Sigma - 24-70 2.8 or 28-70 2.8?

[mickeyjuice]

G'day all.

I'm buying a Canon 10D - like so many others have - and I'm chasing some good(ish) glass for it.

(I've got a Sigma 70-200 2.8 already, and I'm getting a Canon 50mm 1.8 very soon.)

I'm in Western Australia, and our prices down here are horrendous, so I'm buying my lenses from the USA.

The two I'm currently tossing up between are the following:


Sigma 24-70 F2.8
Sigma 28-70 F2.8


Given that my next lens will be a Sigma 15-30, I'm undecided as to whether I need the extra 4mm in this lens.

It obviously makes it more versatile, but it costs more, as well.

Do you any comment on the relative picture qualities of the two lenses? (I'll give up the 4mm for a better image.)

I've Googled away to my heart's content, but I haven't really found much in the way of a direct comparison between these two lenses.

Thanks for your time.

Mic

[David Lawson]

The extra 4mm on the sigma is invaluamble on the 1.6 crop on the 10D. I had one and once it had been realigned by sigma was a really good lens. I upgraded to the canon version when it became available. The canons build quality is superior and the images are more contrasty, saturated and possibly a little sharper but at 3x the cost. I'm a pro and was happy with the sigma on my 1D.

[Arnie]

Hi Mic,

What exactly did u mean by "realigned by sigma"?

I am seriously considering the sigma 24-70 f2.8 since i can't still afford to buy the canon version.

[David Lawson]

Think you meant me regarding "Realigned by Sigma".
When I first got the sigma 24-70 at the wide end the left hand side of the image was noticeably out of focus. Didn't really show at tele end. This is not an unknown problem with sigma, and canon to that matter, lenses. It's just that there is little or no quality control. It went back to Sigma and was adjusted, after that it was fine. A friend has it now on his 10D. No complaints from him either.
Read on a site recently a guy had is Canon 16-35 f2.8L back and forward to Canon 3 times before it became "A good one"
I would bet if you look at the lens design of the sigma and canon versions they would be very similar if not identical. Hopefully the Canon has better construction (It does) and glass quality. Sorry wrong canon has 16 elements in 13 groups sigma has 14 elements in ? groups. Both contain special glasses.

[spark]

I have got the Sigma 28-70, 2.8.

1) Is noisy
2) Is Slow
3) Not too good on focusing when mount to a Canon 10D.....

I don't have the 3) problem on my D60 and D30...

[Arnie]

David,

Thanks for the info and sorry for the mixed up :)

[EvanTass]

Since you already have the 70-200 and are going to purchase the 50 1.8, forget the 24(28)-70 and get the new canon 17-40 4L. I purchased that lens and I love it. I owned the Sigma 24-70 2.8 ex and after using it on the 10d, along with my other canon lenses, I traded it in and got myself the 50 1.4; probably the best decision I could have made. The Sigma was far too soft wide open and the 10d seemed to have a problem focusing with it, not to mention the size. The canon 17-40 is sharp, focuses very well, and really comes in handy when wide angle is what you need. If its too much money, get the canon 24-85, or, the 28-135 IS, both will be sharper than the Sigma (even though the Sigma is a 2.8, its worthless until 4 or 4.5) and both of them are smaller and lighter than the Sigma.