secure and take bashing about very well.
Would I buy it again. Definitely. It has some limitations, but wow, what an optical stunners. The proof is in the results, I have hundreds of great shots from it.
|
|
|
Nov 6, 2005
|
|
soren
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Oct 31, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Great sharp images stopped down a little, Focus accuracy and speed.
|
|
Cons:
|
28 is not wide enough for a 1.3 or 1.6 crop digital camera. Softish at 2.8, although it has a quality there... Build could be better (mine broke)
|
|
This was my first Sigma lens for Canon EOS, and I loved it (since replaced with the Sigma 24-70) A little soft wide open but usable, and a nice softness that I didn't mind. It was sharper than my 24-70 after f4, and also sharper than my canon 24-70 (2.8) when stopped down.
Autofous worked well and fast with D-30, and D-60, 1D, and 1D-II.
It did stop auto focusing once and had to be sent in.. some screw had obviously fallen out, there was a metalic rattling inside.
I still own, it but use the 24-70 because i like the range better, it is amazing what that extra 4mm makes. The 24-70 focuses more quietly as well.
like all Sigma Zooms I've tried, it will extemely back focus on the 20D if used with a Canon Flash (550 or 420) and the red auto focus beam fires.
|
|
|
Oct 31, 2005
|
|
haggaigi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 27, 2005
Location: Israel
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 27, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
fills like well built lens. very sharp from F4.0 and graet colors' up heavy (650g) but it give stability fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
too noisy AF very soft at F2.8 the colors' un netrual at F2.8 nd it sufferes from bad ca at f2.8 and bad flare at F2.8 day light. too nuch plastic that can be broken
|
|
I would recomend to buy this lens that give very good performance for her price and for bright days I ueses thr hood and uv filter, the f2.8 made just for low lights situation like nigt or cave
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2005
|
|
transoptic1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 882
|
|
Review Date: Aug 25, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $220.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Built well, feels nice, great bokeh and contrast. Pretty sharp. Low light AF is pretty good.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF isn't very fast or quiet.
|
|
The first thing I noticed about this lens was how nice it felt in my hands and on my D-Rebel.
The contrast on this lens is great. Focus isn't tack sharp, especially wide. But it is good. Modest USM in photoshop makes for really sharp photos. The bokeh is the best I've seen on any 3rd party lens.
The AF is moderate, and a little noisy. I would define it as a "skitch"ing sound. Some chromatic abbhoration here and there, but nothing serious by any means.
No zoom creep, even at 90 degree angles.
Color rendition is really nice.
A wonderful walk-around lens, more than worth the price.
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2005
|
|
KamiG
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 10, 2004
Location: Italy
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: May 14, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $280.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, good contrast and colour rendition.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow and loud autofocus, soft wide open.
|
|
I have ever this lens on my Digital Rebel 
|
|
|
May 14, 2004
|
|
|
