Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro

[jcw122]

Well I noticed there is no archive for this lense yet, and it's the Tamron's compeditor, so let's see some samples!

[G3 996]

Yes please. We need this thread for the lens archive.

[4x4rock]

Let me be the first :)

http://www.sonnycao.com/gallery/albums/flowers/f4.jpg

http://www.sonnycao.com/gallery/albums/flowers/f1.jpg

[lostdoggy]

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/lostdoggy/POTN%20uploads/CRW_4217PS.jpg
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/lostdoggy/IMG_6257PS.jpg

[Mr. Clean]

Mine here.... http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=165819&highlight=Sigma+24-70

[angryhampster]

Probably my most used lens.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/flowerbug4.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/flowerbug5.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/flowerbug1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/flower2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/band3.jpg

[garrettej8]

Does this lens have the sharpness that the canon 24-70L has? I was considering this as my next lens but I'll probably go with L.

[BrewsterPilot]

Does this lens have the sharpness that the canon 24-70L has? I was considering this as my next lens but I'll probably go with L.

May I suggest you having a look at the Tamron 28-75mm...
It is famous for being very sharp, and at a more reasonable price than the Canon, too.

[jcw122]

Thanks for the images so far. Looks like this lens pretty good bokeh!

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Seems fairly sharp, and the bokeh is good, but it seems to lack contrast. Nice lens for the money, though.

[condyk]

Seems fairly sharp, and the bokeh is good, but it seems to lack contrast. Nice lens for the money, though.

Not on my monitor. You calibrated lately? Sharp, colourful and good contrast. Nice lens.

[4x4rock]

Some more pics :).

http://www.sonnycao.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/downtown.jpg

http://www.sonnycao.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/museum2.jpg

[Jakpro]

Very nice photos! I see that I need to take mine out and work it a lot more! Thanks for letting me see the potential.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Not on my monitor. You calibrated lately? Sharp, colourful and good contrast. Nice lens.

Yup, I am. I just meant the last bunch. The first few look fine. Very nice, in fact.

[jcw122]

Photos are looking good, one thing I like alot about the Sigma is the build quality. It seems better than the Tamron, and I've heard alot of problem w/ the Tamron's AF failing after a while. I also like how the Sigma has a non-rotating focus ring.....I've accidentally grabbed the focus ring on my Sigma 18-200 before and it's probably not a good thing.

[BrewsterPilot]

Does this lens have the sharpness that the canon 24-70L has? I was considering this as my next lens but I'll probably go with L.

Have a look HERE! (http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/exvdi)
Someone made a side-by-side comparison and overall the Tamron got the better results.

[LightRules]

Have a look HERE! (http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/exvdi)
Someone made a side-by-side comparison and overall the Tamron got the better results.

Yes, that particular Di copy was better than that particular EX copy. That particular Di copy's AF mechanism failed and now that loser LightRules doesn't have the lens anymore :eek:

[jcw122]

Yes, that particular Di copy was better than that particular EX copy. That particular Di copy's AF mechanism failed and now that loser LightRules doesn't have the lens anymore :eek:

LOL glad you found the thread LightRules...I was about to say the reviewer had a bad copy, and posted here about it before.

[LightRules]

LOL glad you found the thread LightRules...I was about to say the reviewer had a bad copy, and posted here about it before.

Actually, I don't think it was a "bad copy" (as I've detailed in my comments at the site). I think that particular copy falls within "factory tolerances", which is a broad range IMO. I think a lot of reports on forums (especially by newbies) that they have a "bad copy" are either user error (mostly) or copies that are on the lower end of "factory acceptance" but not necessarily "out of spec" or "bad."

I wish I had never sold my 2nd copy of the 2470EX. I still kick myself over that :cry:

[jcw122]

Actually, I don't think it was a "bad copy" (as I've detailed in my comments at the site). I think that particular copy falls within "factory tolerances", which is a broad range IMO. I think a lot of reports on forums (especially by newbies) that they have a "bad copy" are either user error (mostly) or copies that are on the lower end of "factory acceptance" but not necessarily "out of spec" or "bad."

I wish I had never sold my 2nd copy of the 2470EX. I still kick myself over that :cry:

May be once the Tokina 16-50 comes out you'll feel better :D

[jcw122]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=2358732#post2358732

Found the Sigma 24-70 at Digital Foto Club for $40 cheaper than anywhere else on pricegrabber.

[angryhampster]

Here's one on ebay going for cheap (right now..6hrs left)
http://cgi.ebay.com/24-70mm-SIGMA-Lens_W0QQitemZ180058241439QQihZ008QQcategoryZ10684 4QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[DEMO]

I don't have the lens anymore but I think its a SOLID build and sharp lens.

http://UMEMER.smugmug.com/photos/104904769-L.jpg

http://UMEMER.smugmug.com/photos/98245665-L.jpg

[angryhampster]

Nice WS6, Rafael. Any mods?

[DEMO]

Thanks but its not mine. I think it has just basic bolt-ons.. My other friend has a low 10 second WS6..

I think this was taken with the SIGMA also.. Ill post more pictures of it later.
http://UMEMER.smugmug.com/photos/103204623-L.jpg

[cjm]

Here are some of my landscapes from this lens. These are from my first copy that I later returned because it started having focusing issues.

[cjm]

two more. Water fall completely handheld.

[jcw122]

Awesome landscapes and car shots guys! This lens is lookin nice.

[enigma]

My contribution:

[EpHeSuS]

Don't really have that many shots with this lens, alot of my good shots are with my 10-20 :)

http://www.danielgphoto.com/misc/_MG_2158%20processed%20copy.jpg

[DEMO]

two more I had to add..

http://UMEMER.smugmug.com/photos/115410569-L.jpg

http://UMEMER.smugmug.com/photos/115410573-L.jpg

[woffles]

It can take some nice shots stopped down a little. Wide open it tends to be soft. Not as sharp as the Canon 24-70L opened up. Focus could be faster too. Still not a bad lens as long as you get a good copy. First one was horrible and I took it back. The one I have now was better but still not where I wanted it. Sent it in and came back pretty good.

http://static.flickr.com/116/294226527_47351fdfc3.jpg

[formula4speed]

I find it does well, although it has to compete with my 35L for attention so I don't use it much.

http://imageryalive.com/flora/images/Img_1629%20small.jpg

http://imageryalive.com/Landscape/images/470c8073%20small.jpg

[jcw122]

Anyone have some 100% crops?

[Mullins]

deleted

[Dorman]

There's some really nice looking shots in this thread. This seems like a really versatile lens, would fill the gap in my lineup nicely. Hard choice between this and the Tammy.

[angryhampster]

Here's one I shot the other night. ..Please excuse the blown exposure :) still trying to get used to my flash.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/sam-1.jpg
100% crop
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/samcrop.jpg

[4x4rock]

Angryhamster, that's pretty sharp

[angryhampster]

It's a beautifully sharp lens. Very accurate too, except in very low-light situations.

[jdos2]

I tested it against the Canon L lens of the same focal length.


I have one criteria these days: file size of the raws. The bigger the raws, the less compressible the data. The Sigma, 9 times out of ten, had larger raw files.

That said enough to me, so I bought it. I'm happy.

Seems not to suffer so much in the zones as the Canon- it seems to average the resolution across the field instead of concentrating as much in the center, to good effect.

[EOSAddict]

I tested it against the Canon L lens of the same focal length.


I have one criteria these days: file size of the raws. The bigger the raws, the less compressible the data. The Sigma, 9 times out of ten, had larger raw files.

That said enough to me, so I bought it. I'm happy.

Seems not to suffer so much in the zones as the Canon- it seems to average the resolution across the field instead of concentrating as much in the center, to good effect.


I don't get the logic here, could you explain?

[jcw122]

I tested it against the Canon L lens of the same focal length.


I have one criteria these days: file size of the raws. The bigger the raws, the less compressible the data. The Sigma, 9 times out of ten, had larger raw files.

That said enough to me, so I bought it. I'm happy.

Seems not to suffer so much in the zones as the Canon- it seems to average the resolution across the field instead of concentrating as much in the center, to good effect.

Different lenses won't influence file size dude....

[grimreaper]

thining of getting this lens anymore pics?

[RikWriter]

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/65483573.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/65483222.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/65483199.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/62353995.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/62474699.jpg

[Mr. Clean]

Great shots RikWriter!
I've noticed mine (like it's Canon couterpart) is real sweet at 5.6.

[grimreaper]

nice Rik, especily like number 4

[Mr. Clean]

Here's mine at f2.8 on the L

[farrukh]

36mm

[angryhampster]

f/2.8 @39mm:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/india/marvin1.jpg

No softness issues wide open ;)

[Mullins]

Did this really quick. Also looks like all the converting affected the IQ. Close enough I guess.

Shutter - 1/13
Aperture - 8.0
EC +1/3
ISO - 100
Focal Length - 64mm
Manual Focus

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/SixPlyDream/EOS%2030d/Tests/IMG_5977_6.jpg

100%
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/SixPlyDream/EOS%2030d/Tests/IMG_5977_5.jpg

[jdos2]

Different lenses won't influence file size dude....
Um...

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/zeiss_85mm/zeiss85mm_3.html

He thinks it's valuable. Logic included in the original post (and apologies for not responding sooner!)

The less compressable data, the larger the jpgs. There are plenty of other variables, but when all else is the same, the file size does point to a difference in a lens, be it "not much."

[Max Err]

I like this lens, quite good, more so if you consider its price

http://www.pbase.com/max_err/image/75353767/original.jpg

[muscleflex]

damn - thanks for this thread! i was thinking of getting the 24-70L but i never knew about this one until now...i think i'll go for the sigma and save the money on maybe a different L!
i think i like the build and look of the sigma too over the tamron.

incidentally, where is the CHEAPEST place i can get this in the UK?
or cheapest in the states? and would anyone care to ship it to me? (fellow Potn'ers!) :)

[Mr. Clean]

sigma4less.com!

[grimreaper]

damn - thanks for this thread! i was thinking of getting the 24-70L but i never knew about this one until now...i think i'll go for the sigma and save the money on maybe a different L!
i think i like the build and look of the sigma too over the tamron.

incidentally, where is the CHEAPEST place i can get this in the UK?
or cheapest in the states? and would anyone care to ship it to me? (fellow Potn'ers!) :)



this is a good site to find the cheapest place


http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod171.html

[grimreaper]

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/agrimreaper/joedanbw.jpg

[double.a.ron]

thinking of buying this lens

I've heard there are problems when used with a canon flash? has anybody run into this, or is this a non-issue?

[double.a.ron]

also heard there are compatibility issues with 20d?

[_andrew]

thinking of buying this lens

I've heard there are problems when used with a canon flash? has anybody run into this, or is this a non-issue?

I have the Sigma 24-70 and have used it with my 580ex and have had no issues. The 580 adjusts itself when i zoom in and out on the Sigma.

It is a very good lens, it's so sharp on close-ups. I like to stop the lens down to f/4 or 5.6 if I can...

Check this shot out:
FL: 70mm
Av: f/5.6
Tv: 1/250
ISO: 400
100% Crop (Saved in CS2 - Quality rating of 7)

[RikWriter]

also heard there are compatibility issues with 20d?

Never had any problems with my 20D or 30D with the 24-70.

[double.a.ron]

good to hear - thanks guys

[pepperoni]

I've heard there are problems when used with a canon flash? has anybody run into this, or is this a non-issue?

I was firing flash last night with it. No issues with my 10D and 430EX.
I'll have to post some pics up in this thread.

:cool:

[HoRnYTuRbO]

thinking of buying this lens

I've heard there are problems when used with a canon flash? has anybody run into this, or is this a non-issue?

Yes, u will run into problems if u use the pop up flash. Dont know how to say it but the flash sits to low and your lens will cast a shadow.... yah kno..

[angryhampster]

Yes, u will run into problems if u use the pop up flash. Dont know how to say it but the flash sits to low and your lens will cast a shadow.... yah kno..



That problem would likely be gone by 30-35mm though.

ZING

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/skatepark11bw.jpg

[jacobsen1]

Great lens. My only wish is that it had HSM AF. The AF is accurate, and reasonably fast, but it's noisy and leaves you wondering how much better it could be. For the price though you get awesome IQ and that's the most important aspect.

http://www.pbase.com/benjacobsen/image/60341846.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/benjacobsen/image/60334968.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/benjacobsen/image/55467997/large.jpg

Ben

[-kk-]

i dont have this lens anymore but here are a couple of shots. straight from the camera, adjusted WB in raw, and then resized, otherwise no PS work.

[ZJChaser]

here are a couple from the weekend:
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a218/ZJChaser/2007-05-26%20Good%20Riddance%20Final%20Show/IMG_7446-41.jpg

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a218/ZJChaser/2007-05-26%20Good%20Riddance%20Final%20Show/IMG_7468-46.jpg

[pr0digal]

I just got this lens and I am loving it so far! Here are a couple I took today

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1086/527065800_e55a8e0437.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pr0digal/527065800/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1216/527065826_38de3eb47d.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pr0digal/527065826/)

[nitsuj]

*deleted*

[austincabot]

First post for me. Recently bought my first dSLR and this lens, here are a couple photos I shot recently.





http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h264/JMH123456789/IMG_0182.jpg

Those are awesome shots. Is that a 675 tank? Did you up contrast at all on the last two?

[angryhampster]

YHELOTHAR

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/julyflower1.jpg

Yesterday it was so nice out :)

[rcavanaughjr]

It can take some nice shots stopped down a little. Wide open it tends to be soft. Not as sharp as the Canon 24-70L opened up. Focus could be faster too. Still not a bad lens as long as you get a good copy. First one was horrible and I took it back. The one I have now was better but still not where I wanted it. Sent it in and came back pretty good.



Is this a consistent statement (the part about being soft at 2.8 ) from all current users of the sigma? If so, why is the lense worth having if you can't open it up with good results?

Isn't the reason for buying a 2.8 lense being able to get low light shots and for good isolation of subject from background?

[angryhampster]

Is this a consistent statement (the part about being soft at 2.8 ) from all current users of the sigma? If so, why is the lense worth having if you can't open it up with good results?

Isn't the reason for buying a 2.8 lense being able to get low light shots and for good isolation of subject from background?


Some say the Canon is soft at f/2.8 as well.

I certainly have never seen any softness wide open. It's more prone to CA, but that's easily avoidable in most situations.

here's one wide open from last Christmas:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/angryhampster/artistic/nathan1.jpg

[rcavanaughjr]

Some say the Canon is soft at f/2.8 as well.

I certainly have never seen any softness wide open. It's more prone to CA, but that's easily avoidable in most situations.

here's one wide open from last Christmas:


Thanks for response. What is CA?

[disboifan]

i believe CA = Chromatic Aberration

[Mike]

Here's a couple from mine.

[grimreaper]

thought i would ad these two to the archive


http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/agrimreaper/NATURE%20-%20LANDSCAPES/dt4web.jpg

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c323/agrimreaper/NATURE%20-%20LANDSCAPES/fieldlane-web.jpg

[Niraj]

My first image posts on this site.
I'm new to the POTN scene, so be gentle with C&C.

Both images have received slight AE, USM and saturation adjustments.

*images removed from host*

Niraj Popat.

[EOSAddict]

Welcome to POTN Niraj :) Love the rose shot.

[Niraj]

Thank you :)

Just thought to myself, having a good "subject" tends to make for good images. Though a good copy Sigma lens sure as heck helps, lol.

[tharksha]

Here few pictures taken by me

[photojournalista]

100 percent crop:
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/cubclubpics/random/100_pct.jpg

Low light, handheld shot:
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/cubclubpics/random/lowlight.jpg

[mven74]

there is $100 difference between the macro and non-macro version of this lens. if i don't need the macro feature, should i just get the non-macro? how much does the DF help?

thanks!

[Niraj]

If you are certain you will never shoot a Macro shot with the lens, i'd save the $100... the lens quality will remain the same.

The focus ring works a treat... i sometimes shoot with Manual focus (out of habit) and find it fluid and smooth. However, if you leave it in Manual focus, and AF kicks in, the rings and motors do not sound healthy AT ALL! lol... :)

[aleks.ph]

Here's mine.. During Dubai motor show

http://i.pbase.com/o3/50/815450/1/89283772.ZMQXUh8x.IMG_2111.JPG


http://i.pbase.com/o3/50/815450/1/89283773.nU5GBbJ1.IMG_2112.JPG

[aleks.ph]

more..

http://i.pbase.com/o3/50/815450/1/89283769.uNhXo6rw.IMG_2101.JPG

http://i.pbase.com/o3/50/815450/1/89283774.xMDzfTvJ.IMG_2148.JPG

[vic_6]

just black n white conversion, cropping and resizing
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2344/2052319005_9417dd5f96.jpg?v=0

just bnw and resize
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2376/2048465187_469d6b3d08.jpg?v=0

desat and crop
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2205/1583424019_b9b4312a97.jpg?v=0


i believe all these were shot a 2.8 (if not, the first one may be at f4)

[Tubthumper]

I'm torn between this and the Tamron 28-75. Tammy might have the edge when it comes to sharpness at wider apertures, but I've heard that build quality is a bit plasticky. The Sigma, however, is built like a tank. Any thoughts?

[photojournalista]

I'm torn between this and the Tamron 28-75. Tammy might have the edge when it comes to sharpness at wider apertures, but I've heard that build quality is a bit plasticky. The Sigma, however, is built like a tank. Any thoughts?

Haven't tried the tammy.

Bought my sigma at a brick n mortar store. Have to go through several copies before I got 1.

It also took me quite sometime to tame the big thing. Probably the way I hold the cam. I now have better keeper rate. Couldn't tame the borrowed 17-40L either. FYI.

24mm at wide end is already pushing it for my type of shooting. I surely wouldn't get by with a 28. (1.6 crop) No try before you buy in our part of the globe, so I'm stuck with this for a while. But will surely switch to a 17-50/55 when time comes.

[MLphoto]

does this lens have IS ?
thanks

[El Duderino]

does this lens have IS ?
thanks

No.

[EOSAddict]

does this lens have IS ?
thanks

No it doesn't.. doesn't have HSM either.. unfortunately..

[Niraj]

does this lens have IS ?
thanks

It doesn't have IS... but when compared to a 24-105 L F4 with IS, you really only get theextra 2 stops, which puts you almost back on par. (IMO)

[photojournalista]

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/cubclubpics/random/tarsier2.jpg

[elysium]

Bought this lens today and OMG I have a new love. Adequate replacement for my kit lens. I really cant wait to give it a good test with ample light. Tonight a few shots at the pub.

[vic_6]

congrats! it's definitely a more than adequate replacement for the kit lens :) happy shooting :)

here are a few more shots :)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2137/2099796277_3a27202c80.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2134/2099794685_b01b051c8f.jpg

[elysium]

Heres two I really managed to pull off last night around London. Its random since when you live in a city, you will not even see the same thing tourists may find!

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/8397/img0691hy3.jpg

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/325/img0702rc6.jpg

[Sharon_Kay]

two more. Water fall completely handheld.
These are just AMAZING! I just bought this lens last night (although I am still a newbie to the XTi and everything I need to learn about cameras!)....you have definitely inspired me! :D

[elysium]

These are just AMAZING! I just bought this lens last night (although I am still a newbie to the XTi and everything I need to learn about cameras!)....you have definitely inspired me! :D
Trust me, the lens is very capable and will give you a high rate of keepers when used correctly. Congrats on the purchase.

[Prssinglecut]

A quick shot taken yesterday with my new Sigma 24 - 70mm f2.8

Taken in the beautiful city of York, unfortunatly only the place I work, not live.

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/397/test009edited1nh9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Remeber guys, Im a newbie to this photography and Im just learning, so if you think the picture is not very good, please, its probably my skills and not the lens being rubbish.

Regards

Phil

[shutterguy]

congrats! it's definitely a more than adequate replacement for the kit lens :) happy shooting :)

here are a few more shots :)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2137/2099796277_3a27202c80.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2134/2099794685_b01b051c8f.jpg


Those are some nice shots!!!

[shutterguy]

I'm about to pull the trigger on this lens in about 2 weeks. I've been seeing posts about getting good "copies". How do you know if you have a good or bad copy of this lens?

[cbass]

I'm about to pull the trigger on this lens in about 2 weeks. I've been seeing posts about getting good "copies". How do you know if you have a good or bad copy of this lens?

Ditto, I am wondering the same thing. I'm interested in this lens and want to buy it in the next week or two.

[elysium]

I have had one and was good straight off the shelf. My friend bought one a week later and same result.

Im not too sure about good and bad copies. Try it out in store personally if you are really worried about a good/bad copy before buying.

[claybuster]

The first one they took off the shelf I tried in the local camera shop was great! I bought it,I love it!
Mike

[booja]

some images to add to the archive thread.

first lens i bought and it stays on the camera almost all the time... until i get the 10-22

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2275/2289882323_bd51a470d6_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3086/2289020800_9bbdf3e4f8_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3182/2288202127_29d95f9b50_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2229/2271013465_af67038d5b.jpg

[elysium]

Just one more from me. Enjoy this lens like crazy.

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/8286/32632776qm7.jpg

[Mike]

Here's 2 from me from last year:

[elysium]

1,000 POST! ^_^

Just a bit of USM and NR reduction

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4946/dropscp2.jpg

[Mullins]

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n35/SixPlyDream/IMG_6148.jpg

[mrmacca]

would this lens be ok for wedding shots , say inside the church

[elysium]

would this lens be ok for wedding shots , say inside the church
Yes, be prepared to bump up the ISO to compensate for slow shutter speeds.

I use this lens wide open all the time when in a nightclub.

[mrmacca]

cheers , one on order

[elysium]

Wow either I am a good salesman or you has already ordered one

[mrmacca]

just about too order now , just had a look at your site , nice pics , where they with the sigma or the 50mm

[elysium]

just about too order now , just had a look at your site , nice pics , where they with the sigma or the 50mmMixture. Few with the 50mm unless im going macro.

The Sigma is my main lens and used for about 70% of my work. Fashion and walkabout work was taken with this Sigma. The rest was taken with the imfamous 18-55 kit lens since its the widest I own so for the automotive stuff, I didnt want to rick my Sigma being dropped!

[mrmacca]

just sent my 17-40 l back got a terrible copy , reluctant to get another thats why im asking about lens for a wedding as i need one in the next few weeks , so will get the sigma.
cheers
dave

[elysium]

just sent my 17-40 l back got a terrible copy , reluctant to get another thats why im asking about lens for a wedding as i need one in the next few weeks , so will get the sigma.
cheers
daveNot a problem. If you were a local, I would have popped by and let you borrow it. Does get a bit heavy with flash and grip on the body.

Pop down to your local Jessops with your DSLR in your hand, they be more than willing to let you try it on for size.

I did that with a 17-40. The clerk asked if I wanted to head outside and shoot, I would have done a runner even with a bad copy so I stayed inside and shot to my hearts content. Still thinking about the move, the Sigma 24-70 just feels like a tank. Construction of the new Sigma lenses is just solid.

[Mike]

would this lens be ok for wedding shots , say inside the church

This is fine for inside churches - I have shot a couple with it and no probs so far. As elysium said though, up the iso and shoot wide open and you'll be fine.

[Corejonp1]

WOW. I am very impressed by this lens. I was looking at the sigma 17-70, but I am willing to sacrifice focal length for better IQ, and a constant 2.8. This lens with something like the 10-22 down the road would make a good pair.

[Corejonp1]

I did it, I ordered this lens! I can not wait for it to arrive!

[deci]

Bit late coming to this, but heres the obligatory cat picture taken just after I got my Siggy in Sept last year
http://www.black-cat-gfx.co.uk/potn/0855.jpg

Absolutely no Post Processing ('cept maybe a bit in ACR)

[elysium]

I love mine. Vibrant yet creamy results!

Bit of a different night from me. I was a photographer at a charity award ceremony but was hired for the dj and his point of view.

Other photographers were outside taking portraits. Kind of cheated since I took my umbrella along. Got the job done without too much difficulty.

Was shooting with a kit lens for wide shots. Pics shown here were taken with the Simga just PWNED all night long. The vibrance I got from my pics without much effort, was stunning. I so can't see this lens. Tricky when you need a wide shot but just awesome.

PP Done - NR and Resize.

#1
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5663/mg4248bs0.jpg

#2
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/9742/mg4271nm0.jpg

#3
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3213/mg4292wq9.jpg

Enjoyed the night, was hot as hell. HATED the drive home.

[Corejonp1]

I get mine tomorrow, and wouldn't you know it I have the day off AND the weather is supposed to be clear and around 41, thats spring enough for me to get outside and try out the new lens. Hopefully it comes in the morning.

[elysium]

Congrats on the purchase. You should really find this to be a great lens. Sharp wide open :D

[Corejonp1]

This lens is crazy - I just got it. Its a beast! One of the cons I've read is that it has a stiff zoom, and it does, but for me, its not really a con - I like it. the 82mm filter was a bit pricey but I still have gas money, and it weighs a tons.

I'm going down to a park - day off, 41 + sunny + new lens = happy:D:D:D:D!

Pics tonight. Lets see what it can do!

[snails]

Maybe I just have a bad copy, but does anyone else have trouble with this lens and missed focus? I've largely stopped using my Sigma 24-70 because I only get a handful of pictures with the correct focus whenever I shoot.

[Corejonp1]

I'll report back after I have some more use on it. In the first few test shots mine seems to lock on to focus right away. Slight hunting in low light as my living room was dark until I opened the shades.

[elysium]

Mine does hunt a tad bit but pairing it up with a external flash, quick on focus. If I leave the clutch focus ring to AF, focuses quicker.

Wight I like but 82mm filter size is pricey and rare.

[elysium]

Maybe I just have a bad copy, but does anyone else have trouble with this lens and missed focus? I've largely stopped using my Sigma 24-70 because I only get a handful of pictures with the correct focus whenever I shoot.I tend to stick to centre focus point. Raised my keeper rate to 75%.

Try it out and see what you can find.

[snails]

I tend to stick to centre focus point. Raised my keeper rate to 75%.

Try it out and see what you can find.

I never leave the center focus point personally. My XTi likes to focus on obscure objects if I don't.

Most of my missed focus pictures are within 5ft or closer to the lens, maybe I'm just too close? They would probably be considered as "macro" as the lens can shoot.

I find I'm also always at the 70mm end of the lens. I guess I just like to be up close and personal with my subjects. (I obvously don't shoot too many people.)

[elysium]

I never leave the center focus point personally. My XTi likes to focus on obscure objects if I don't.

Most of my missed focus pictures are within 5ft or closer to the lens, maybe I'm just too close? They would probably be considered as "macro" as the lens can shoot.

I find I'm also always at the 70mm end of the lens. I guess I just like to be up close and personal with my subjects. (I obvously don't shoot too many people.)
Im usually at the other end. Possibly 60mm at most. It makes a very nice club lens.

I would like to move up to a 17-40L but I cant give up this lens. As much as I need the wide end, I cant find anything that performs as well as this in terms of sharpness and colour vibrance.

[Corejonp1]

Just reporting in from the field. So far, I like ALOT! Havnt seen any pictures yet wont till later on tonight, but I have a good feeling. I like the range, but I now know that before I get my UWA, i'm going to be needing the 70-2001:4L. It seems birding is kinda fun...actually, its kinda addicting...how very evil.

[Corejonp1]

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/9433/duck1yz1.jpg
--
1:10, 1/400 @ 70mm

-Note great, but not terrible. This is zoomed in to the max. I am pretty sure i did not do the lens justice today. Today was kinda a trial and error day with the new lens. Tomorrow is supposed to be 47, sunny with light clouds, and...you guessed it, I have the day off - Soooo, take two.

I really like this lens, I think it is going to be more picky than the kit lens was, which is a good thing - I need to learn. Right now I just guess, ok lets try this shutter speed in Tv mode, or how about this aperture in Ap mode. So for me, its more of change the settings and prey instead of change the settings, and KNOW it will be a good shot. I have just over 200 shots on the rebel now, so I am still a newbie. This lens will hopefully add to the potential, lets just see if I can use that potential.

--

[elysium]

I tend to use this lens in Av mode most of the time unless in a club, just sifting through a few pics now. I really really really find this is the only lens I own which is sharp enough to shoot wide open.

[Corejonp1]

here is a 100% crop. Tomorrow I'll focus on Av mode, and if I am daring, M mode.http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/9931/duckcropcopyae0.jpg

[elysium]

M mode is not that scary. Start off in Av mode @ 2.8 and ISO100, you SHOULD get some great results.

Sadly the weather sucks bigtime here so im stick to indoor shooting or low contrast shots unless in a club

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/2109/examplexp0.jpg

Quick pic from tonight while at my induction at the club. Was in the basement so there was no real ambient light but no matter, still great results.

[snails]

I just went around and fired a few test shots with my Sigma 24-70mm, it was so out of focus it wasn't possible to mistake for a "missed" focus. I guess I should send mine in.

[Mullins]

here is a 100% crop. Tomorrow I'll focus on Av mode, and if I am daring, M mode.http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/9931/duckcropcopyae0.jpg

That is pretty weak for the 24-70. Seems like right behind the goose is in focus a bit more(or is the grass in front of it more in focus?), but no where near it should be. If you keep getting results like this one, pay more attention to your focus point or suspect a really messed up lens.

[pixelharmony]

I'm about to pull the trigger on this as well today. I'm going to test it out of course but it's off craiglist from another photographer and it's a great price (just no box). I'll probably bring my laptop to dbl check image quality on a 100% crop. I just want to make sure it's sharp and the AF works properly.

[elysium]

I'm about to pull the trigger on this as well today. I'm going to test it out of course but it's off craiglist from another photographer and it's a great price (just no box). I'll probably bring my laptop to dbl check image quality on a 100% crop. I just want to make sure it's sharp and the AF works properly.
Keep in mind the double clutch mech and also filter size. Apart from that, great lens.

[pixelharmony]

Okay,

So I found a photographer selling this lens on Craigslist. I negotiated a $250 price for the lens. There's no box and papers, but he has lens, caps and hood. I asked for a couple sameple shots wide open @ 24mm and 70mm. he took them on ISO 400 at 1/125.

I'm just going to link the full sizes. He said he used AF on these.

I think something is off about these. The focus is off and it looks choppy and almost like a photoshop cross hatch was applied to it.

You guys tell me. I just linked the full sizes off my server. Since i'm at work I couldn't edit anything really over RDC.

http://imagehost.rlmarketing.com/forums/photo/1.jpg


http://imagehost.rlmarketing.com/forums/photo/1web.jpg


http://imagehost.rlmarketing.com/forums/photo/2 (http://imagehost.rlmarketing.com/forums/photo/2.jpg)

[wreeder]

A friend of mine told that my copy of the Sigma 24-70 2.8 was sharper than thier canon 24-70 2.8?

[elysium]

A friend of mine told that my copy of the Sigma 24-70 2.8 was sharper than thier canon 24-70 2.8?
You are not the only one who has experienced that. Within a week of purchasing mine, I used it at a fashion shoot and forgot to process one pic I sent to a friend.

He found that the colour reproduction and sharpness wide open did rival the Canon alternative very well. A week later, I had a knock on the door from him wanting to give mine a try. Its lil brother, 24-60 is still selling quick.

[Just Be]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see any really sharp images let alone anything that really pops. I'll pass on this one. I tried the Tamron version in this range and returned it for the Tamron 17-50 2.8. Super sharp and images that really pop at all apertures.

[pixelharmony]

I just picked one up, despite being skeptical with the first pictures not being sharp. This was quite a deal! The lens is 100% definately worth it for the money. I haven't found it to be super sharp at most of the 2.8 range but I'll try more later.

ISO 400
28mm
f2.8
1/20 hand held

Here's a 100% crop of a fabric swatch.
http://imagehost.rlmarketing.com/forums/photo/3-100p.jpg

Full image here.
http://imagehost.rlmarketing.com/forums/photo/3lg.jpg

[rooeey]

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee124/rooeey/IMG_5374RAT.jpg

[rooeey]

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee124/rooeey/IMG_5548RAT.jpg

[elysium]

@ rooeey

Great captures. The first one from the Chinese new year?

[rooeey]

Yes it was in Dixon St in Sydney i took 400 shots and kept about 50....Is that normal ?:)



@ rooeey

Great captures. The first one from the Chinese new year?