Customer Reviews

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Aspherical Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I have owned and used this lens professionally for over a year now and after a minor focus issue that was resolved very quickly by Sigma's excellent service department I have to say this is the sharpest 24-70 lens I have used. I also have experience with the canon 24-70L lens which retails for just over a grand and the Sigma is sharper throughout the whole range(even at 2.8). The only negative thing I have to say about this lens is the noisy autofocus (Canon's USM is much quieter). But it is still reasonably fast to AF. This is definately the best lens for the money in this zoom range and is without a doubt the best optically. Canon's build quality and weather sealing are definately superior to the Sigma so if that is an issue, you may want to go with the Canon.

-NB

Disclaimer: used it for 4 months+, on Canon Rebel XT 350D and Canon 430 film camera, I am an ameteur shooter.

Pro:
Full time MF.
constant 2.8.
Great contrast and color, consistent with my other Sigmas,
nice weight, fit and finish.

Neutral:
OK AF speed indoor and outdoor
f2.8 isn't fast enough in many indoor situations with moving subjects. I have to use flash with it.

Con:
Arrived with severe front-focus problem. Fixed under warranty.
Zoom could be smoother.
AF whines a bit, but tolerable;
Border not as sharp as center.
Sharp only after stop down. But usable wide open for me

Conclusion:
Probably not pro grade, but for the build quality at this price, it's a winner! (I deducted 1 star because of the less than perfect IQ.)

Update:
This claims to be a macro lens without HSM, so the so-so AF speed is excused. Got a very shallow DOF wide open. So IQ can be very low if AF is not spot on wide open. This is not a great low light lens as I thought it would be. But with good light, the IQ is excellent with fantastic color and contrast. Considering the price, it's not a bad deal really.

Update: March 2009
Just got my used 28-70 2.8L. It looks used and the MF is problematic, but the IQ(sharpness/color/contrast) is so much better than this Sigma, not to mention flair resistance, light fall off on full frame, AF. Contrary to the Sigma, the Canon L is very much usable at f2.8. Only the border sharpness improves significantly stop down. And I got the L used for not much more than the Sigma brand new. The L is a bit bigger but not really heavier in hand, both feel handful. I am a pack-rat so I'll keep my Sigma. I guess without the Sigma I couldn't have really appreciated the L lens anyway! Sigma just came out with a Mark II of its 24-70 with HSM, priced into $800+ range. I think if you like it cheap, Mark I is a steal now, if you have the cash, go for the L. If you are lucky, there might just be a good used L out there for you somewhere :)

After using my stock kit lens, 18-55, for months, I decided I really needed a new lens to replace the kit lens.

I chose this over the Tamron 28-75 and the Canon 17-85.

This lens has been proven to hang right with the $1300 Canon 24-70 L in terms of sharpness.

On with the review:

PROS: Extremely sharp above f/2.8, pretty decent in low light situations, very solid and rugged build quality, comes with a carrying case and hood, very good price

CONS: little on the heavy side (weighs as much as my 70-200 f/4), very loud AF, focusing is a little on the slow side, 2 step manual focus, 82mm filter size ($$$)

Overall, this has been a decent lens for me, but I actually have it up for sale now to move on.

Rev

I've used this lens a couple of years now. It's a good value but not up to professional standards.

Pros:

Very good in low light/no flash situations.

Focuses well in low light, better if you catch and edge in the focus box.

The 24-70 range is good for general indoor photography.

Cons:

The image is not crisp at f2.8 but is ok at 3.5 getting better with higher f-stops.

The lens is heavy, almost to the point it should have it's own tripod mount.

Two stage manual focus, difficult to switch between manual and auto.

The lens is solid, but mine is cracked at the base from a minor 25" to 30" fall (from a pew) onto carpet with camera attached. I didn't flinch when it fell, I didn't think it hit hard enough to do too much. I've dropped cameras from a ladder before with no damaged. The plastic around the base is now cracked. I had to loosen the base ring and pop the plastic back into place. The lens still works and I'll keep using it for candid shots.

The image quality is "good" but does not compare to other 2.8 lenses I've used. For the price, however, it's a great deal.

Out of the box I don't think I would have gave this lens one star. The focus was terrible, I couldn't get a sharp image out of the lens to save my life. To be honest i read alot of reviews beforehand and almost anticipated on sending it back for calibration. Anyhow, I sent it back to sigma for calibration, 2 weeks later I have the lens back and it's consistently sharp! It's not "L" quality glass (as some claim)....but for for the $700 savings this lens is worth it's price in gold!

To sum it up, buy this lens but plan on sending it back to sigma for calibration. I do wish they would get a handle on quality!

I bought this lens for exactly what it is. An inexpensive, fast, wide to normal zoom. This was my first non-Canon lens and I was pretty impressed overall by the value of this lens. I'm obsessed by sharp photos though, so in the end, it didn't meet what I needed and I sent it back to Amazon.
Please read on though. Although this lens isn't right for me, it might be right for you!
Everything camera related is subjective. I really like this lens' color output, you may hate it. I think it's soft, you may find it perfectly sharp. There's also differences between copies of lenses. Just because I rate it a four star does not mean it's not going to be exactly what you are looking for.

The build quality seems good, it feels solid in your hands and the focus and zoom rings have enough, but not too much resistance. I see no zoom creep, but that may happen after some usage. There's a zoom lock though so that will not be too much of a problem.
It's substantial, but not nearly as heavy as other lenses in this range I've used.
I'm not a huge fan of the finish, it seems like it will wear off easily, but only time will tell.
Comes with a case and petal-type hood, which is always nice.

On viewing my first shots with this lens, I was immediately impressed by the color output. Reds especially seem to pop. Supposedly this lens has special coatings that make images look better taken with digital cameras, I can't argue, I like what I see. I was using custom white balance set with each lens I tested this against and I preferred the color from this lens the best.

It was in looking at the sharpness of each lens where this one didn't come close. Again, sharpness is subjective, and it will also vary from copy to copy, but the output from this lens was not even close to to the Canon EF-S 17-55 IS when both were stopped down to f8 and f11.
What I found is that this lens is fairly soft wide open; no surprise there, most lenses are soft wide open. It's actually sharper than I would have expected wide open. However, stopping it down to f4, f5.6 and f8 did very little to increase the sharpness. The lenses I tested it against typically got sharper though this one stayed fairly soft.

So, to me, that means it's very usable at f2.8 if I have to shoot at wide open to capture motion or work in so-so light. The problem is, it doesn't get any sharper in better lighting conditions where I can stop it down. I can deal with it being not so sharp wide open, but I don't accept the fact I can't get it any sharper by stopping it down.

Is that a problem with the copy I got? Maybe. I tested both on auto focus and manually focusing with the same result. Was I willing to take the chance to send it back to Sigma to be calibrated and possibly miss the window to return it? No. I've now accepted the fact I'm going to have to spend the big bucks on an "L" lens to get the sharpness I want.

Now I need to mention something. What I see as sharp and what you see as sharp may be quite different. I run my monitor at 1680x1050 and it's 18" from my face. If you run your monitor at 800x600 you will probably be perfectly happy with this lens.

4x6 prints from a photo from this lens vs the $1200 "L" lens by Canon are not going to show a dramatic difference, and I doubt 90% of people would ever notice a difference in sharpness. I happen to be in the 10% so I returned this lens and will buy the expensive one. Please understand, that's just me and I'm not you.

Although I returned this lens, I can tell you that it's a very good lens that almost anyone would be happy with. I give it four stars because I think the vast majority of people considering it would be happy with it. I take away a star because those wanting tack sharp photos will be disappointed.

Enjoy,
Kyle

I've had it for a few months now, and after minor usage these are my initial thoughts:

Pros:
- Very nice focal length range for indoors/street photography; using full frame or film cameras this goes from very wide angle to a short telephoto, covering normal lengths. On APS-C cameras, it becomes a 38-112. Useful for some street shooting and portraits, not for tight spaces. I've used it successfully to shoot stage performances too, taking advantage of its telephoto characteristics with APS-C.
- Constant maximum aperture, so you don't have to recheck your exposure everytime you change focal lengths.
- Makes you look like a pro. I know this may sound silly, but the truth is, people tend to respect you more when they see you arrive with a smart looking lens.
- Comes with a cool hood that can be stored with the lens (Canon, can you hear???).
- Comes with a nice padded pouch (Canon, can you hear???).
- Well built, feels sturdy.

Cons:
- Quite soft at 2.8. If you're buying it just because of this feature alone, think twice.
- No image stabilization.
- No full time manual focus (despite what other reviewer said, this lens does not have that capability).
- Two step manual focus (a switch would have been much better).
- Quite heavy at 711 grams.
- Bulky.
- Lens length changes when zooming in/out.
- Focus ring not very smooth (at least compared with my canon lenses). Maybe with enough usage that will change?
- Very large filter size ($)

Despite what other reviewers said, I haven't had problems with AF.

Similar items used:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/3.5-f/5.6

I am in the process of selling my sigma to upgrade to a canon L version. The lens is pretty nice for the cost but less than professional grade in my opinon. I liked sharpness and brokeh. Could use improvement in contrast and the color seems a bit off. Vignetting was a bit harsh too. Mine also had the issue where the zoom ring doesn't rotate freely. It's a little stiff. I've heard tons of complaints about this. Overall I think its about a 3.5 of 5 stars.

Btw did anyone else find the sigma review video to be unprofessional? They have a woman with tats exposed reading from a teleprompter the whole time. That wouldn't have been so bad if she didn't stumble over every third word she read. Geez guys, it's not live film. You can do a retake. It just seems like a lack of effort. I may not have bought this lens had I seen this video first.

I will have to send this back to Sigma. It is horribly soft at 2.8 up to 5.6. Would have loved to have bought the Nikon as I think you get what you pay for.

As a wedding photographer, I've rented the Canon version but can't afford to buy it at over $1,100. So I bought this less expensive lens without testing it first.

The problem I'm having is focus. About 40% of the shots are not in focus. I only use the lens for low light situations and prefer the 24-105mm IS lens for most other situations. I'm not sure if there is a problem with the lens I received or if it's an inherent problem with all the 24-70mm lenses by Sigma.

Now the lens stays in the bag while I use a 50mm prime for most low light situations, it focuses better in low light situations and it's always sharp.