Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 lens

  • Thread starter Thread starter scottsdaleriots
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
S

scottsdaleriots

Guest
#1
Anyone have any experience with it? I've been reading a lot of reviews and even more customer reviews so i know it doesnt have full time manual override and it rattles a bit and the lens cap doesnt 'lock' in tightly - you can knock it off. But is this for all copies or do some copies' caps dont lock in? Also heard that its probably best to focus using live view. And the sharpness "falls off" at the edges so the corners arent sharp. From what i understand this lens is intended to be used on crop bodies but maybe not so well on the 7d - since that's a semi-pro camera.

I want to use this lens for concert photography (right in front of the stage/band where the security personnel stand). Dont ask me whatfocal lengths i usually use coz i dont know it varies since i shoot sports with my 70-200. I have a 7d. Any alternatives to this lens? Not sure on canon's 17-55mm 2.8 IS, price is high
 
#2
I bought this lens as a stopgap while I waited for the 5D3. _When_ it shoots nice pictures, it's almost L quality, with great color and sharpness. But it's only now and then that it shoots nice pictures. I get a lot of back focusing, and the manual focus ring has such a fine travel you need remarkable haptic skills to pull good focus in video. But then again the video I shot on it a couple weeks ago just became video of the day on a popular site, so its problems aren't gonna prevent success. The OS is good (and not great) for stills but is not good for video, I far prefer the 24-105L's IS which is more the opposite.

This lens is for crop cameras so its life is limited (it fits on ff but I haven't seen what that does...vignettes madly?). As for lens caps falling off, I have a UV protector on it and have no problem with that.
 
Upvote 0
#3
scottsdaleriots said:
Anyone have any experience with it? I've been reading a lot of reviews and even more customer reviews so i know it doesnt have full time manual override and it rattles a bit and the lens cap doesnt 'lock' in tightly - you can knock it off. But is this for all copies or do some copies' caps dont lock in? Also heard that its probably best to focus using live view. And the sharpness "falls off" at the edges so the corners arent sharp. From what i understand this lens is intended to be used on crop bodies but maybe not so well on the 7d - since that's a semi-pro camera.

I want to use this lens for concert photography (right in front of the stage/band where the security personnel stand). Dont ask me whatfocal lengths i usually use coz i dont know it varies since i shoot sports with my 70-200. I have a 7d. Any alternatives to this lens? Not sure on canon's 17-55mm 2.8 IS, price is high
Click to expand...

I just posted some info in another thread. :)

Lens cap - yeah I heard the same. All I know is when I open the box & looked at it the lens cap looked great & the moulding seemed high quality. It fit perfectly on the lens so when it was loose I was quite surprised. long story short once turned to where I felt that it was all the way you then actually give it a little extra twist so as to lock it down tight. It's a perfect fit at this point and there's no way that it would ever fall off and it actually fits better then the other hoods I have.

The rattle- I would not describe it as a rattle. I would say it's more of a very very soft thunk I think it might be the IS can shift slightly when not powered. Sigma has said that it is totally normal. You only notice it right at first because it's different.

Corner falloff - some fall off in the corners is totally normal for this type of lens. If you have much you can correct it post. I personally don't have any significant fall off. The 7D has a crop sensor, the dimensions are standard. The only issue you'll run into is if you try to mount it on to a full frame body. Pro versus semi pro has no relevance.
 
Upvote 0
#4
^ yeah i saw your post :) sorry i meant the lens hood not the cap. But really, the lens cap doesnt 'lock' properly?

peederj said:
I bought this lens as a stopgap while I waited for the 5D3. _When_ it shoots nice pictures, it's almost L quality, with great color and sharpness. But it's only now and then that it shoots nice pictures. I get a lot of back focusing, and the manual focus ring has such a fine travel you need remarkable haptic skills to pull good focus in video. But then again the video I shot on it a couple weeks ago just became video of the day on a popular site, so its problems aren't gonna prevent success. The OS is good (and not great) for stills but is not good for video, I far prefer the 24-105L's IS which is more the opposite.

This lens is for crop cameras so its life is limited (it fits on ff but I haven't seen what that does...vignettes madly?). As for lens caps falling off, I have a UV protector on it and have no problem with that.
Click to expand...
If you could rate this lens outta 10 (1 = terrible, 10 = best, L quality), what would you rate it and why? Its the first time i've heard of back focussing issues. Have you found a way to fix it, or is it an issue to live with? I was intending to shoot videos with this lens. Hmm...I thought this might be a good alternative to the 50mm lens (canon and sigma) or to the 24, 35 primes. The 24-105 isnt fast enough i dont think since it's f/4.

Would you say it's 50/50 with getting good, in focus shots? _When_ it takes good shots? Or worse, something like 30/70 (30 being good and 70 being OOF unsharp pics).
 
Upvote 0
#5
scottsdaleriots said:
^ yeah i saw your post :) sorry i meant the lens hood not the cap. But really, the lens cap doesnt 'lock' properly?

peederj said:
I bought this lens as a stopgap while I waited for the 5D3. _When_ it shoots nice pictures, it's almost L quality, with great color and sharpness. But it's only now and then that it shoots nice pictures. I get a lot of back focusing, and the manual focus ring has such a fine travel you need remarkable haptic skills to pull good focus in video. But then again the video I shot on it a couple weeks ago just became video of the day on a popular site, so its problems aren't gonna prevent success. The OS is good (and not great) for stills but is not good for video, I far prefer the 24-105L's IS which is more the opposite.

This lens is for crop cameras so its life is limited (it fits on ff but I haven't seen what that does...vignettes madly?). As for lens caps falling off, I have a UV protector on it and have no problem with that.
Click to expand...
If you could rate this lens outta 10 (1 = terrible, 10 = best, L quality), what would you rate it and why? Its the first time i've heard of back focussing issues. Have you found a way to fix it, or is it an issue to live with? I was intending to shoot videos with this lens. Hmm...I thought this might be a good alternative to the 50mm lens (canon and sigma) or to the 24, 35 primes. The 24-105 isnt fast enough i dont think since it's f/4.

Would you say it's 50/50 with getting good, in focus shots? _When_ it takes good shots? Or worse, something like 30/70 (30 being good and 70 being OOF unsharp pics).
Click to expand...

I wrote cap didn't I. ???
Sorry I meant hood.
The cap is fine it should be hard to screw up a cap anyhow. :D

I would not compare this to a L series lens mainly because canon does not offer L that are compareable. I have heard the canon 17-50 to be L worthy if it had the appropriate seals and slightly tuffer construction.

I feel this lens is optically very high quality and perhaps surpasses the Canon version in this area.
The build quality also is extremely fine, good, no slop, no lens play and the zoom feels just right very smooth with perfect amount of resistance.

It sucks that my 60 d cannot do fine tune autofocus as the 7D allows so I was a little more concerned.
My autofocus seems to be fine I keep trying to find some fault with it but I have not had any issues thus far. Based on past reviews I felt the autofocus could be an issue but lately reviews from new owners show 4 the most part the autofocus accuracy is good.

It would be nice if the manual focus ring had more fine control but in truth it has been entirely adequate based on my usage. I would say the canon definitely gives you more manual focus control because of the wider range of movement in the ring. This is perhaps the main differentiating point - canon will give you easier manual focus control. I do not shoot much video of course so I can not really say how crucial this would be. When I shoot my stills manually it's proven to be adequate.

I'm getting just as many keepers infocus as I do with any of my other Canon lenses. I don't know how much your shooting style affects your percentage of keepers but most of mine are good say over 90 percent (using center point mainly) of course that depends on the exact situation & environment that you're shooting in.

I would think of it this way - buy it knowing that you might have to have a calibrated. Once it's been calibrated or you get a good copy matched your body right off the bat, then at this point you have saved yourself 400 to 500 dollars.

So that just leaves fine control using manual in question. For me it's adequate.
 
Upvote 0
#6
I will throw in 1 other tidbit. ::)

An article at lens rentals website indicated the Canon version had strange and unusually high # of autofocus failures that needed to be returned for servicing to Canon after around a year of abuse use.

Just another thing to consider.
:o
 
Upvote 0
#7
I have owned the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS for a couple months. I also own the Canon 70-300L IS so a have a decent lens to compare quality. I have this mounted on a Canon 50D

This Sigma lens is very sharp and very nice color from it. Extremely happy with the performance of it. No issues with focusing.

I would recommend buying this through a brick and motor store. It took me 3 Sigma 17-50 2.8 lens to get one good one. The other 2 would only be sharp at one focal point and soft every where else. Did not matter how I micro-adjusted it, only could get it sharp at one focal point.

This one I also did have to micro-adjust it and it ended up be at a -8, but now is totally sharp from 17 all the up to 50mm.

Without being able to micro-adjust this lens it would of been very soft.

This is my first lens that does not have FTM focus and I do miss it.

Hope this helps
 
Upvote 0
#9
For s&g I tested this lens on the 5d3 today, it crops out a circle (with the top and bottom lopped off) in the center of the frame. The coverage is only adequate for APS-C, on FF you will have to crop as if it was APS-C, which is pointless.

I find the zoom to be way too stiff on my copy for zooms during video. It's fine for stills. To zoom during video, you will want a sturdy tripod, though I'm not sure even that and a "follow zoom" will counteract the stiffness and yield no shake.
 
Upvote 0
#10
bklein61 said:
I have owned the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS for a couple months. I also own the Canon 70-300L IS so a have a decent lens to compare quality. I have this mounted on a Canon 50D

This Sigma lens is very sharp and very nice color from it. Extremely happy with the performance of it. No issues with focusing.

I would recommend buying this through a brick and motor store. It took me 3 Sigma 17-50 2.8 lens to get one good one. The other 2 would only be sharp at one focal point and soft every where else. Did not matter how I micro-adjusted it, only could get it sharp at one focal point.

This one I also did have to micro-adjust it and it ended up be at a -8, but now is totally sharp from 17 all the up to 50mm.

Without being able to micro-adjust this lens it would of been very soft.

This is my first lens that does not have FTM focus and I do miss it.

Hope this helps
Click to expand...
Thanks so you suggest to buy it at the store rather than online coz of the quality control issues? And to get it micro-adjusted? Hmm, have to admit that does deter me from buying this lens. Did it cost you extra to get the lens micro-adjusted? And do you know how long sigma's warranty goes for? I know that it's 10yrs in Canada, which is generous.
 
Upvote 0
#13
I called up DWI and found out all the products they're selling are grey imports - no wonder it's so cheap, cheaper than amazon and b&h. i can't justify the almost $800 price tage on this lens at ted's right now. maybe in the future. i seems like a good lens though
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
Auto-focus performance/panning test: RF100-500 vs EF 300/2.8 II vs EF200-400
Replies
9
Views
6K
Click
Click
K
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM CA and field curvature at 1:1?
Replies
2
Views
3K
Frodo
F
K
The best flat field macro lens for 1:1 reproduction
Replies
2
Views
7K
Kuja
K
C
Lens Error 60 (RF 85mm F2)
Replies
3
Views
8K
HenWin
H
Big_Ant_TV_Media
RF 70-200 F2.8 lens "need expert opinions and peace of mind"
Replies
14
Views
5K
Big_Ant_TV_Media
Big_Ant_TV_Media
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu