Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8 dodgy reputation

Discussion in 'UK Photography' started by David, Sep 19, 2008.

  1. David

    David Guest

    I own the Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 dg ex. Like many amateurs, I am a
    prodigious reader of opinions and reviews of kit that I already own,
    as well as what I would like to own. The aforementioned lens gets a
    very bad press. I have had good results (with a bit of positive
    exposure bias) on my Nikon D200. I am constantly disappointed by
    disparaging reports on the internet (to the bemusement of my adult son
    (Canon shooter), who thinks I should just enjoy the results). Even
    Sigma seems to have disowned the lens by failing to mention it on
    their website.
    Today, I tried out a second-hand example of the venerable Nikon
    17-55mm f/2.8 dx in comparison with my Sigma. To my great surprise and
    happiness, except in parts of the f/2.8 shots only, where the Nikon
    was noticeably brighter and more detailed, the Sigma held its own in
    all respects. I used Photoshop to view similar parts of comparable
    photos at 200%.
    I had money available and ready to spend. I am so glad that I decided
    to do the test shots and compare them at home. There is a lesson here
    somewhere. Will this cure me of reading about my kit - unlikely!

    Regards,
    David
     
    David, Sep 19, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    Two words - copy variation.
    You got a good one - some got lemons, and as usual, the lemon owners are
    the more vocal. Sigma do seem to produce more than their fair share of
    lemons, it must be said.
    I have a Sigma APO 28-105 f:2.8-4 which came with the camera and I
    didn't expect it to be much good, so didn't use it for months. A few
    weeks ago I decided to give it a shake and was pleasantly surprised at
    the results. It's not Zeiss, but it's not crap either.
     
    Grimly Curmudgeon, Sep 21, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. David

    David Guest

    Thanks for responding Dave. You said it. A surprised though, to find
    the Sigma IQ better (to my eyes) at middling apertures and smaller.

    Could this have been a lemon 17-55mm ? My money's still burning a
    hole !

    Regards,
    David
     
    David, Sep 22, 2008
    #3
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.