User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: sigma lens choice

  1. #1
    Member chad79's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Mar 2008
    Location
    koonawarra
    Posts
    35
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    sigma lens choice

    I have been looking at two sigma lenses the 24-70mm and 17-70mm i still can not make up my mind what one to purchase.
    Anyone with ideas and have tested them out? Maybe can post a test shot with lens.
    Thankyou.

  2. #2
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    with what you already have.. I'd take the 24-70mm.

    It'd be nice to have a more general purpose one size fits all lens, and if that's your photographic methodology then you'll probably get better value from the 17-70.

    I think once you've been shooting for long enough, you soon realise what it is that you really want, and at what focal length you want to work at!

    FWIW: I'd take the faster aperture over the longer zoom ratio any day.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  3. #3
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I have the 24-70 as well and its one sharp lens. Good walk around lens! Though if you are into landscapes the extra you will get at the wide end with the 17-70 might make it worth it.

    However, considering you have the Sigma 10-20, then the 24-70 would be my pick for you
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  4. #4
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    19 Jan 2007
    Location
    Perth, Straya
    Posts
    1,232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have had the 17-70mm for about 18mo and have found it an excellent lens for closeups, semi-macro, wide angles and portraits. It's also pretty much the main lens I take on holiday. My only beef with it is that it is not a fast AF lens and not USM, which means it make a little noise during its not very quick AF.

    The 17-70 is very sharp straight out of the camera and has a MWD of about 2cm. It's the lens I now use for taking "macros" of anything over about 5cm in height/width. Previously I would be using the 100mm f/2.8 for that.

    I don't know anything about the 24-70mm and if it has faster AF, is just as sharp you might consider it as an option. You may have the 10-20mm already (as I do) but getting down to 17mm on the one lens is very handy particularly given the MWD of the 10-20mm is 24cm.

    I just checked the sigmaphoto website and they say the 17-70mm has a MWD of 20cm, perhaps that is just for AF? I'm sure I am shooting at much shorter distances than that.
    "Nature photography is about choosing a location, crawling through dirt, being bitten by insects and occasionally taking a great image". - Wayne Eddy.

    Canon 5D MkIII, Canon 7D, 17-40mm f/4L,
    24-105mm f/4L
    + Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS +400mm f/5.6L + Canon 1.4xTC + Canon 100 EF f2.8 USM + 430-EX


  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    18 Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    271
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i'm also in the market and looking at the 17-70 HSM version which should resolve the AF speed issue. keen to test it out next week. any 17-70 owners want to post up sample shots?
    Thanks,
    Nam

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    18 Jun 2006
    Location
    Echuca
    Posts
    65
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm using the 24-70 as a walkaround and have been really pleased with it, but I also have a 10-20 , truth be told I sometimes wish the 24-70 was just a bit wider, but constant f2.8 is more important to me than a little wideness, I would have considered the 17-70 if it was available whhen I purchased the 24-70, but I'm very happy with the results from the 24-70 and you soon become accustomed to composing with the lens you have on the camera, and that holds true for the 10-20 also
    My Image Policy: Feel free to comment or edit as you wish.

    Rebel XT
    Canon 18-55 kit
    Canon 50 f1.8
    Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM
    Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG macro
    Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX APO HSM
    Sigma 150 f2.8 EX APO Macro DG HSM
    Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS USM
    Sigma 135-400 f4.5-5.6 APO
    Sigma EF-500 DG Super

    http://spacejunk2.deviantart.com/


  7. #7
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    19 Jan 2007
    Location
    Perth, Straya
    Posts
    1,232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by N*A*M View Post
    i'm also in the market and looking at the 17-70 HSM version which should resolve the AF speed issue. keen to test it out next week. any 17-70 owners want to post up sample shots?
    I have the 17-70mm and will strongly consider the HSM model when the dollar gets to a reasonable level again. That said the 17-70mm I have is not too bad on AF.

    Wish I could post some sample shots for you, but my main PC hard drive fell over on Sunday night. It's got 200Gig of images on it and I am unable to drive for a few weeks.

    There's a 17-70 thread on this Forum or on POTN.

  8. #8
    Member Calxoddity's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Apr 2008
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    473
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the Nikon HSM version of the 17-70 and it's both fast and quiet at focusing - faster than the kit lens. It's also great value compared to some of the other options.

    As a walkaround lens it's really nice - great sharpness, can do decent macro-ish shots, some distortion down at the 17mm end, consistent with other lenses. Whilst the 24-70 is faster throughout, the tradeoff is that you lose the wide angle end and that could be sucky for your landscape photography.

    Regards,
    Calx
    Calxoddity
    Concert Pianist, Test Pilot, Pathological Liar


    Nikon D40, Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4.5 HSM, Nikkor AF-D 50mm f1.8
    Post Processing: Aperture 3 & Photoshop Elements 6

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    25 Jun 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    182
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    sample shots

    Hi there,

    I recently bought the 17-70 and am very very happy with it. I rarely take it off, its a great walk around lens.

    Here are some photos I have taken with it recently.......
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Ellen
    Pentax K10D, the newest baby
    Sigma 17-70mm
    Sigma 70-300mm
    Pentax 50mm f1.4
    Sigma EF-530 DG ST Flash
    Whats next????

    Please CC my photos, and edit where you want! Got lots to learn so please pass on instructions....

  10. #10
    Member campdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 2009
    Location
    Bonny Hills . NSW
    Posts
    42
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ellen thankyou. I have a K10D and deciding which lens to get.Choice now made.Sigma 17-70mm

    John
    Pentax K5
    Pentax K10 D Limited Edition
    Pentax FA*28-70mm f/2.8
    Pentax FA*80-200mm f/2.8
    Pentax 100 MACRO f/2.8
    Pentax FA 31mm 1.8 Limited
    Pentax FA 15 mm Limited Wide Angle.

  11. #11
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 Nov 2008
    Location
    Wunghnu Victoria
    Posts
    1,436
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enduro View Post
    I just checked the sigmaphoto website and they say the 17-70mm has a MWD of 20cm, perhaps that is just for AF? I'm sure I am shooting at much shorter distances than that.

    They are possibly quoting the MFD from the sensor rather than the front element. 5cm sounds a bit close to me but I could be wrong

    Cheers
    Leigh
    Nikon D600, 24-70, 300 VR1 2.8, Tamron 60 f2 macro + Kenko tubes. SB800.



    My Nikonians Gallery

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    05 Aug 2007
    Location
    Paralowie, South Australia
    Posts
    545
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was going to get a Canon 17-40mm f4L lens but it's a little out of my price range now. Might consider the 17-70. as an alternative, unless I find a cheap Canon lens.
    Andrew.
    comments and criticisms are always appreciated.
    Unless I post into the "NOT FOR CRITIQUE" section then the above doesn't apply.


  13. #13
    Member Calxoddity's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Apr 2008
    Location
    Wollongong
    Posts
    473
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Image from 17-70

    Hi,
    Sorry - tried to post a pikkie - didn't work. Something at this end, I think
    Regards,
    Calx
    Last edited by Calxoddity; 21-03-2009 at 9:53pm. Reason: add pikkie

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Jan 2009
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    26
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TEITZY View Post
    They are possibly quoting the MFD from the sensor rather than the front element
    Bang on, MFD is always specified from the sensor
    Wedding photographer shooting Canon

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    02 Jul 2008
    Location
    Launceston, TAS
    Posts
    335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I own the Sigma 24-70. I really like it, it is a well constructed lens and pretty sharp (though not as good as my 70-200). Given you have the 10-20 you'll be fine for covering the whole focal range when you need to.

    The downside of this lens is flare. It can be very annoying at times and I've had to compromise photos to remove flare. The only other thing is the 24mm minimum length. I did my first street-shots with this lens yesterday and must say I did find the lack of wide-angle a bit annoying. As a walkaround lens I think a 17-50 2.8 or similar would be better.

    Would I buy this lens again, probably, as for what I do the lack of wide angle isn't a problem, and I like the 70mm long end.
    Adam.


    AGSPhotos.com

    Using Nikon & PS CS5.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •