Reviews and Problems with Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
Showing 1-10 of 39
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM le
Dr. Moto, B&H Photo
27 August 2014
Excerpt: I tested the lens and had a problem with focusing. The problem possibly could have been rsolved with the USB dock which I didn't have so I sent the lens back. Two stars for build quality and size.
Summary: Totally unimpressed. I bought this for my K-5 and it is worse than my $200 dollar kit lens. I bought this because I wanted an upgrade from my 18-50mm kit, but boy was this the wrong choice: Higher than average noise levels in night photography Blurry images at 17-20mm Distortion at the edge of the...
Excerpt: I don't know why, but I had a different experience than most others here with the sigma 17-70 contemporary. First I tested it for sharpness against my 18-55 WR kit lens by shooting a test sheet/chart with each lens (using a K-30).
Excerpt: Buying brands like Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron can result in a ~70/30 bet that you will get a good copy of the lens. The Sigma 17-70 (for Nikon) I bought had some major focus issues. It would constantly hunt for focus and about 8 of 10 photos were nasty blurry.
Summary: Well, I just got this lens in the mail "Brand New" for my Sony a77. Immediately I decided to put it to the test. I have to say that image quality was good when images were in focus. Initially I tested the lens indoors. I ran the test against my Sony 16-50mm f/2.8.
Summary: Frankly, my testing methods were rather un-scientific however, I stand by my findings. I don't know if I got a bad instance of this lens or what but the overall image quality, in my opinion, was quite bad. I tested this on two bodies, a D40x and a brand new D5100.
Summary: I really wanted to like this lens. On paper, it looks like a near perfect everyday lens. The relatively fast aperture, nice wide to medium zoom range, and bonus close focus distance make it sound like something you could keep on your camera most of the time.
Conclusion: I wanted to love this and use it as a general purpose lens, but it's VERY soft, much heavier than it's non-OS predecessor and expensive for what it is. Maybe I got a bad one (which seems to happen a bit too much to me with Sigma lenses). Steer clear.
Pros: Reasonably well built.
Cons: Everything else. Soft, heavy, expensive for what it is
Excerpt: With this lens the first time I used it was at wide open using av between the f2.8 to f4 in the forest at about a 60th using auto focus and everything once seen on my Mac was out of focus and most images were unusable.