Reviews and Problems with Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
Showing 1-10 of 36
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 frame in wide angle shots Unable to autofocus/incorrect focusing at 17-20mm Bleh. The only thing I will say that it is good about this lens is the Macro.
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). The sigma contemporary was sharper, noticeably sharper, but not by leaps and bounds. I then shot photos around the neighborhood, the same scenes with both lenses. I was surprised to see that the kit lens was consistently sharper than the sigma!
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. To be fair to both lenses, I ran the test of both lenses at f/4.0 since the Sigma lens has an f range of 2.8-4.0. Now, I was disappointed to note that the f/2.8 only lasts up to 18mm, then it goes to f/3.2.
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. Unfortunately, Sigma still hasn't figured out the auto focus system of the Canon EOS lineup. I immediately noticed a severe front focusing problem in the first set of test shots taken when the lens arrived.
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
Summary: I have had this lens for more than 6 months now and I am slightly frustrated with it. Initially it was fine though focus was off out of the box. I then calibrated it using the Sigma USB dock and have managed to get it to focus almost accurately though it wasn't always perfect. After 5 months of use I spotted fungus marks on the front element which was surprising for a new lens. I sent it to Sigma for repair and even they were surprised to see fungus.
It is quite soft at 17mm and oddly stopping down the aperture does not make things noticeably better. The good thing is that it
CraigM "craig13393", Amazon
11 July 2014
Summary: My conclusion on this lens is that all the reviews are right. It is quite soft at 17mm and oddly stopping down the aperture does not make things noticeably better. The good thing is that it is still a lot better than a Pentax 18-55 kit lens so can be seen as a genuine step-up lens, but at £329 it should be! The zoom range is also good and at anything from about 30mm upwards this lens is extremely sharp, especially from f5.6.
Summary: Purchased as a replacement for my ageing 17-85mm Canon which had a contact fault. However, in tests the sigma was very soft in comparison. Focus accuracy was poor too. So returned it and had the Canon repaired instead.