sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG Macro

[chalkie7]

Does anyone else here have this lens? If so, what are your thoughts on it? I've owned mine since Feb 09...wasn't too impressed so basically put it to one side until more recently when I had time to check it out again. I was right...so poor in so many areas it's untrue.

I took it back to Jessops who sent it off to be checked by Sigma. They have allegedly done all their tests/checks/adjustments and now I have it back with me. It still sucks big time...hunts for focus, does not seem sharp at all...colours do not seem very faithful...I could go on. The sharpness issue is not only at its extremes either..tried it in a studio...typical f8 / iso 100 / 125th shots and other than at the centre of the shots, the images lack clarity.

I'm now going to be taking it back to Jessops again...this time I want either a replacement unit or a refund / credit note.

I'd love to know other people's views on this who own or have used this particular lens.

Cheers,

Mark

[candleman]

I got that exact model about 2 weeks ago..
Errr.. its not incredible.. but certainly significantly better than my kit lens.
it does “hunt” a little..
I do notice wide open is quite soft.. sometimes, but the strange thing is
other times, predominantly when flash is employed it, becomes very sharp even wide open.. which I really don’t understand because I’m very conscientious about shutterspeed/focal length relationships..
but you’re right.. general ambient type images are lacking but technically speaking there shouldn’t really be any difference in sharpness if shutterspeed is high enough. (or from flash/ambient light sources)
heres a link to some of the sharper stuff I’ve done whilst wide open. this is with flash on the hotshoe.

I got mine “mint and used” for a very good price so I’m not crying about it, but if I bought it new I wouldn’t be totally impressed to be honest.
“Apparently” the new “IF” version is much sharper..

I havn’t had the time to test it properly with studio/strobist type stuff.. so I shouldn’t be making sweeping statements as I havnt really tried to actually create a “work” with it yet.. its all just been snapshots.
but its not bad, better than my kit lens because theres no noticable CA, and its (on occasion) prettymuch on par with what i get from my 50mm (*gasp*)

but again.. i havnt fully kicked it around

[chalkie7]

Cheers for that Candleman. I did look at plenty of reviews before purchasing from new, and most people did seem really happy with its performance. Whilst I realise it is not up to the standards of the canon 24-70mm, I did expect better than I've got to date with it. I even lent it out to a local studio owner for him to test it and give me his opinion (after Sigma had supposedly repaired it). I saw his images today and they were not good. The shots were full length of a fashion model...the middle section of the shot looked crisp, whilst her face lacked any sharpness at all and her ankles/feet were no where near sharp either.

I had read that Sigma's quality checks weren't upto much, but even if i was unlucky and initially received a bad copy, I'm gob-smacked that it still has issues after they've had their hands on it.

I've had a look at the link you posted and yours is definitely sharper than most images I've taken. I can understand softness creeping in at its extremeties, but not around f8 or f11 at say 50mm...unforgiveable.

[candleman]

Originally Posted by candleman

I do notice wide open is quite soft.. sometimes, but the strange thing is
other times, predominantly when flash is employed it, becomes very sharp even wide open.. which I really don’t understand because I’m very conscientious about shutterspeed/focal length relationships..
but you’re right.. general ambient type images are lacking but technically speaking there shouldn’t really be any difference in sharpness if shutterspeed is high enough. (or from flash/ambient light sources)

man.. that made no sense when re-reading it lololol
apologies for being stupid.

what i wanted to say, was:
when shooting ambient, I noticed wide open its very soft.. even when the shutterspeed is high enough to freeze any motion or handshake.
When using flash it tends to be a bit sharper… but that sounds like absolute tripe, because there should in theory be no difference in sharpness.

Possibly its apparent sharpness I’m noticing not “pixel peeper” sharpness.
Meaning the flash is harsher and thus is creating more contrast.. giving an illusion of sharpness.

I don’t know..
I just hope you didn’t get a dud.. its possible.. mine seems “ok” from initial tests considering its reputation.
have you got any 100% crops to show what sort of stuff you're getting?

[chalkie7]

lol...I did get your drift, honestly! At f2.8 I have to agree..it is pretty soft and to some extent, understandable. I'm gonna be taking some more test shots this weekend in the studio so will get back to you with some hard evidence! Cheers, Mark

Originally Posted by candleman

man.. that made no sense when re-reading it lololol
apologies for being stupid.

what i wanted to say, was:
when shooting ambient, I noticed wide open its very soft.. even when the shutterspeed is high enough to freeze any motion or handshake.
When using flash it tends to be a bit sharper… but that sounds like absolute tripe, because there should in theory be no difference in sharpness.

Possibly its apparent sharpness I’m noticing not “pixel peeper” sharpness.
Meaning the flash is harsher and thus is creating more contrast.. giving an illusion of sharpness.

I don’t know..
I just hope you didn’t get a dud.. its possible.. mine seems “ok” from initial tests considering its reputation.
have you got any 100% crops to show what sort of stuff you're getting?

[kirbinster]

Maybe the cannon version is not very good, but I had a Nikon mount unit and it was very sharp and a nice lens. I replaced it with a used Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 AF-S because I wanted to use it on my D5000 also and because I got the lens at a great price. Typically I find that OEM lenses are better, but generally cost much more - thus you have to trade-off price and quality and decide which is more important to you.

[cheap]

Sigma DG is ok with cropped bodies but softer, less saturation and contrast. good for soft portraits.

5D 21MP needs top L lenses!

[candleman]

ok i figured it out, i think...
now, why didnt this come to me sooner..

Kirbinister and I are both shooting crop.. thus using only the centre of the lens.

my guess is you're using your 5Dmk2 and not your 40D for these comparisons... so that would explain the poorer results. have you compared shts between the bodies?
your full framer is using the whole lens element, and its obviously not so great on the extremities.

its either that,
or i've horribly misunderstood how lenses on crop bodies translate to lenses on full frame / vice versa