Sigma lens

[iijm]

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

[stevemack]

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.

[rwg717]

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

[rwg717]

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

[stevemack]

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.

[dulvariprestige]

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.

[rwg717]

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