Customer Reviews

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC IF Macro Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

5 star:		(24)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This is the first non-Canon lens I've purchased and the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 DC surprised the hell me with its fine performance. Zoom range, speed, resolution, low Chromatic Abberation, fast/sure autofocus speed and solid build quality make this lens stand head and shoulders above the typical cheap Canon kit lens such as the terrible Canon EF 18-55/4.5-5.6. Plus the Sigma has 1:2.3 macro capabilities with very sharp results...AMAZING! I've read more and more reviews all over the Internet on this Sigma lens that praise its qualities. This lens will compete with Canon lenses costing two and 3 times as much (EF 17-40, EF 18-50/2.8, EF 16-35/2.8). The Sigma 17-70 is constructed with one SLD low-dispersion glass element which is responsible for its excellent lack of Chromatic Aberation. At this price I never expected that kind of quality. Highly recommended!

Obviously I was luckier than the previous reviewer: my first copy was, and is, fine.
I use my Sigma with a Canon 400D (XTi in the US). I also have a Canon 50mm lens that's supposed to be really sharp. Maybe I have a bad copy of that, because the Sigma is definitely sharper. In fact I was disappointed with the camera until I bought this Sigma lens.
Now I get images that are sharp and colourful, yet with that smooth SLR look that was evading me when using the Canon lens. I'm very pleased with it.
One thing that surprised me was how big and heavy it is though. People look at me as though I have a long zoom (it extends quite a way at 70mm), even though it's really not.
But, you get used to it pretty soon.
I guess it had to be big to get the f/2.8. Trouble is, at about 20mm you lose the f/2.8, so it's not quite as good as it sounds. This lens loses out on that score to the constant f/2.8 17-50 lenses from Tamron and Sigma.
The compensation is that you get a bit of extra reach, which makes it more of an everyday lens.
And the trump card is that you can get really close with this lens. Minimum focus distance is 20cm. Doesn't sound that great, but that's 20cm from the sensor, not the end of the lens. Zoom all the way to 70mm and you can focus on stuff that's almost touching the glass!
I like the feel of the lens. It's very solid and attractively finished, feels expensive.
You get a lens hood in the box, unlike when you buy a Canon lens.
The only thing I don't like is that the focus ring moves in auto focus and I find it often catches on my hand. No big deal.
All in all, a great lens.

I own an XT and 3 lenses: this one, the ef 70-200 f/4 and the 50mm f/1.8. I use them all about equally. This one is versatile in terms of focal length (solidly wide angle to short tele) and it has a pseudo-macro close focus ability that is great for closeups (flowers, large bugs, frogs etc...). While it is not particularly sharp wide open, it is definitely acceptable to me and essentially matches my other two lenses when stopped down. I can't speak to the possibility of "bad copies" that may be "floating around"... mine is satisfactory. There are clearly trade-offs that come with buying a cheaper lens that does several things, but I found this lens to be quite balanced in that respect. Overall I find this lens of good quality and its versatility to be indispensable... until I save up enough to get the ef 100 2.8 macro and the 17-55 2.8IS.

If you are considering buying this as your first lens instead of getting the kit, I unreservedly recommend doing that (especially if it will be your only lens for a while). I owned the kit with my first XT (lost to a break-in) and frequently chafed at its limitations (slowness, minimum focus distance, short focal length) and I think you would find that the modest improvements in these attributes that come with this lens will greatly increase your enjoyment of your camera.

This is an amazingly versatile lense, and I'm delighted with it. I've had it for about a month and have shot more than 1000 photos with it. I take close ups of flowers and I can get so close with the macro I'm afraid I'm going to touch the object with the lens. The wide angle is all I need for my Canon digital camera, and the telephoto is great for portraits and a lot of my landscape shooting. Autofocus is fast and quiet, and the lens is build solidly. If I could have only one lens, this one would be it.

I've had this lens for a few weeks now, and have been experimenting with it since I've gotten it. I absolutely love the macro feature, as I've been taking all sorts of wonderful closeup shots of my wife's flowers, and have been very pleased with the results. I've also been doing a variety of landscape photos out at a local beach, and again, the results have exceeded my expectations, especially given this lens' price! I bought this to replace the pretty useless 18-55mm kit lens my Rebel XT came with, and I haven't regretted this in the slightest. I looked up an awful lot of reviews, and most regarding this lens were very positive (which was good ... but I also did find that for everyone who loves a particular lens, there's someone out there who hates it, so take every review with a grain of salt), but the clincher was the price. I do not have the kind of money necessary to buy Canon L lenses, and I doubt I ever will (food, mortgage, home repairs, etc. are a bit higher on my list), so this lens was a compromise, one that I've found to be very satisfactory. I may be just a weekend photographer, but I still want good quality for my limited budget, and this fits the bill.

Sigma's 17-70mm offers digital SLR users a versatility not found elsewhere. Many small sensor SLR's (that magnify the lens image) cause the standard 35 or 50mm lens sizes to increase to the point that it is impractical to use them on an everyday basis. For example, to photograph people indoors and include their full bodies, using a 50mm lens requires you to stand so far back that you are out of flash range. Anyone with an older Canon SLR will be very familiar with the disappointment od discovering that the EF-S 18-55 won't fit their cameras without a warranty-voiding alteration to the mount.

The lens offers good clarity, and although does distort straight lines a little at it's widest (most wide zooms do), it also is very fast for a lens of it's cost. For the layperson, the speed of a lens is related to the "f" number, which describes how wide the lens will allow the aperture to open. The smaller the number, the more light the lens will allow in, and the higher the shutter speed you'll be able to use (hence, the faster the lens). This enables the lens to be used in lower light situations, without flash, more easily; although the use of a tripod is still the best way to get sharp images.

The Sigma 17-70 is for you if you have had these problems, and it won't break the bank. It would be an exceptionally good choice for photography students and hobbyists.

I bought this lens about 3 months ago and I honestly like it but it's not the best lens you could buy. For the money though, you can't beat the focal range, build quality, and picture quality. I've not really noticed any real problems with this lens, however, the auto focus is noisy and sometimes a little slow (compared to my L lens). Sigma could have made this better by building it to the same specs as their EX series with the HSM autofocusing motor too. Still, I've been happy with the lens, it's built like a tank and I would recommend this to anyone who is looking for a wide angle zoom lens that won't break your piggy bank. I am planning on selling it in the future for the Canon 17-40L or the 24-105L. No time soon though. It's still serving it's purpose as a great walk around lens.

I shoot with a variety of lenses and this is one of my favorites...it stands tall next to my 50mm f/1.8!. I LOVE the Macro feature on this camera! LOVE IT! I also like the solid design. The AFD is relatively smooth and not as loud as some of the others I have used. Focis has been quick, tight, and accurate.

TURN OFFS:
The zoom is a bit thick and needs to be broken in. The 2.8 is very misleading: it drops off at about 19mm and jumps rapidly. It's hard for mebecause I shoot people so much- wide angles distorts limbs and is unflattering.

I'm a professional and I bought this as a lens to use at the beach and other places where I didn't want to risk damaging my expensive glass or getting dirt in my camera switching lenses. The main difference between this lens and my expensive glass optically is the Bokah is better on the expensive glass (the bokah on the sigma is kind of grainy without the nice round specular highlights of my nikon 28-70), the barrel distortion at 17mm is also pretty noticeable on the sigma-but it's a pretty big zoom range, and it can be corrected in PS if needed. Overall, however, the color saturation, speed, and resolution of this lens leaves little to be desired for the price, and I've wound up using it on more and more jobs because I'm willing to hang from trees, run with the camera, get in the dirt, more than I would be with a $1600 lens.

I was excited about this lens when I saw all these reviews that seemed to suggest that it was the holy grail of walkaround lenses: fast, has a super-broad zoom range and is under $500. But when I got it, I was immediately underwhelmed. It is very soft at 17mm and at 70mm, with the only good focus away from the extremes. I shot RAW on my 40D and had to sharpen way too much to get a decent shot out of this lens and then it would just pick up the really bad chromatic aberrations when shooting 17mm. I sent it back and am getting the Tamron 17-50 since I have lost hope that I can get good focus and tons of zoom thanks to this lens.