Comments on: New glass – Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG Macro

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:15:47 +0000

@ John

Yeah and I’d have rather gone for a BMW M5 than my Honda Civic.

But in all seriousness, I think buying lenses is a tricky business. The best thing you can do is possibly rent a few and decide which gives you the best results and which ones you’ll get the most use out of. For everyday use, the pros tend to all agree on one thing… a nice fast 50mm. But that, obviously only matters if you haven’t found your groove yet. If you shoot extreme sports, get yourself a nice fish eye, if you shoot wildlife then take out a mortgage on a supertelephoto lens like a 500-600.

Horses for courses innit.

By: John Sutton

John Sutton — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:33:02 +0000

Personaly I’d have gone for a full frame camera (like the Canon 5D) and the Canon 24-70L lens. Yes it’s more expensive but worth it

By: Barry Thomas

Barry Thomas — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 22:35:50 +0000

Boy this is a problem.!!
I am looking at buying this lens on ebay. It would seem from reading feedback on all types of photography websites, that 50% of the Sigma’s have focusing problems.
Is this just poor quality control from Sigma, or is an issue with matching individual lense to individual body’s.
Seems every body is happy once the lens has been re-calibrated. But it should not be aproblem in the first place.
The lens I am looking at will be coming from Hong Kong, so if it had a problem I guess I am stuck with it.

By: John S

John S — Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:35:19 +0000

“Itâ€™s a great lens, indeed, and captures more information (by raw file sizes for exact same scenes) than the Canon lens of the same range.”

….so are you telling me the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is a better lens than the Canon 24-70 L f.2.8 ??? hmmmm…..better tell all those pros out there they made a big mistake …….(or didn’t)

By: Daze

Daze — Tue, 26 Dec 2006 23:04:08 +0000

Hi JD and thanks for the comment. I don’t consider myself much of a “pixel-peeper”, but a lens which doesn’t focus correctly – no matter what focal length – is just plain wrong in my eyes. Especially the price of this one.

Don’t get me wrong, the construction of the lens is superb, and if it did focus correctly I would have kept it, and probably bought more Sigma’s in the future – but it didn’t.

I’ve since upgraded (after my 28-105mm Canon) to the 17-40mm L from Canon. I’ll tell you, its simply outstanding. Its not as fast, but the sharpness is out of this world. Fantastic

By: JD

JD — Tue, 26 Dec 2006 03:19:45 +0000

My particular copy has wonderful focus: dead on at 70mm. The front focus gets worse and worse as the focal length decreases, so that by 24mm the camera focuses at six feet for a target 10 feet away, making for visibly soft pixel-peeping (but not for 8×10′s, uncropped)

I’m working on talking with Sigma. It’s a great lens, indeed, and captures more information (by raw file sizes for exact same scenes) than the Canon lens of the same range.

By: New glass - Canon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM - Dazecoop

New glass - Canon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM - Dazecoop — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:42:29 +0000

[...] Following on from my short experience with my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX lens, I decided that for the money the lens just wasn’t cutting it. The quality was down a lot when wide open at f2.8, and that was one of the main reasons of buying. [...]