Would this be considered an upgrade?

TheKenTurner · Jun 10, 2012

Hello TPF!

I have Canon's 17-85mm f/4-5.6, and have found myself in a lot of low-light situations. After some "research" (browsing B&H), I have come across Sigma's 17-70mm f/2.8-4. This lens would obviously be better in low light, and I don't need those extra 15mm. When looking at the lens, it just looks cheaply built compared to what I have now, and I'm not sure if the IQ will decrease. Do any of you have experience with this lens or any other Sigma lenses in the same price range? I guess Nikon users could theoretically answer this too.

TheKenTurner · Jun 12, 2012

Bump! Anyone with Sigma experience?

-ken Turner

Espike · Jun 12, 2012

I have the older Sigma 17-70 non HSM, non OS. I use it for almost everything and I love it. The build quality is good although i can't compare it to an L lens since the only experience I have with one is that I saw one once... My biggest complaint is that if you point it down and don't have the zoom lock on, it will extend and likewise if it is zoomed out to say 50mm and you point it up, it will go back to 17mm. Other than that issue, I really like the lens.

Edit: i should also mention that my older version is f/2.8-4.5 not 2.8-4 like the newer one.

unpopular · Jun 13, 2012

idk. how much will one lousy stop do? If you had a Sony, I'd say a lot since handheld at 1/30 is very doable while below 1/15 it starts getting tricky very rapidly. But I'm just not sure you'll really see that much of a gain between 2.8 and 4 w/o IS. I think if I had reservations about build quality and IQ then I'd just stick with the Canon.

Espike · Jun 13, 2012

The 2.8-4 (newer one) does has IS and USM ( called OS and HSM respectively). I do tend to agree that 1 stop isn't a huge difference though.

unpopular · Jun 13, 2012

Does the Canon have IS?

Espike · Jun 13, 2012

Looks like it has both IS and USM. Each lens has something that the other doesn't so ultimately you will have to decide what is most important for you OP. The Canon has the extra zoom, and full time manual focusing. The Sigma has 1 stop bigger aperture, and is macro capable.

TheKenTurner · Jun 13, 2012

Thanks, guys! So I guess I'll just stick with the 17-85. But does sigma have good quality glass?

-ken Turner

o hey tyler · Jun 13, 2012

TheKenTurner said:
Thanks, guys! So I guess I'll just stick with the 17-85. But does sigma have good quality glass?

-ken Turner

Yes, Sigma does make lenses that are worth buying. I shoot a lot of my photos with the Sigma 85mm f/1.4. A lot of people like the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, as well as the 70-200mm f/2.8 OS. I'd probably only buy Primes from Sigma, but that's just me (and the fact that I shoot w/ only primes).

fjrabon · Jun 13, 2012

o hey tyler said:
TheKenTurner said:

Thanks, guys! So I guess I'll just stick with the 17-85. But does sigma have good quality glass?

-ken Turner

Click to expand...

Yes, Sigma does make lenses that are worth buying. I shoot a lot of my photos with the Sigma 85mm f/1.4. A lot of people like the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, as well as the 70-200mm f/2.8 OS. I'd probably only buy Primes from Sigma, but that's just me (and the fact that I shoot w/ only primes).

I love the sigma 10-20mm wide angle zoom as well. The only complaints I've ever heard with sigma is that occasionally you can get a bad one, as their quality control seems to be a bit less 'tight' than Nikon and Canon. But I'd say for 90%+ of them, they easily hold their own with the comparable first party lenses.

unpopular · Jun 13, 2012

You can prob avoid the quality issues by buying used, as the lemmons would have alreadby been returned to the manufacturer for repair or refund.

hukim0531 · Jun 13, 2012

unpopular said:
You can prob avoid the quality issues by buying used, as the lemmons would have alreadby been returned to the manufacturer for repair or refund.

Sad but not necessarily true. Many of those who own bodies with MA built in tend to keep the lens if within the range of adjustment. For this reason and Sigma's track record in loose quality control, I would be extremely careful buying them used.

fjrabon · Jun 13, 2012

hukim0531 said:
unpopular said:

You can prob avoid the quality issues by buying used, as the lemmons would have alreadby been returned to the manufacturer for repair or refund.

Click to expand...

Sad but not necessarily true. Many of those who own bodies with MA built in tend to keep the lens if within the range of adjustment. For this reason and Sigma's track record in loose quality control, I would be extremely careful buying them used.

Yeah, this is why I buy from Amazon. Easiest exchange policy around. God help you if you buy a 2 year old used Sigma off ebay or whatever else site and then you find out it's 'off' in some way.

unpopular · Jun 13, 2012

Hmm. Thanks for your input, Steve.

I know what you mean, fjrabon - I recently bought a 28mm Minolta on ebay with a sluggish aperture. It was just easier for me to fix it than to return it.

TheKenTurner · Jun 14, 2012

Thanks guys for your input! I've been extremely busy, but I got some time to play around with my camera this evening. I was testing my 50mm at f/2.8, and f4, and it seems like f/2.8 takes either half the shutter speed or half the ISO to get the same exposure. I think I'm going to go with the 17-70.

Have you guys gotten any sticky zoom lenses from Sigma? Is there a way to fix it?

-ken Turner