Photogtaphy Forums

Photography Forums > Camera Manufacturers > Canon > Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS

 
 
Digi - Reb
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 01:17 AM
I own 3 Canon lenses,
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came w/ Digital Rebel
EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM that came w/EOS Elan II
EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM.
Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is the
lens I'm considering as my walk around lens.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=350973&is=REG
also considering...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=284399&is=REG

Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be appreciated, as
well as any other serious recommendations.

TIA
John

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Douglas
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 03:15 AM

"Digi - Reb" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:XK21e.23986$b_6.15448@trnddc01...
I own 3 Canon lenses,
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came w/ Digital Rebel
EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM that came w/EOS Elan II
EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM.
Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is the
lens I'm considering as my walk around lens.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=350973&is=REG
also considering...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=284399&is=REG

Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be appreciated, as
well as any other serious recommendations.

TIA
John

If you can put up with a focus motor you can hear and one which is a triffle
slower than a Canon USM and you can handle the occasional miss focus. You
don't mind a Apochromatic lens producing chromatic aberrations on some
scenes. The Sigma is a product worth considering. I just sold one of these
(non macro) lenses after owning it for less than 6 months. Watch the line
wrap!!
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....e=STRK:MESO:IT

There is no difference in the sharpness of the image this lens and my new
24~70 f2.8 L series produces under circumstances ideal to the Sigma lens.
There is lots of difference in other areas and I really don't mind having
sold 2, Sigma lenses to get one "L" series of this type. I found the 28~70
f2.8 Sigma I had on my 10D to be better than the new Sigma for Digitals. If
you care to take some advise from a previous owner... Try the 28~70 before
making a decission.

Douglas


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Steve Wolfe
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 07:17 AM
> I own 3 Canon lenses,
> EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came w/ Digital Rebel
> EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM that came w/EOS Elan II
> EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM.
> Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is the
> lens I'm considering as my walk around lens.


I personally like the 18-55 as a walk-around: Not because of quality
(it's obviously not stellar), but because going as wide as 18mm is often
very helpful to me - even though it isn't terribly "fast". Unless you don't
find that to be so, you might want to wait until you can scratch up enough
for:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=351548&is=USA

In fact, that lens would make the 18-55 useless, meaning you could sell it
on ebay, making the cost difference between that and the Sigma not very
great.

steve


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Rosengart
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 08:39 PM
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 01:17:43 GMT, Digi - Reb <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is =
> the
> lens I'm considering as my walk around lens.
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai=
> ls&Q=3D&sku=3D350973&is=3DREG
> also considering...
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai=
> ls&Q=3D&sku=3D284399&is=3DREG


These links just take me to the B&H front page, I'm afraid.
Probably because of the quoted-(un)printable encoding. It would
be better if you posted your message as regular text rather than
multipart MIME with text and HTML.

> Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be =
> appreciated, as
> well as any other serious recommendations.


Assuming we're talking about 20-something to 70-something f/2.8 zooms ...

Photozone.de disparages the Sigma 24-70 and talks up the Tamron 28-75.
Doesn't provide much detail though. Follow this link and look at
"Alternatives", underneath the table:

http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/canonFAQ.htm#28L

They don't mention the Tokina 28-70, another competitor in this range.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
 
Reply With Quote
 
David H. Lipman
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 10:12 PM
From: "Ben Rosengart" <br+(E-Mail Removed)>

| On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 01:17:43 GMT, Digi - Reb <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is =
>> the
>> lens I'm considering as my walk around lens.
>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai=
>> ls&Q=3D&sku=3D350973&is=3DREG
>> also considering...
>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai=
>> ls&Q=3D&sku=3D284399&is=3DREG

|
| These links just take me to the B&H front page, I'm afraid.
| Probably because of the quoted-(un)printable encoding. It would
| be better if you posted your message as regular text rather than
| multipart MIME with text and HTML.
|
>> Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be =
>> appreciated, as
>> well as any other serious recommendations.

|
| Assuming we're talking about 20-something to 70-something f/2.8 zooms ...
|
| Photozone.de disparages the Sigma 24-70 and talks up the Tamron 28-75.
| Doesn't provide much detail though. Follow this link and look at
| "Alternatives", underneath the table:
|
| http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/canonFAQ.htm#28L
|
| They don't mention the Tokina 28-70, another competitor in this range.
|
| --
| Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
| Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
| questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
| --Josh Micah Marshall

Those URLs are fine but are wrapped. You can't just click on them becuase they are
incomplete. Just copy them and the line below them into notepad, unwrap them, copy the full
URL and past into the Browser line.


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Rosengart
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 10:29 PM
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:12:05 GMT, David H. Lipman
<DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
> Those URLs are fine but are wrapped. You can't just click on them becuase they are
> incomplete.


No sir, that is not the issue. It's the quoted-printable encoding
applied by the O.P.'s newsreader. Thank you anyway.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
 
Reply With Quote
 
David H. Lipman
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-26-2005, 11:06 PM
From: "Ben Rosengart" <br+(E-Mail Removed)>

| No sir, that is not the issue. It's the quoted-printable encoding
| applied by the O.P.'s newsreader. Thank you anyway.
|
| --
| Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
| Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
| questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
| --Josh Micah Marshall

Then blame your News Reader -- slrn/0.9.8.0 (NetBSD) ;-)

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm


 
Reply With Quote
 
Douglas
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-27-2005, 01:14 AM

"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
news:jWl1e.25744$b_6.2980@trnddc01...
> From: "Ben Rosengart" <br+(E-Mail Removed)>
>
> | No sir, that is not the issue. It's the quoted-printable encoding
> | applied by the O.P.'s newsreader. Thank you anyway.
> |
>
> Then blame your News Reader -- slrn/0.9.8.0 (NetBSD) ;-)
>
> --
> Dave


You waste your time dave. If there is one person you could find more
dissagable than a Linux user it just has to be a BSD user. NetBSD at that!

This guy uses an oddball (to be kind) reader and expects it to recognise
advanced, non-complying (because it is advanced) features of a modern day
news reader. When it won't, he blames not his historic reader but the one
with features all the rest of us are used to having.

It's one thing to use an alternative operating system but another thing
alltogether to expect it to be as advanced as a bought one. For years users
of Unix like operating systems have predicted the imminent demise of
Microsoft as the dominant OS. Maybe if the 'ix developers ever did agree on
one point and make it seem possible, the next point would be in disagreement
and the whole thing fall over again. SLRN is hardly a leading edge package.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Rosengart
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-27-2005, 02:28 AM
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:14:42 +1000, Douglas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> You waste your time dave. If there is one person you could find more
> dissagable than a Linux user it just has to be a BSD user. NetBSD at that!


It's true, don't try to sag me.

NetBSD isn't my choice, that's what my ISP (and employer) runs.
I'm posting from their machine.

> This guy uses an oddball (to be kind) reader


Tsk, it would really be better if you weren't so snotty.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Rosengart
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      03-27-2005, 02:31 AM
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 23:06:55 GMT, David H. Lipman
<DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
> Then blame your News Reader -- slrn/0.9.8.0 (NetBSD) ;-)


No. There's no good reason to post anything but text/plain to a
non-binary newsgroup.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question about Canon EF 180mm f3.5L Macro USM AutoFocus Telephoto Lens Dave Canon 3 11-03-2007 01:16 AM
Sigma 105mm lens - possible autofocus problem kit 35mm Cameras 3 11-10-2006 07:01 PM
Canon Normal EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM Macro Autofocus Lens Vincent J. Hrovat Canon 1 05-08-2005 12:51 AM
Vivitar or Phoenix 100mm f/3,5 macro autofocus lens. teranews 35mm Cameras 2 03-15-2005 05:19 PM
Nikon zoom lens won't do macro autofocus Guv Nikon 0 08-04-2003 04:51 PM