User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  3
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Sigma lens

  1. #1
    Member iijm's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Jan 2010
    Location
    Wagga Wagga
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Sigma lens

    Anybody out there got a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 DC Macro OS. Any comments/criticisms of the lens and is it superior to the non-stabilised version.
    Considering as a walkabout on a D90
    Cheers,
    Ian
    Ian

    Never too old to learn

    Nikon D90, Tamron 17-50/2.8 VC, Nikon 18-105VR, Nikon 35/1.8, Tamron 90/2.8, Tamron 18-270 VC, gorillapod, SB 600

  2. #2
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    09 May 2008
    Location
    Brightveiw
    Posts
    1,270
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi ian i have just purchased the 17-70 2.8 4.5 DC macro lens,matched with the canon 30D and i am extremely happy with it an awsome walk around lens and very sharp i cant see there being to much difference in these two lenses as far as image quality goes i would definatley reccomend it.

    steve.

  3. #3
    Ausphotography Veteran rwg717's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Jun 2009
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,569
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I might be interested in this lens to fit on a Canon 7D, been looking around for an alternative to the Canon offerings of similar zoom range in their L series, wonder how the Sigma stacks-up against them?
    Richard
    I've been wrong before!! Happy to have constructive criticism though.Gear used Canon 50D, 7D & 5DMkII plus expensive things hanging off their fronts and of course a "nifty fifty".

  4. #4
    Ausphotography Veteran rwg717's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Jun 2009
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,569
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rwg717 View Post
    I might be interested in this lens to fit on a Canon 7D, been looking around for an alternative to the Canon offerings of similar zoom range in their L series, wonder how the Sigma stacks-up against them?
    Richard
    Further note re: the above, I have been looking at the Canon mount Sigma 18-125mm f3.8-5.6 DC OS HSM as it is a stabilized lens, at a more expensive level is Sigma's 24-70mm f2.8 IF EX DG which is NOT stabilized, not sure which way to go????
    Richard

  5. #5
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    09 May 2008
    Location
    Brightveiw
    Posts
    1,270
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In my personnal opinion and from experiance richard you really dont need IS at them focal lengths just pointless,200mm yes but below that no "unlees you have an illness and you do suffer with shakes"

    steve.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    23 Jul 2009
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    659
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've also got the 17-70 and found it to be a great lens for the money, and agree with Steve on the stabilization, never really needed it unless i was using very low SS's.
    Jayde

    Honest CC whether good or bad, is much appreciated.
    Love and enjoy photography, but won't be giving up my day job.

    Flickr

  7. #7
    Ausphotography Veteran rwg717's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Jun 2009
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,569
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stevemack View Post
    In my personnal opinion and from experiance richard you really dont need IS at them focal lengths just pointless,200mm yes but below that no "unlees you have an illness and you do suffer with shakes"

    steve.
    I like this....."shakes I get from a bottle sometimes....otherwise you are probably right!!"
    Richard

Posting Permissions

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