Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro

[In2Photos]

Well, now the Sigma seems to be very popular. In fact I thought about getting this lens myself and dumping the Tamron 28-75 and kit lens. If it were a constant 2.8 I would have no reservations but I am still contemplating whether or not I need the extra stop and a third. I did however just coax a co-worker into getting it with his new XT so maybe I can borrow his sometime and check it out.

So now it is time to post away. These threads seem to be pretty popular and people consistently post new pics all the time so don't be shy and post away.

[evandavies]

You have probably come across one of my comments in other posts about this lens and I will say it again... "I got one recently and I love it..." ;)

It replaces my Sigma 18-125mm (as you can see from my signature). Tho the 18-125 is a good lens and I will miss the extra reach, the 17-70 is much sharper throughout the range and the f2.8-4.5 is much better. Of course it would be great if it was f2.8 only but I don't think there is another lens with this range that is faster...? (I'm sure I'll be corrected...)

Tho its not a true 1:1 macro (its 1:2.3) its still lots of fun and has a ridiculously close focus. There is one photo where I could almost focus on water drops ON THE UV FILTER!!!

Examples: Sorry, mainly closeups...
http://www.pbase.com/evandavies/sigma_17_70

:)

[In2Photos]

Thanks for breaking the ice on this one. My co-worker got his today and we were testing its macro capabilities. We could almost touch the object we were trying to focus on, which happened to be the box from a spare battery.

[evandavies]

Yeah, this can be a problem for lighting as you can get so close and the front end is so wide.

[trailstar]

All right, here a bunch. I have not been selective, so please be gentle. Should give an indication of what the lense can do.

I have shot a lot of sports today, will post more next week.

From Yesterdays HeliRide (Biking) in Norway
http://terrengsykkel.no/img/magasin/telex/full/heli.jpg

Alva
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62286501/original.jpg

Flower
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62232958/original.jpg

My son
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62330983/original.jpg

Chute
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62331011/original.jpg

and again....
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62588570/original.jpg

Concentration
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62384102/original.jpg

My dad
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62393083/original.jpg

[In2Photos]

Those pics are great. Thank you for contributing.

Come on folks. This lens has been a topic of heavy discussion and many of you have picked one up. show me those shots.

[demarco36]

I get mine today from UPS (Yeaaa) I hopefully can post some in a few days. Albiet not as good as some of the others but I am just learning. This actually might be a good opportunity for some corrective
criticism

[trailstar]

These were posted in the sports section, but I´ll put them here as well

All images are taken with a 30D + Sigma 17-70. All at ISO100, Av-Mode, Average Metering Mode(1), Manual Focus (prefocused), and shutterspeeds above 1/1000, Full Exif should be in the photos.

Shot in RAW, processed in Bibble, then CS2 for tweaking + sharpening.

Anyway, here they are.

BMX, Turndown
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62765272/original.jpg

BMX, Nosedive 360
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62765236/original.jpg

Mountainbike, Superman Seatgrab
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/72342878/original.jpg

Mountainbike, Superman Seatgrab
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62887416/original.jpg

BMX, 360 X-UP
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62765267/original.jpg

Mountainbike, Tailwhip
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62765252/original.jpg

BMX, 360
http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/62765268/original.jpg

[Dorman]

What a great lens this 17-70 appears to be!

Great images Trailstar, the BMX stuff blew me away.

[andrewaaa5]

i am also considering this lens. any more pics from anyone lucky to have one? anyone not happy with it for any reason?

[Mr. Clean]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=162904&highlight=17-70
I actually returned mine for the 24-70, but sometimes I regret it. The focal length on the 17-70, and the IQ makes for one of the best bang for the buck walkarounds! I'll get another, I just have to decide if I want the 30mm,10-20, or 17-70 first.

[andrewaaa5]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=162904&highlight=17-70
I actually returned mine for the 24-70, but sometimes I regret it. The focal length on the 17-70, and the IQ makes for one of the best bang for the buck walkarounds! I'll get another, I just have to decide if I want the 30mm,10-20, or 17-70 first.

Thanks Mr Clean for 'linking' me up. It was a useful thread. I still have not made my mind up as yet, and am not in a hurry. Bookmarked : ) Thanks.

[Steve Parr]

Here's one from last night:

http://onstagephotography.com/images/hugefire06.jpg

I am really diggin' this lens...

[Steve Parr]

"Hi, my name is Lloyd, and I have no brain":

http://mishuna.image.pbase.com/o4/32/661032/1/62765260.MUeG5aCQ.jam20_makken_supermanseatgrab.jp g

No idea what would possess someone to want to do that.

Unless it's to impress the chicks.

Nice shots, man. I love the perspective you got...

[trailstar]

No idea what would possess someone to want to do that.

Unless it's to impress the chicks.

Nice shots, man. I love the perspective you got...

Ha ha,

Funny story. That kid was one of the few who actually crashed hard enough to be treated by the onsite medical staff.

Here she is:
http://k43.pbase.com/o4/32/661032/1/62765265.kkN8cF19.jam24_chicka_ts.jpg

PS. Still taken with a 17-70 ;)

[Orogeny]

Here is a link that has quite a few examples.

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/17_70_28_45_dc_macro

Tim

[dan25730]

http://i.pbase.com/g4/67/689567/2/64555945.pTqngP1F.jpg

[Falkon]

where can you buy one in the USA?

[Tom W]

Impressive shots, people. The lens is looking good, but the real deal is the people behind it.

Might grab one for 1.6X. ;)

[m3incorp]

Those were some really nice action shots. Sure would hate to think of him landing on that tripod that is sitting there.

[225719]

I'm about to buy one and would lov e to see some original high ress pics !

[jbrown1]

Heres a quick shot I took while I was out walking the dog the other day

CLICKY (http://www.boogaloo-photo.co.uk/sigma1770.jpg)

No PP done at all

[molesrkool]

how fast is the autofocus on this lens?

[ccp900]

trail, those shots of your son did not undergo any type of sharpening and you shot them raw??

what picture style were you using? LOL....those are crazy sharp man. oh and did you hyperfocal focus on the BMX shots? i need to learn how to do that one of these days.

[Coco-Puffs]

My dad
http://i.pbase.com/o4/32/661032/1/62393083.dk2q0ej8.paps.jpg

oh my god!! its Eric Clapton!! lol, but kinda looks like him, doesnt he? maybe not :p.

and your pics are amazingly sharp!

[trailstar]

ccp900,

the shots of my son were shot in jpg, and have a tiny bit of sharpening applied.

Heres a 100% crop of his right eye, no sharpening applied.
http://i.pbase.com/o4/32/661032/1/65014846.v04l3wF1.sander.jpg

For the bmx/mtb shots I prefocused using auto (had someone stand in the middle of the jump first) and switched to manual focus, so that I couldnt ruin anything ;) then stayed away from the focus. other than that? Just point and shoot. Av mode. I sat at the exact same location for the shots, and the riders just kept coming and coming.

light was pretty much the same all the time, so I should have gone fully manual. I think I used pic.style landscape for the shots, all in raw. however, the skin tone looks weird in landscape so I had to do some post processing.

thanks for the heads up!

[ccp900]

yeah, i was blown away by the sharpness of your pics and if they came out of the camera like that then its amazing.

sad to hear that a bit of sharpening was applied though it would have rocked if they came out looking like that LOL. but STILL,that 100% crop of the right eye is AMAZING!

you have a superb copy, i wouldnt sell that ever if i had that copy.....time to hunt down the local sigma distributor here, sit in the stock room for 6 hours looking for an exact copy of yours LOL.

and to think i was looking at a 17-55 canon....costs 1/3 the price....but man IS and 2.8....GRRRRR!!!!! cant decide need to meditate some more LOL.

great shots trail, keep em coming. continue to amaze us.....

[Coco-Puffs]

and to think i was looking at a 17-55 canon....costs 1/3 the price....but man IS and 2.8....GRRRRR!!!!! cant decide need to meditate some more LOL.

i saw that lens and i was like "screw sigma, im buying this"
then i saw the price tag and was like "screw canon, im buying a sigma"
and I havent bought anything yet LOL.

but I decided no to the EFS17-55 b/c I really dont need IS, and I shoot @ around f6-8 usually. Plus with that price, I can buy a 17-70 and a 10-20.

[trailstar]

yeah, i was blown away by the sharpness of your pics and if they came out of the camera like that then its amazing.

sad to hear that a bit of sharpening was applied though it would have rocked if they came out looking like that LOL. but STILL,that 100% crop of the right eye is AMAZING!

you have a superb copy, i wouldnt sell that ever if i had that copy.....time to hunt down the local sigma distributor here, sit in the stock room for 6 hours looking for an exact copy of yours LOL.

and to think i was looking at a 17-55 canon....costs 1/3 the price....but man IS and 2.8....GRRRRR!!!!! cant decide need to meditate some more LOL.

great shots trail, keep em coming. continue to amaze us.....

I hear you. sharpening sucks. But for the price of this lense I dont mind. the 17-55 is probably an amazing lense. I looked at that one too, but couldnt justify it at the time. IS and 2.8 all the way would be fantastic. Probably faster AF too.

anyway, I took the 17-70 to Morzine. Wonderful lense!

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/65015478/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/65015476/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/64065139/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/64067088/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/64065155/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/64065179/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/64065467/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/64065471/original.jpg

[ccp900]

god trail....those are just amazing man!! can you post the out of the camera versions? with no PP...just wanna have an idea how much sharper you get them to be after a lil tweaking.....sorry to be demanding man...

[ccp900]

i saw that lens and i was like "screw sigma, im buying this"
then i saw the price tag and was like "screw canon, im buying a sigma"
and I havent bought anything yet LOL.

but I decided no to the EFS17-55 b/c I really dont need IS, and I shoot @ around f6-8 usually. Plus with that price, I can buy a 17-70 and a 10-20.


i hear ya man hahaha. that price tag mutilates the pocket. and im in the same boat as you. i just recently sold my tamron 28-75 in the hopes of getting a 17-55. then i see the sigma 17-70 pics again and then started considering the 17-40 L. now i cant make a decision.

[nicshow]

Straight out of the camera, no PP
http://static.flickr.com/86/213212065_22d439638f_o.jpg

[arjay702]

that is a freaking cool lense.

[trailstar]

god trail....those are just amazing man!! can you post the out of the camera versions? with no PP...just wanna have an idea how much sharper you get them to be after a lil tweaking.....sorry to be demanding man...

No prob. Here's an out of the camera version. Focus is on the right eye. This image needs no sharpening as far as I am concerned :)

http://i.pbase.com/o4/32/661032/1/65033297.gfUVVx3j.IMG_5171.jpg

[ccp900]

yep, this lens does deliver....now im really confused.

24-105L, 17-55 2.8,17-40L, or 17-70 sigma.....seriously.....this sucks LOL.

well if i go for the 17-70, i wouldnt have to go sell my kidney....thats always a plus.

hey trail,can you run down the exif on that last pic....thanks.

[trailstar]

Make: Canon EOS 30D
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 70 mm
Exposure Time: 1/160 sec
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO Equivalent: 200
White Balance (-1)
Metering Mode: average (1)
JPEG Quality: (6)
Exposure Program: aperture priority (3)

[syntrix]

17-70 has been my walkaround for a long time. I'll have to get on the other computer and run though the archives. I've moved and I'm only working on the laptop with a cellular modem connection of late, and I've been shooting sigma 10-20mm and their 30mm f1.4 lately.

But the 17-70 is a great lens, glad to see a strong following here!

[syntrix]

Here's one from today, really hazy out, but it performed very well:

http://www.lasvegastech.com/ar_pics/pinnacle_3.jpg

Edit: I really have no idea what that line is, I didn't think there were power lines... oh well I'll save it for CS2 for another day.

[ccp900]

could it be a hair inside the lens or the sensor?

[syntrix]

Yup, dog hair on the sensor, grrr... and I just blew everything out the night before. Must have got in during lens changes today.

[ezza]

have had my 30D with a 17-70 for about 2 weeks so still learning :) this is my contribution (was just testing the remote timer)
with PP done
Tv(Shutter Speed)
-1812Sec.
Av(Aperture Value)
-F16
ISO Speed
-250
Lens
-17-70mm
Focal Length
-19.0 mm

[Margie]

Actually, I don't have any photos because I don't have this lens yet...but after looking at all the photos and comparing them to the ones I took with the lens kit 18-55mm...I think I am going to get this one.

I really love the sharpness of them compared to the ones from the kit lens.
It seems like it would be a good up-grade from it.

One problem that I do have...is that I have heard that sigma has a quality control problem and the lens can be great or less than great. It seems like it would be wiser to try and buy it locally, where I could try it out first, even if it will probably cost more. Would you agree?

Thank you for your help. I have alittle money that I just made that is burning a hole in my pocket !

Margie

[syntrix]

I've never got a sigma lens with a problem. I think a few lenses, when they first came out, might have had a few issues, but sigma is quick to fix them.

If you buy online, make sure they will exchange the lens if it's soft (another good reason for a local shop, you can try before you buy!).

[dan25730]

The only problem im having with this lens is the creeping. If I extend the lens to 70mm then point it at the ceiling it slips down and if i set the lens to 17mm and point the lens at the floor it does the same. It does have a lock but this only works when the lens is at 17mm, probably for storage.

This isn't a massive problem because im not normally shooting at those angles but in niggles me and im taking it back to the shop to point it out to them. Another user has said that Sigma could probably tighten the barrles to fix this.

apart from that this lens is lovely.

[Steve1096]

Does anyone have any comparisons of the 17-70 to the Sigma 18-200? I have the 18-200 and am currently wanting to change to a two lens system with the long end either being the Canon 70-200 f4 L or the Canon 70-300 IS (when ever it gets in stock again) (still cant decide on that, but that is another debate).

I was thinking of the Canon 17-85 IS but it seems a majority of people prefer the 17-70. I am curious though as how the 17-70 compares to the 18-200 as I still have been unable to find any comparisons. Thanks in advance.

[ccp900]

well, you really cant compare a lens that has 11x zoom with something that is like 4x zoom. that amount of glass in there is surely going to lead to IQ degradation. That being said i do have my own tamron 18-200, its decent for a walkaround during sunny days. i just love having the 200 reach hehehe. but if you ask me since i love IQ, id rather have the 17-70. well id rather have the 17-55 2.8 and the 24-105L but i think you know why i cant have them both hehehe....im in the market to buy either 1 and am currently in limbo deciding which....

[Purelife]

I picked one up tonight.. i will post some pictures from it in the next few days

[dan25730]

I picked one up tonight.. i will post some pictures from it in the next few days

Purelife,

Out of curiosity can you check if your lens creeps up or down as I mentioned in an earlier post. My copy is a couple of months old now and im curious if it does this on a new copy.

Thanks.

[rakesh]

Hi

I'll be getting my 17-70 Next week and then I'll post some shots.

Regards

Rakesh

[gef]

My 17-70 lens creeped when I first got it, but only when partially extended. At 17 or 70 the barrel stayed put and after a few weeks it's still the same.

[Purelife]

Purelife,

Out of curiosity can you check if your lens creeps up or down as I mentioned in an earlier post. My copy is a couple of months old now and im curious if it does this on a new copy.

Thanks.

Hey i checked for creep before i left the store with my copy.. I asked for the newest box that they got in and it had no creep at all. he pulled out the display lens for me which is been there for a bit it has a bit of creep.

[Margie]

No creep on my 17-70 either...tried it both ways!

A few photos with 17-70...no PS ed.

Both taken this morning with f 4.5, 800 ISO, at 70mm

[Margie]

A few from the last few days.... I really like the quick, accurate focusing it has...not too sure about the sharpness, the wine glass photo I like, but at a distance it doesn't seem that clear to me...

[Margie]

A couple of views with wide end...

[rounder_09]

I was jsut ondering if there is a macro and non-macro verison of this lens (excuse my ignorance if this is a stupid question :) )??

I called my local dealer about this lens, and was quoted 450 canadian. I then looked at the sigma site, and only saw the macro one, which is a lot more expensive (590 US).

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3315&navigator=6

Did i get a quote for a non-macro lens?... or does the sigma site have the wrong price?... or am i getting a great deal??

TIA

[In2Photos]

I was jsut ondering if there is a macro and non-macro verison of this lens (excuse my ignorance if this is a stupid question :) )??

I called my local dealer about this lens, and was quoted 450 canadian. I then looked at the sigma site, and only saw the macro one, which is a lot more expensive (590 US).

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3315&navigator=6

Did i get a quote for a non-macro lens?... or does the sigma site have the wrong price?... or am i getting a great deal??

TIA

There is only one version. That $590 is MSRP. Retail is about $389.

[rounder_09]

There is only one version. That $590 is MSRP. Retail is about $389.

Thanks a bunch!

[yellowmr]

does anyone know if you can use Kenko extension tubes with this lens? If so, that'll probably seal the deal for me.

[deniska]

Here's a couple taken with 17-70.
http://images18.fotki.com/v330/photos/9/960748/3840824/DannieNewBike06-vi.jpg
Original here (http://images18.fotki.com/v330/filep9Ho/3da64/9/960748/3840824/DannieNewBike06.jpg)

http://images14.fotki.com/v21/photos/9/960748/3840824/IMG_1333-vi.jpg
Original here (http://images14.fotki.com/v21/filel4nO/3da64/9/960748/3840824/IMG_1333.jpg)

No PP (other than basic things applied in Adobe Light... whatever, which I don't use anymore -- nice piece of software, but very slow, and seems to introduce more noise to pictures than other RAW convertors like RSE or DPP).

[Orogeny]

does anyone know if you can use Kenko extension tubes with this lens? If so, that'll probably seal the deal for me.I don't know the answer for sure since I have never used extension tubes, but my understanding about tubes is that they allow you to get closer to the subject. If that is the case, I can tell you that I cannot imagine being able to get closer to the subject than I can without the tubes, so I don't know if they will help much.

Tim

[Jon]

does anyone know if you can use Kenko extension tubes with this lens? If so, that'll probably seal the deal for me.Kenko tubes only have a problem with the ef-S mount; this is a stock EF mount even though it's the smaller image circle. So they'll mount. You may be focussing inside the lens at the wide end with much extension on, though.

[gospastic]

i had this lense, i actually just exchanged it yesterday. i really liked it, except for the fact that the copy i had had creep in both directions, and at certain times it had trouble auto focusing. however, when it does focus correctly, it is super sharp. one thing you must not try though, is using flash when doing macro shots. at least on the rebel xt, the diameter is so large that you can see the shadow of the lense in pictures. i don't even know if other lenses are like that but it got annoying sometimes.

anyway, here are a couple samples:

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/5247/rainha7.jpg
100% crop from jpeg no p-p
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/2149/raincrophe7.jpg
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/8642/fruitbowlnr8.jpg
100%crop from jpeg no p-p
http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/9492/fruitbowlcropry9.jpg

[astayton]

where can you buy one in the USA?

I'm ordering one from...

http://www.47stphoto.com/item_child.asp?c=5294915&p=5018884&catky=&subcatky1=&subcatky2=&subcatky3=

[landoawd]

Just a snap I posted in another thread. No PP, just resize/border/"sig".

I'd like to take a second and recomment thecamerabox on Ebay (not affiliated, just pleased with the purchase). 316 with 12 dollar shipping for this puppy, and it came in 4 days.

[Mr. Clean]

just for the record, zoom creep is pretty normal on that lens, hence the "zoom lock" switch. Those crops from gospastic are impressive. I don't think I would have given that lens back!

[Nick_C]

Zoom lock only works at 17mm so its more of a transportation lock, I wish you could lock it up at any setting.

Using a flash with any lens on macro shots can create shadows caused by the lens blocking the light, the only solution is to move the flash off shoe, this is what I do with my Sigma EF500 DG Super, I put it in optical slave & handhold it.

The 17-70 is a fine lens, with a little postprocessing it can keep up with an L series quite easily, infact I remember it being compared to one on a site some place, there was no difference, but an L has better build quality, you cant compare it with that, although the Sigma is real solid.

Nick :-)

[rakesh]

Hi

I bought my Sigma 17-70 today and here are test shots. NO Post processing just converted RAW to JPG using Digital Photo Prof.

@ 17mm, F4, 1/60, ISO 400

http://static.flickr.com/91/243861354_622a8ad46d_o.jpg

70 mm, F4.5, 1/60, ISO 400
http://static.flickr.com/96/243861358_9c23658e16_o.jpg

70 mm, F4.5, 1/15 Sec., ISO 400
http://static.flickr.com/98/243861356_c386a13798_o.jpg

Cropped image : (70 mm, F4.5, 1/15 Sec., ISO 400)

http://static.flickr.com/88/243862781_15a69315c6_o.jpg

[deniska]

Here's another example:
http://images19.fotki.com/v22/photos/9/960748/4034486/Montral_IMG_2652-vi.jpg

100% crop:
http://images19.fotki.com/v22/photos/9/960748/4034486/Montral_IMG_2652_c1-vi.jpg

Another 100% crop:
http://images19.fotki.com/v292/photos/9/960748/4034486/Montral_IMG_2652_c2-vi.jpg

A little soft on a 100% crop, but it works well for my needs.

[giarc]

Hi guys,

Just a quick quesion from a newbie - would it be advisable buying this lense from a UK Ebay seller, they appear to be roughly £50 cheaper than the shops.

Is there any risk regarding warranty etc?

Thanks in advanced,

Craig

[Warrick Hunt]

Hello newbie here, have had the Sigma 17-70 for 2 weeks now and i'm not sure if i have a good copy :( as i find the pictures i have taken with my Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro much much sharper.
The pictures are stright from the camera.
Great site btw :D .


Hope this works.
P.s have read about stoping down to get sharper pictures, what's this all about and how is it done?

[Nick_C]

Stopping down simply means instead of taking your photos lets say at F2.8 or F4.0, you would take them instead at F8.0.

Most lenses are sharper the more you stop down, but dont go overboard, I have found F16 to be pretty sharp but F22 starts to see lens diffraction, which is normal but will degrade the sharpness of your pics.

The 17-70 is sharp at any focal length (zoom setting) at around F8 to F16 & is super sharp at 24mm F5.6.

Nick :-)

[Warrick Hunt]

Thanks nick you've been very helpfull mate, will act upon you advice :D

[Nick_C]

No problem, if you take a look at the link below, you can actually see what settings give the best results, I found it to be really interesting, the graph looks a bit puzzling at first but basically purple (low on the chart) is best (sharpest) with blue & lighter blues the worst (soft), you will see what I mean if you call up the Canon kit lens tests! by clicking on the graph you can actually choose the aperture & focal length & see what is the best or worst, very neat!

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/349/cat/10

Nick :-)

[Nick_C]

Here is a recent shot taken at 30mm F5.6 ISO 400

http://www.network201.plus.com/Tests/cornwall.jpg

Nick :-)

[Warrick Hunt]

Hey Nick, If i was to stop down to maybe f8 would that help to make this picture any sharper than what it is?


44mm F10 ISO400

[Warrick Hunt]

Sorry to be asking silly questions like this, is there a better part of the forum for questions like this?

Well I am new here you know :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Mike Reynolds]

thats gnarly

[Nick_C]

Hey Nick, If i was to stop down to maybe f8 would that help to make this picture any sharper than what it is?


44mm F10 ISO400

No I would say it wouldnt have made any difference, that setting is in the sweet spot of the lens already, so sharpness should have been pretty good.

I need a little more info,

What was the shutter speed on that photo?

Was it taken in Raw or Jpeg?

Do you do any post processing?

Let me know & I will try & help,

Nick :-)

[Warrick Hunt]

Hello Nick

Don’t want to hog this thread so I’ve posted the Info in the Talk About Photography part of the site.

Cheers Warrick Hunt
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[jbrown1]

Here's a couple I took recently.

For a cheap lens, I think its great

[Janika]

Good images everyone, Looking forward to go out with this lens. I just picked it up couple of days ago, but haven't had the chance to give it a good test drive. Only tested it in the store, using my 350D. Thank you for posting all these images! ;)

[papucla10]

Hey Nick, If i was to stop down to maybe f8 would that help to make this picture any sharper than what it is?


44mm F10 ISO400

I think you may be having a camera shake problem, you should take your time when taking a picture make sure the focus is at an specific point, using the center focus point would help. make sure you have focused correctly before firing, hold the shutter half way and after you have know you have your subject in focus fire.

[Nick_C]

I thought that at first but he told me it was 1/250th so that rules out camera shake.

Nick :-)

[deniska]

I thought that at first but he told me it was 1/250th so that rules out camera shake.

Nick :-)

What if he was drinking heavily the night before? Some hands shake harder than others, you know ;)

[Warrick Hunt]

What if he was drinking heavily the night before? Some hands shake harder than others, you know ;)


Hey I drink to stop the shakes!.......Maybe I didn’t drink enough.;)

[shaneotool]

Just a heads up -
I bought a tamron style lens cap with the center release for this lens. The glass is so close to the edge of the lens that the cap was hitting the glass before it would seat against the edge - so be careful.

[syntrix]

Just a heads up -
I bought a tamron style lens cap with the center release for this lens. The glass is so close to the edge of the lens that the cap was hitting the glass before it would seat against the edge - so be careful.

You need nikon style one, not one of those ones with a big thick center that are cheaper. I can see those not working.

[shaneotool]

You need nikon style one, not one of those ones with a big thick center that are cheaper. I can see those not working.

Thanks bro - that thick center style is the one I got. I'll pick up the nikon one instead.

I got the cheap one over at Bedfords on rodney parham - small world.

[OneTime]

What about night shot, any samples?

[tiagomiguel]

Does this lens extend during focus, because according to the sigma website it doesn´t.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/digital/17_70_28_45.htm

[gef]

The lens does not extend during focus..

[MeNiS]

Does this lens extend during focus, because according to the sigma website it doesn´t.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/digital/17_70_28_45.htm

when focusing - no. but the focus ring does move. that's the only thing i don't really like.

when zooming - yes.

[Nick_C]

You get used to that after like 10mins of using the lens, just make sure you hold the lens properly so you are not touching the focus ring, otherwise that shot will be screwed up.

Nick :-)

[jespereriksen]

Here are a single pic of an old watch

[Nick_C]

Nice lighting! I like the orangey glow, it really warms the photo up.

Nick :-)

[Janika]

Shot this on Sunday, mounted on my XT. My first outing with this lens.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Macro/Sept-24-2006-100.jpg

[Nick_C]

Nice! what aperture was used? as I cant help feeling that while its a nice shot I would have just liked to have seen the back edge in focus.

It sure is a great lens, I dont understand why on all the reviews they compare it against the kit lens, I mean the kit lens isnt a patch on the 17-70, the test results of the 17-70 are impressive, ive seen worse sharpness figures from some L lenses, they should compare the 17-70 with something better than a lousy kit lens, also Sigma should have gave it the EX badge.

Nick :-)

[Janika]

Nick I shot this at f/4.5 that's why the DOF. as I said, this was my first outing with it and I am still not used to the closeups with larger aperture. We had crazy wind too, so I tried to stay in the woods where we had only limited light, so the larger aperture came handy.
On Photozone.de they comapre this to the more expensive Sigma 18-50 EX 2.8 and the Canon EFS 17-85 iS and the 17-70 DC beats em both in optical quality.
Can't wait to take it out to the beautiful Gatineau park in a few weeks. I'll share the images with y'all!

[Nick_C]

I know what its like, I tried taking a macro of a flower outdoors but couldnt get F16 due to the poor light & not to mention the flower keeping on moving all over the place, how people take closeups of bugs amazes me as well.

I was going to buy the 17-85 IS but it has THE worst distortion of any lens & a very high CA, I think its a case of getting too much for the money with that lens, most of the money goes into the IS no doubt..

Nick :-)

[gef]

Yah, it took some getting used to the 17-70 for me too! Mind I did not have much previous experience either as I'm fairly new to all this, previous to this zoom lens was my kit!. Sometimes I found myself getting to close to things when shooting macro and the focus was off. I really like the Sigma's semi macro, below is a recent shot which I'm pleased with. Even though some of the petals are out of focus, I'm still very happy with it!

http://static.zooomr.com/images/226442_b6ab9def19.jpg
Bigger (http://static.zooomr.com/images/226442_b6ab9def19_b.jpg)

I did a lot of reading on the 17/18-50 Tamron/Sigma lens as well as the Canon 17-85. But for me the 17-70 was the best fit for a well rounded lens!

I would love to see some shots of Gatineau park, it's been a few years since I've been there and I'd love to see some recent photo's of it!!

[Nick_C]

If I lived in Canada I would hardly ever be indoors, id love to see some photos of Gatineau park.

What aperture did you use for the flower shot? I find at 70mm on closeups there is such a shallow DOF.

Nick :-)

[gef]

There are some really beautiful areas in Canada, I plan to photograph more of it!! It's a big country and it may take me a while... =_)

For the flower above I used:

ISO: 100
Exposure: 1/60 sec
Aperture: f/4.5
Focal Length: 70mm

[Janika]

That's a nice flower shot and yes at f/4.5 you only have a small portion of your subject in focus, as this lens gives very shallow DOF. Going to Gatineau Park is best around the second week of October. Here are some more closeups from last Sunday. I think I shot all these at ISO-200, f/4.5 & 70-mm, AV, Handheld...


http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Flowers/Sept-24-2006-083.jpg

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Flowers/Sept-24-2006-080.jpg

[johnms88]

Janika, I really like the second shot.
Good Work :)


I just got this lens a few days ago..but its been rainy out. Ill post some good pics when I get them (or if i get them)

[burchy]

Just bought one of these, only had chance to try it indoors with the flash, But on initial observations it looks superb. These have absolutely no PP:

Settings: Manual, 1/100 sec, f6.3, ISO200, 550ex bounced, 62mm

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/8779/img4164hf3.jpg

Here's a 100% Crop:

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/5484/100eyecropsb7.jpg

For the money, this looks like it might be a very sound investment. I know where my kit lens it going anyway;)

[Nick_C]

Welcome to 17-70 world :-p

Its a great lens, possibly even an L in disguise!! lol..

Nick :-)

[giarc]

Only bought the lens yesterday - tried it out today. Found it prefered to focus away from the centre rectange most of the time, hope its ok - time will tell! Went to the zoo so few pictures, some behind glass im afraid:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e320/gringoboyo/bees.jpg
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e320/gringoboyo/17701.jpg
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e320/gringoboyo/IMG_0770.jpg

[Nick_C]

They look great!

Nick :-)

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

any night shots? or low light pics?

[Nick_C]

Take a look here, inside of a church is always dark!

http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=211401&page=2

Nick :-)

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

i wonder if i can find any concert shots with the lens

[Nick_C]

Depends if anyone has been to a concert lately, maybe somebody might have some outdoor shots at night at a BBQ or something..

Fireworks night coming up soon, there might be some pics then outside in the dark..

Nick :-)

[syntrix]

any night shots? or low light pics?

I have mine fs in the fs forum here, but here you go:

http://www.swankmonkey.com/vw/jetta/2006/images/night1/gli_night2_400.jpg

edit:

link to my FS of this lens:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=224488

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

you forgot to attach

[Nick_C]

I see a photo (red car)

Nick :-)

[syntrix]

Wish I had the full size on that one, it was on a rebel and it turned out great!!

I have some car interior pics somewhere too at 17mm.... I can't wait to get my office setup after the move, but it's not there yet. Probably in about 2 weeks :(

[Richard T]

http://www.copford.plus.com/images/Photos/Picture%20597.jpg

http://www.copford.plus.com/images/Photos/Picture%20757.jpg


http://www.copford.plus.com/images/Photos/sample.jpg

and a 100% crop

http://www.copford.plus.com/images/Photos/sample1.jpg

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

wow

[lakiluno]

I just want this lens...

Dave...hurry up and get bored of it :D

[MagicallyDelicious]

Just bought it!

[TMR Design]

I love this lens! My first zoom.

[WhoisDAN]

The Sigma looks like a pretty good lens. I chose the Tamron 28-75mm instead.

[TMR Design]

I hear great things about the Tamron as well. I chose the Sigma for the range. I wanted something that covered wide angle and on a 1.6 crop the 28 just wouldn't have done it for me.

[Nick_C]

I love the close focussing on the Sigma 17-70, AF focusses about 1" away from the front of the lens but if you go into MF you can touch the front UV on the subject & it can still focus!

This was taken about 2" away, I dont need to get that close but its nice to have the ability if I need it.

http://www.network201.plus.com/Tests/tap.jpg

The 17-70 is optically very good & great value for money.

Nick :-)

[Janika]

Couple of more closeups from earlier this month:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Closeups/Oct-02-2006-068.jpg

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Closeups/Oct-02-2006-063.jpg

[moophus]

can someone with firsthand experience compare the sigma 17-70 and the canon 17-85 IS ? I know it's slower lens but there a bit more range at the far end.

[Janika]

Congrats Sarah, See You'll love it! ;)

John

Just bought it!

[Hedoniste]

Nice thread. ;)

[dtngo]

can someone with firsthand experience compare the sigma 17-70 and the canon 17-85 IS ? I know it's slower lens but there a bit more range at the far end.
Have a look at http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/17701785. Great review there (along with alot of his other reviews).

[TMR Design]

I love the close focussing on the Sigma 17-70, AF focusses about 1" away from the front of the lens but if you go into MF you can touch the front UV on the subject & it can still focus!

This was taken about 2" away, I dont need to get that close but its nice to have the ability if I need it.

http://www.network201.plus.com/Tests/tap.jpg

The 17-70 is optically very good & great value for money.

Nick :-)

Couple of more closeups from earlier this month:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Closeups/Oct-02-2006-068.jpg

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b186/Janika2/Closeups/Oct-02-2006-063.jpg

It's these kind of shots and the flexibility of this lens that make me love it so much.

[Nick_C]

Have a look at http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/17701785. Great review there (along with alot of his other reviews).

Also remember the 17-85IS has the largest barrel distortion & CA of all, its breaking new records on barrel distortion, take a look on photozone.de & see what I mean.

I think the IS is really where most of the money has gone with that lens, the optics are second!

Nick :-)

[Janika]

This is so true! I had the EFS 17-85 iS for a year and I sold it couple of months ago. The only thing it was good for is landscapes, as it was relatively sharp from 35mm and up.


Also remember the 17-85IS has the largest barrel distortion & CA of all, its breaking new records on barrel distortion, take a look on photozone.de & see what I mean.

I think the IS is really where most of the money has gone with that lens, the optics are second!

Nick :-)

[johnms88]

They are both cropped and resized, but you'll get over it :P

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b35/johnms88/Theresa_by_johnms88.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b35/johnms88/IMG_0090.png

[Nick_C]

I was messing around with my 17-70 today & took a closeup of one of my fathers cacti plants, its always been a hobby of his to grow rare cacti.

I took this one at F22 from about 1.5" away, the camera was on a tripod, mirror lockup, a slow shutter to get as much ambient light onto the plant & then with my Sigma flash handheld I fired half way through the exposure bounced off a sheet of A4, to fill in any shadow areas.

I love this lens, I am actually wondering what would be the advantage of a true macro lens?

My next attempt will be with a plant in a larger pot so it isnt shown in the photo, or a different angle, as the pot is very unattractive! bearing in mind this is a very small cactus, not even 1" in diameter & due to the shape of the plant its hard to get a decent DOF, even now some of the tips are not in focus, but that cant be helped.

http://www.network201.plus.com/Tests/macrocacti1.jpg

100% crop (a photo just isnt the same without a nice 100% crop!) ;-)

http://www.network201.plus.com/Tests/macrocacti2.jpg

The 17-70 is king when it comes to being a good all rounder..

Nick :-)

[mven74]

mine just arrived today. this thread actually convinced me to purchase it. i'll be posting pictures really soon.

[Throlkim]

Does anyone have a comparison of the lens at 17mm, and the lens at 70mm?
I'd like to see how long the focal length actually is (it's a very odd length, never used one at this range before).

From what I've seen in this thread, it seems fast enough for sports/action shots, as well as nice landscape work.

[TheAztech]

STTOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPP this is too tempting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I need to save money !

[gef]

Funny, that is one thing I did when I first got the lens... take a shot at 17 and then at 70... If someone doesn't get to it first I'll post some shots... I should add a 300mm shot as well since that would include the longest and widest shots in the lenses I have.... =_)

[Throlkim]

That'd be great. I'm really interested in this lens, but I also have the opportunity to photograph sports for my university paper, and I'd like to see how the lens would work for that (doesn't have to be a perfect zoom - can crop fairly small outdoors).

Then again, I can just say "screw the paper!" and get it anyway. :D

[gef]

Not that best shots in the world that's for sure, but I did quickly snap two shots this morning at 17mm and 70mm..

Sigma @17mm
http://static.zooomr.com/images/472772_0cccef8a24.jpg

Sigma @70mm
http://static.zooomr.com/images/472773_b88253eed0.jpg

Hopefully this will give you an idea what kind of range to expect...

[TMR Design]

Does anyone have a comparison of the lens at 17mm, and the lens at 70mm?
I'd like to see how long the focal length actually is (it's a very odd length, never used one at this range before).

From what I've seen in this thread, it seems fast enough for sports/action shots, as well as nice landscape work.


Fast enough for sports/action is questionable. I own the lens and depending on the lighting you may have to crank up the ISO and/or use a tripod.
Great lens overall!!! I love mine.

[syntrix]

Fast enough for sports/action is questionable. I own the lens and depending on the lighting you may have to crank up the IS and/or use a tripod.
Great lens overall!!! I love mine.

I know you meant ISO instead of IS, but just so others know what you are talking about ;)

[TMR Design]

I know you meant ISO instead of IS, but just so others know what you are talking about ;)

Thanks, I corrected it.

[Throlkim]

Excellent, thanks for the shots and notes guys - it's definitely on my to-buy list, but just depends on when :D

[TMR Design]

A walk in the park.

[Dorman]

I wish this thread would just crawl away and die, this lens has haunted me since I bought my 17-40. Don't get me wrong I LOVE my 17-40 but the extra range and close-up ability would be nice and the slightly faster aperture on the wide-end. With the extra range I could justify picking up a 10-20 EX UWA as a compliment to it, right now there'd be too much overlap and I'm afraid I wouldn't touch my 17-40. Darn Sigma with their great stuff at decent prices!

[TMR Design]

Sorry Dorman,

I don't think it will die. I have not fallen out of love with this lens and just today I was out shooting with it using a CPL I borrowed and I had a ball. I'll probably post another shot.

I don't own other Sigma lenses at this time (although I am mapping out when to get the Sigma 10-20mm. I've been eyeing that for a while now) so I can't speak about them other than to say that based on the build, feel and image quality I would not hesitate to buy another Sigma lens unless it was just getting bad reviews for some reason. Bad copies can happen with any lens so I don't really pay much attention to the posts expressing dissatisfaction because they got a bad copy. In all cases it is either replaced by the retailer, the manufacturer or in many cases I am told that if you send out a lens to be individually calibrated it comes back even better than if it had been calibrated in the factory. I don't know if there's any truth to that. Either way you WILL end up with a good copy as long as you pursue it.

Keep this thread going and encourage others to serioulsly look at tihs lens, especially for those that don't want to the get the kit lens and think that spending a little more is worth it for a great gerenal purpose walkaround and macro lens with great range. Personally I don't think you can beat it for the price.... and the Tamrons always look very attractive too but to me, not quite as attractive as the Sigma's. Personal preference.

[TMR Design]

Uh oh. Here comes another. This one and the one above are at 17mm. I'm using a CPL filter for this one. It's just such a sweet lens.

[Dorman]

Nice shot Robert, the CPL certianly brought out rich colors. I know this thread will keep plunking along, the lens is a fantastic value and a proven performer already. There really is no Canon answer to this lens other than the wildly mediocre 17-85 IS.

I'm not kidding that I've considered dropping my beloved 17-40 several times and going with the 17-70 as a walkaround, getting an UWA for my landscapes, and using a 70-200 for a three lens complete solution.

[TMR Design]

Nice shot Robert, the CPL certianly brought out rich colors. I know this thread will keep plunking along, the lens is a fantastic value and a proven performer already. There really is no Canon answer to this lens other than the wildly mediocre 17-85 IS.

I'm not kidding that I've considered dropping my beloved 17-40 several times and going with the 17-70 as a walkaround, getting an UWA for my landscapes, and using a 70-200 for a three lens complete solution.

Thanks man.
Thats the kit I'm building right now with a few primes thrown in.
My first lens was the Sigma 17-70mm, then I got the 50mm f/1.8, I just added the 85mm f/1.8 and I plan on getting the Canon 70-200 f/4 L and the Sigma 10-20mm and then I've got the complete range I want covered. Having the 10-20, 17-70 and 70-200 really compliment each other nicely.