Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8

bustersdelight

bustersdelight

Messages
462
Name
Neil
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

I have a Canon EF 24-105mm f4.0 L IS USM Zoom Lens, and want to sell it to get something better for low light, can anyone recommend the sigma 24-70?
 
Have you not thought about a 50mm 1.4 or 1.8? The 24-105 is such a lovely lens you may well regret selling it (I know I'd miss mine!).

From what I've read the Siggie is nearly as good as the Canon equivalent. Are you sure you wouldn't miss the extra 35mm of the 24-105?
 
I used to have the Siggy 24-70 together with the Canon 24-105 and I would not get rid of the Canon for the Siggy. Yes do do get the extra stop but IMHO you will loose far to much. The 105 is a wonderful lens and I'm afraid I don't think the Siggy comes close.

Hope this has been some help.

Ian
 
Depends on what you're shooting, but I'd have thought IS is of more use in low light than an extra stop? And do you really want to be shooting at the more limited DoF given by F2.8?

I had an older Sigma 24-70 F2.8 for use on my Nikon, and it wasn't in the same league as top end Nikon glass, which I suppose it broadly equivalent to L glass.
 
I have the canon 24-105 and the older version of the sigma 24-70 and I actually love them both however the canon is better in almost every way.

I'm not sure why I keep the sigma, I love the colours and speed of the lens but the build quality is pretty shocking (remember it's the older, and well used I might add, copy). It helps I suppose that it mates usually to my wifes 30D.

I might be an option to try and find an older sigma 24-70 and keep the canon to see how you get on, they're fairly cheap, I got mine for less than £200 from mbp a couple of years back.
 
Which version of Sigma's 24-70 f/2.8 are you considering as there's more than one. The better one is the later HSM model which is an improvement over the older one.

If you intend to use screw in filters on either you'll need to add the cost of 82mm filters into things and choices for these where limited when I owned my non HSM version. I found the auto focus a bit ponderous in low light and the lack of full time manual focusing also a bit annoying at times.

Whilst I now use a 24-70L rather than the 24-105 I wouldn't trade for the non HSM version if I was in your shoes.

I agree with Davie above regarding the build quality of the non HSM version. Although if worked fine whilst I owned it I know that a subsequent owner needed to have a repair carried out the focus motor under warranty (Luckily all EX lenses came with 3yr warranty at the time)
 
Last edited:
daugirdas said:
I would take even 17-85mm on crop over that sigma. It brings me very bad memories.
Click to expand...

I'd also consider the 17-55 over the Sigma 24-70, and IMHO, it's a better focal range on a crop sensor.

Steve
 
I have a nifty fifty 1.8
I shoot a lot of wedding receptions as I'm a Dj and show the pics on screen through out the evening. And I dint want to use flash. The nifty fifty us ok but I need a bit more zoom.
 
I have the non HSM version as a backup to my Canon 24-105, the Sigma is OK, but no in the same class. The HSM version gets mixed reviews, if you go full frame then it is very soft in the corners.

I would personally consider a longer fast prime and certainly wouldn't be getting rid of the Canon.
 
Thanks for all your comments, looks like i will keep the 105 and get something for low light conditions, only trouble is I need to sell one to get the other.
 
daugirdas said:
I would take even 17-85mm on crop over that sigma. It brings me very bad memories.
Click to expand...

Jeez, it can't be THAT bad. The 17-85mm has good range, IS and USM but I can't say anything good about it optically and yet again you're stuck at f4 at best.
 
It really depends what you are asking from the lens to do...Obviously you will never get the IQ of a £1000 lens with a third of the money.

I got it for my A500 for 200 on this forum. The main reason I got it is that I am an amateur musician (and photographer ;) ) and I tend to go to gigs of friends in small poor-lit venues where any other lens simply can't be used. I need to push my ISO up to 3200 and shoot with the lens wide open. Flash is no option as it is a bit annoying for people around. I do get decent results which are better than nothing. Alternative? for me two primes (one 30-35mm and a 50). Those will give you even better low-light capabilities but are less flexible.

Note that I was also thinking about getting a Tamron 17-50 but in the end I decided that the 24-70 would save me from wide angle distortion and gives me the chance to get better portraits at the 70mm end.

A lot of people complain about Sigma's quality control but my copy seems fine. Sharpness wide open is good (not great but I wouldnt expect to beat a £1500 zeiss with a lens i bought for £200) and the colours are nice and warm most of the times
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top