Sigma 24-60 vs. 24-70 vs. 24-70 HSM?

All,

I'm in a bit of a quandary. A friend has a Sigma 24-60 that he's willing to sell me for a good price (<$200) but the lens has a front-focus problem. Sigma NYC says they don't have spare parts for this lens and because it's a ROM lens they can't calibrate it (https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=3926​99&page=93).

So...

Should I buy the lens and try to microfocus adjust it, or should I consider a Sigma 24-70 non-HSM or the Sigma 24-70 HSM? I'm concerned about MFA'ing a zoom-lens. I'm not too worried about focus speed, but sharpness (wide-open) and focus accuracy are very important to me. I've heard the 24-60 (if focusing properly) was actually better than the 24-70 that came after, not sure about it stacks up against the HSM 24-70 though.

Would really appreciate your lens insights.

Not being a pain, but given the Sigma 24-60 thread has 90+ pages, I would really hope someone here has an opinion on these lenses...anybody?

What body are you shooting with? If you have a 50D or above with micro adjustments, ask the friend if you could use it for a weekend seeing if it gets any better with the adjustments. If it does, then I would jump on it for that good a deal.

Nick

I don't think we can answer your question about a specific copy of the lens,. you are telling us it is malfunctioning? And asking if you should buy it?

I could not recommend that course of action.

That said, I owned a copy myself and it now resides with my Sisters family along with my old 20D, and it is a very affordable fast aperture mid zoom that I highly recommend on this forum often.
Used prices are often amazing,. (like your sub $200.00)

If you can get it to solve the front focus issue with micro adjust, you have a true bargain in a solid lens. The canon equivalent is nearly 10 times the cost!

I had one. It had front focussing syndrome but rectified it in 50D. Was a great lens for 235$. Sold to fund 70-200 2.8

Thanks for the replies.

Some info:

- My body is a 5D Mark II, so I do have MFA
- My friend lives a few hundred miles away, but last time we met I tried his lens for a few shots and it clearly front-focused. Unfortunately, I can't do any more tests unless I buy it.

Some questions:

- [godfather:] Is the lens sharp at all focal lengths after MFA?
- Are the newer 24-70 Sigmas, esp. HSM sharper than a "sharp" 24-60?

Don't cheap out. The 24-70 is not much extra anyway you'll be kicking yourself later if you buy that 24-60. I have the 24-70 non HSM and I was lucky enough to acquire a super sharp copy and I think it's much better than the HSM version IQ-wise.

I've used all 3 Sigmas you're interested in.

I owned the 24-60 f2.8 and it was good at all focal lengths at f2.8. The focus was slow but the lens did a great job.

I now own the 24-70 non HSM. It is the same or if not better at 2.8 as the 24-60. The main advantages the 24-60 has over the 24-70 are size, weight and price. The 24-6 is much more compact and much lighter and usually a lot cheaper.

When I bought the 24-70 non HSM I had a long hard look at the HSM version. I tried it for a few days and really liked it. It was much sharper on my 5D II than either of the older non HSM versions. It was also more compact than the non HSM 24-70. It was also not as prone to flare as the other two.

The reason I didn't get the HSM is I don't really use zooms too much on my camera. They're more of a walk around solution or an in studio lens for me and therefor don't see much time on my camera. In the studio if I need the lens I'll usually be shooting at f5 or smaller so the differences in sharpness wide open don't make much difference.

I went with the 24-70 non HSM as compromise and back up lens. If it was going to be the main lens on my camera I would have chosen the HSM version.

c00lpix wrote in post #10559765
Thanks for the replies.

Some info:

- My body is a 5D Mark II, so I do have MFA
- My friend lives a few hundred miles away, but last time we met I tried his lens for a few shots and it clearly front-focused. Unfortunately, I can't do any more tests unless I buy it.

Some questions:

- [godfather:] Is the lens sharp at all focal lengths after MFA?
- Are the newer 24-70 Sigmas, esp. HSM sharper than a "sharp" 24-60?

Yes it was sharp "enough" at 2.8 on all ranges. But it omproved at 3.5. IT have some sort of CA Actually, but it is noticiable only when you pixel peep. Not at normal resolutions. I had got a couple of prints from thi lens too at 2.8 shots, they turned out real good with no visible deficiencies.