new sigma 24/70 f 2.8 EX IF DG HSM

lolly56stk

lolly56stk

Messages
56
Name
marco
Edit My Images
No
Hi all!
what about the new new sigma 24/70?

I've found a review on the net, and it's amazing!

take a look, it's compared to the Canon 24/70 2.8 L and the 24/105 f4 L:

24/70 review

The price it's about 400 pounds cheaper than canon 24/70....:naughty:
 
Looks like Puddleduck's one was totally FUBAR and not representative of what this lens can achieve if you have a properly working one. Still waiting for a proper review of this in English.
 
Totally agree about puddleduck's not being truelly representitive - the reviews I've seen and had translated by friends all indicate that the new HSM is as good as the Canon offering but for 1/2 to 2/3 of the price
 
Maybe it'll be the push Canon need to finally release a 24-70L IS to try and distance themselves from Sigma again. Good as the Canon undoubtedly is, I still baulk at spending around £1k on a walkabout lens which doesn't have IS.
 
I own this fantastic lens. It quite simply is the sharpest lens I've ever owned and I love mine. The first thing I did when I got outside on the first day was to see the sharpness, my reaction was "****ing hell that's sharp"

I've just seen puddleduck's sample shots and let me tell you there was something seriously wrong with his copy. :LOL:
 
Photogaz said:
I've just seen puddleduck's sample shots and let me tell you there was something seriously wrong with his copy. :LOL:
Click to expand...

Yes - that was kindof the point in the thread really ;)

David Kilpatrick over at Photoclub Alpha has also had to reject two samples tested on the D3X for similar reasons and sent images to Sigma - he also says the lens is terrible on Sony cameras too.

I'd love to see some 100% samples shot close up and at distance... the distance ones I suspect won't be that razor sharp.. but I'll wait to see your samples :)
 
there were some equal truble with the first sigma 70/200 HSM for digital, 7 on 10 had something wrong and make picture like the one you post on the other trhead. but 3-4 works good!

i think sigma has some trouble with the new production line and on the quality program
 
Sigma's QC has always been a problem, if they could sort that out then then i would buy more of their lenses. Until then, i am not really prepared to try about 5 copies to get the good one.
 
i 've never bought a new sigma lens, i want try first if it works good!
 
Sigmas lenses tend to get better the longer they have been in production, for example you very rarely see any threads complaining about thr 17-70 and the huge spate of complaints about the 10-22 seem to have dried up in recent times.
 
puddleduck said:
Yes - that was kindof the point in the thread really ;)

David Kilpatrick over at Photoclub Alpha has also had to reject two samples tested on the D3X for similar reasons and sent images to Sigma - he also says the lens is terrible on Sony cameras too.

I'd love to see some 100% samples shot close up and at distance... the distance ones I suspect won't be that razor sharp.. but I'll wait to see your samples :)
Click to expand...

The sharp closeup and soft at distance is exactly the same as the original 24-70, interesting you point that out. I assume that is a problem with focusing rather than maybe sharpness in general?
 
Amp34 said:
The sharp closeup and soft at distance is exactly the same as the original 24-70, interesting you point that out. I assume that is a problem with focusing rather than maybe sharpness in general?
Click to expand...

Its nothing to do with focusing...

I'll defer to David Kilpatrick..

The Tamron/KM 28-75mm f/2.8 appears to be excellent on the A900, same goes for the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 design. I am now working with two Sigma lenses, the 12-24mm and the new 70-200mm HSM f/2.8, which I can recommended. However, we found the new 24-70mm Sigma HSM to be a poor lens even by comparison with older Sigma designs - and well short of the CZ 24-70mm standard."

I've used a lot of lenses, and its by far the worst example of a 24/28-70 I've ever seen.
 
OK Puddleduck I tested the lens at 70mm and f2.8 and admittedly it's not as sharp at the 70mm end, but damm at 21mp 100% its still good in my opinion. As soon as you stop down slightly it improves hugely! Here is a very quick sample I did when I got home of an area of 100% crop in the center. I've compared it to my 70-200 f2.8 IS at 70mm (optically its best range).

comparison_.jpg
 
Well.. I think thats really quite soft. Its better than mine.. but even so... you need to stop that down - you'd use f/2.8 in an emergency but not for critical sharpness.

Given the Canon is covering much more range.. well its no comparison tbh.

I had a feeling even your "sharpest lens I've ever owned" sample wouldn't cut the mustard on a distant object.. ;)
 
I only included my 70-200 f2.8 because you can see that lens at it best to see the difference.

I doubt you'll get the Canon any sharper than that either!
 
the canon at f2.8 looks as sharp as the sigma at f7.1.
 
I can't believe you had to stop the lens down to f/7.1 to get it to an equally acceptable level. That example at f/2.8 is poor IMHO.
 
No no no, 7.1 was just one of my shots i decided to put as an example. It became far sharper at f3.2. Seems I'm actually having to tweak with my 5d Micro adjustments at 70mm now. Just done some tests and its much better. Will post in a bit.

I have to admit I was a little bit gutted when I originally posted the 70mm 2.8 shot, I was happy with it all until I saw 70mm 2.8 though I was positve i'd tested that last week.
 
Yeah, Sigma in the middle.

On the new shots I've done my copy is not as good as theirs at 2.8 but close but its far better at f4 than theirs. Now I'm confused.
 
This is the single biggest problem with Sigma lenses tbqh, the variability.
 
How do Tamron compare?

I do hear though the Canon 24-70mm has a problem with sample variation. People over at dpreview were saying they went through 2-3 before they got a good copy.
 
My sigma 24-70 is good other than the amount of micro focus adjustment I had to dial in. I'm sending mine to sigma for calibration which seems to be quite common for the 5Dmk2.

The only thing I have to complain about is the vignetting which is quite shocking on FF wide open. not much CA or PF either.

70mm f2.8 (click for larger image)




100% crop f4 24mm

f424mm.jpg


using a 13mm extention ring

5208.jpg


100% crop

5208crop.jpg
 
Landrover Discovery, 200 Tdi .... about 1993ish
 
Your copy at f2.8 70mm is sharper than mine after 5d adjust. I phone Sigma this afternoon who said they'll do a calibration if I wanted to book it in. They are actually just a 20 minute walk from me :D
 
Photogaz said:
Your copy at f2.8 70mm is sharper than mine after 5d adjust. I phone Sigma this afternoon who said they'll do a calibration if I wanted to book it in. They are actually just a 20 minute walk from me :D
Click to expand...


I'm going to send mine to sigma for focus adjustment
 
They are quite helpful aren't they. I got mine from HK, but they said its still covered although my HK supplier reckoned it wouldn't be.
 
With you two guys both sending them for adjustment, and me getting a refund.... hmm!

Not heard from anyone with a good one yet!

The price of these has tumbled (less than £550 from HK) so if they can be made good, its a bargain..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top