LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon 17-85 vs Sigma 17-70

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 29 Apr 2006 (Saturday) 03:55   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
ruksak
Member
Joined Apr 2006
37 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Forget the price - which simply gives the better results?

If people have samples to post/compare please do.

Many thanks

Post #1, Apr 29, 2006 03:55:15


RuKsaK

Canon Kiss n (350D), 18-55mm, 50mm 1.8, Sigma 17-70, Speedlite 420EX

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
farrukh
Goldmember
farrukh's Avatar
Joined Jul 2005
1,969 posts
Lahore, Pakistan
[MORE/SHARE]

Sigma is better quality lens.
Canon is all about IS

Post #2, Apr 29, 2006 04:26:19


5D Mark II + 40D | Lenses: Sigma 150-500mm BigmOS / Canon 24-105mm F4L IS / Canon 70-200 F4L IS / Canon 85mm 1.8 / Sigma Macro 70mm f/2.8 EX / Sigma 10-20mm EX / Canon 50mm f/1.8 II / Sigma 1.4x APO TC / Kenko 2x PRO300 DG. Lighting: Canon 580EX II + Metz 58 AF-1 + Sunpak 383...
Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
pup
Goldmember
pup's Avatar
Joined Mar 2006
1,812 posts
NJ
[MORE/SHARE]

i rented the 17-85 over easter weekend and liked it

Post #3, Apr 29, 2006 05:48:46


Screening shots
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/quarters222/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
benca1
Senior Member
benca1's Avatar
Joined Jun 2003
480 posts
San Jose
[MORE/SHARE]
banned

ruksak wrote:
Forget the price - which simply gives the better results?

If people have samples to post/compare please do.

Many thanks

Canon is mechanically superior, Siggie is optically superior.

There are outstanding reviews and test shots all over the web.

My personal view: when in doubt decide on the optics. That the siggie is 2/3s the price is pretty nice too.

Post #4, Apr 29, 2006 06:23:07


30D / BG-E2 / 3021BPRO & 488RC2 / 420EX Flash /
Sigma 18-50EX / 105EX Macro / Canon 70-200L F4 /

LOG IN TO REPLY
Neilyb
Goldmember
Neilyb's Avatar
Joined Sep 2005
4,810 posts
Munich
[MORE/SHARE]

Canon is great when used within it's best range, 40ish-85 mm....sharp when used at this range! from 17-39ish you get alot of CA and fringing, alot of distortion at 17mm and average edge sharpness!

Heres one I did at 85mm: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=163688
IS is a great help. Remember that the sigi only has a 2.8 opening for the first few mm....so the canon is only half a stop behind it at any time plus it has IS.

Post #5, Apr 29, 2006 09:07:23


http://natureimmortal.​blogspot.comexternal link

http://www.natureimmor​tal.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
forsakenme720
Senior Member
forsakenme720's Avatar
Joined Mar 2006
910 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

The Sigma is better in every aspect: build quality, IQ, CA, vignetting, distortions, etc. The only advantage the Canon has is IS.

Post #6, Apr 29, 2006 09:13:35 as a reply to Neilyb's post 6 minutes earlier.


Cameras: Canon 20D, Canon Rebel XT (converted to infrared)
Lenses: Canon 17-40mm f4L; Tamron 28-75mm f2.8; Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5; Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro; Canon 85mm f1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mr. ­ Clean
Cream of the Crop
Mr. Clean's Avatar
Joined Jul 2005
5,996 posts
Olympia, Washington
[MORE/SHARE]

I think ultimately people who choose either lens are very happy with their choice! Both great lenses. A good review can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/17701785external link

Post #7, Apr 29, 2006 10:00:30


Mike
some shots @ Zenfolioexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Seefutlung
Goldmember
Seefutlung's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
3,262 posts
SoCal
[MORE/SHARE]

Gotta tell you that no "serious" photog uses the 17-85. Too much distortion on both ends and too soft on the wide. This doesn't make it a bad lens for the average Joe. It was a great range, and if you're not too particular about IQ ... then it is a great lens. The fact that you're asking about this lens ... tends to make me think that you are not into professional quality images and tend to print 6x4s. So maybe the Canon would be right for you .. the IS is a handy tool to have.

Post #8, Apr 29, 2006 10:09:12


- Unsharp At Any Speed -
LAShootersexternal link for SoCal shooting
www.garyayala.smugmug.​comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
benca1
Senior Member
benca1's Avatar
Joined Jun 2003
480 posts
San Jose
[MORE/SHARE]
banned

Mr. Clean wrote:
I think ultimately people who choose either lens are very happy with their choice! Both great lenses. A good review can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/17701785external link

That's true. But don't take the fun away from mocking (rich) canon fan boys! Sigma: For the working people. :p

I'm no commie nevertheless.

Post #9, Apr 29, 2006 10:11:50 as a reply to Mr. Clean's post 11 minutes earlier.


30D / BG-E2 / 3021BPRO & 488RC2 / 420EX Flash /
Sigma 18-50EX / 105EX Macro / Canon 70-200L F4 /

LOG IN TO REPLY
ScottE
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2004
3,179 posts
Kelowna, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

benca1 wrote:
That's true. But don't take the fun away from mocking (rich) canon fan boys! Sigma: For the working people. :p

I'm no commie nevertheless.

Maybe you're no commie, but you're not toeing the Party line either. I'm surprised none of the "L"omists on this lists have not castigated you for not expounding the basic principal of lens politics. "If it does not have an "L" in the name, it is not socialy acceptable."

Post #10, Apr 29, 2006 11:26:45 as a reply to benca1's post 1 hour earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Mr. ­ Clean
Cream of the Crop
Mr. Clean's Avatar
Joined Jul 2005
5,996 posts
Olympia, Washington
[MORE/SHARE]

Seefutlung wrote:
Gotta tell you that no "serious" photog uses the 17-85. Too much distortion on both ends and too soft on the wide. This doesn't make it a bad lens for the average Joe. It was a great range, and if you're not too particular about IQ ... then it is a great lens. The fact that you're asking about this lens ... tends to make me think that you are not into professional quality images and tend to print 6x4s. So maybe the Canon would be right for you .. the IS is a handy tool to have.

Well that's just an a**load of assumptions. A tad on the rude side too eh?
*edit*
Sharpness, does not a make someone a professional.

Post #11, Apr 29, 2006 15:35:44 as a reply to Seefutlung's post 5 hours earlier.


Mike
some shots @ Zenfolioexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Behzad
Senior Member
Joined Nov 2005
230 posts
near Atlanta, Georgia
[MORE/SHARE]

I don't know about sigma, but I had the 17-85 and didn't like the IQ at all, so I exchaged it for 24-105 L so I can "socialize"

Post #12, Apr 29, 2006 15:56:23


Behzad :p
Eos 20d
EF 50 1.4
EF 24-105 L IS USM
Speedlite 580 EX

LOG IN TO REPLY
ruksak
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Joined Apr 2006
37 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Seefutlung wrote:
Gotta tell you that no "serious" photog uses the 17-85. Too much distortion on both ends and too soft on the wide. This doesn't make it a bad lens for the average Joe. It was a great range, and if you're not too particular about IQ ... then it is a great lens. The fact that you're asking about this lens ... tends to make me think that you are not into professional quality images and tend to print 6x4s. So maybe the Canon would be right for you .. the IS is a handy tool to have.

Thanks for this - I'm pretty much set on the Sigma now I think as I want something with decent results at the wider end.

I imagine everyone is as particular as they can be about IQ, but I'm also particular about not getting divorced too! Despite my original question money is a factor past the $700 mark.

Anyway, thanks to all reponses - damn this forum is a drug!

Post #13, Apr 29, 2006 18:03:13 as a reply to Seefutlung's post 7 hours earlier.


RuKsaK

Canon Kiss n (350D), 18-55mm, 50mm 1.8, Sigma 17-70, Speedlite 420EX

LOG IN TO REPLY
forsakenme720
Senior Member
forsakenme720's Avatar
Joined Mar 2006
910 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Seefutlung wrote:
Gotta tell you that no "serious" photog uses the 17-85. Too much distortion on both ends and too soft on the wide. This doesn't make it a bad lens for the average Joe. It was a great range, and if you're not too particular about IQ ... then it is a great lens. The fact that you're asking about this lens ... tends to make me think that you are not into professional quality images and tend to print 6x4s. So maybe the Canon would be right for you .. the IS is a handy tool to have.

You could have the kit lens as your only lens and still be a "serious" photographer.

Post #14, Apr 29, 2006 18:10:20 as a reply to Seefutlung's post 8 hours earlier.


Cameras: Canon 20D, Canon Rebel XT (converted to infrared)
Lenses: Canon 17-40mm f4L; Tamron 28-75mm f2.8; Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5; Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro; Canon 85mm f1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
benca1
Senior Member
benca1's Avatar
Joined Jun 2003
480 posts
San Jose
[MORE/SHARE]
banned

ScottE wrote:
Maybe you're no commie, but you're not toeing the Party line either. I'm surprised none of the "L"omists on this lists have not castigated you for not expounding the basic principal of lens politics. "If it does not have an "L" in the name, it is not socialy acceptable."

It always cracks me up when I see someone new, on a budget to, ask for advice for what to get beyond the kit lens and the reply is always, "get the 17-40L!" Or something similar... :lol:

I can't imagine only having use of 23 mm of focal length and all of it wide angle. Obviously the 50mm would be a decent suggestion, cheap, outstanding performance, or some other prime - but nooooo it's not an L! Okay, my rant is done. ;)

Post #15, Apr 29, 2006 19:29:00 as a reply to ScottE's post 8 hours earlier.


30D / BG-E2 / 3021BPRO & 488RC2 / 420EX Flash /
Sigma 18-50EX / 105EX Macro / Canon 70-200L F4 /

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
21,533 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 17-85 vs Sigma 17-70
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00086 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
791 guests, 591 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Old Father William

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.