Product Description

Large aperture zoom starting from 24mm and realizing a maximum aperture F-value of 2.8 As for the front element does not rotate at the time of focusing.

Product Details

• Brand: Sigma
• Model: B0009E1XF8
• Released on: 2006-05-04
• Dimensions: 2.97" h x 2.97" w x 2.30" l, .95 pounds

Features

• Accepts 82mm size filters
• Variable zoom offers excellent image definition and increases your creative possibilities, when compared to a standard 50mm 'normal' lens
• The use of two (2) SLD (The Special Low Dispersion) glass elements results in excellent correction of chromatic aberration for a high level of optic integrity
• The lens materials used in this new lens are lead and arsenic free ecological glass

Customer Reviews

Professional Quality Optics
I have owned and used this lens professionally for over a year now and after a minor focus issue that was resolved very quickly by Sigma's excellent service department I have to say this is the sharpest 24-70 lens I have used. I also have experience with the canon 24-70L lens which retails for just over a grand and the Sigma is sharper throughout the whole range(even at 2.8). The only negative thing I have to say about this lens is the noisy autofocus (Canon's USM is much quieter). But it is still reasonably fast to AF. This is definately the best lens for the money in this zoom range and is without a doubt the best optically. Canon's build quality and weather sealing are definately superior to the Sigma so if that is an issue, you may want to go with the Canon.

-NB

Just buy it
I had read quite a few reviews of this lens before buying it for my D300. Some were great and others not so great. I picked it up to use as a portrait lens for location shoots. I haven't experienced any problems whatsoever. Some say it's soft at f2.8. Not mine. Tack sharp at all focal lengths. Some say the Autofocus is noisy(loud.) Not mine. Or maybe I'm just not that picky. If noisy means you can hear it then...yeah it can be noisy. Some say that the autofocus hunts. Not mine. In fact this lens focuses so fast I was amazed. Color rendition is good. Contrast is good. Bokeh is nice and smooth.

People raved about the Nikon 18-200vr so I bought one. It's soft and slow in my experience. It was "ok" on my D70 but its flaws were multiplied on my d300. So even with the good reviews of this lens I was really worried about buying it but the price made me give it a try. I'm so glad I did. I could easily slip into another good Sigma or halfway decent Nikon lens with the money I saved over going with the Nikon equivalent. It makes me wonder how their competitor to Nikon's 18-200vr stacks up.

My only "complaint" about this lens is that the zoom ring is small, stiff, and at the base of the lens. It's sometimes hard to get to and a bit backward from what I'm used to. A minor annoyance is that switching to manual focus is a 2 step process. The lens will stay in autofocus even after locking the clutch down as long as the camera is still in autofocus. Be careful with this because you could damage your camera's motor drive if you have a tight grip on your lens. You'll know the lens is set to manual when you try to focus and the focus ring turns on its own. I also found it odd that the lens is at it shortest when zoomed all the way in and longest when backed off to 24mm. Strange...maybe I'm missing something here but all my other zooms are the opposite.

It's big and bulky. I actually like this because I have big hands and find it easier to stabilize heavier equipment. And as dumb as it sounds...it looks good on the camera. Those out of "the-know" will judge you based on these types of things at times.
Nice big lens = professional right?
As long as you're a potential paying customer...um...yeah! Of course!

I haven't had a chance to try it out yet but I've heard some people complain about lens flare and that hood is useless to protect against it. I like lens flare and use it creatively in my own photography so it's not anything I would consider a minus. For me a lens hood is something I use to keep from bumping the end of my lens into stuff. I can see though how people could get annoyed if it's unexpected. But if you're getting unexpected flare in your shots you're not doing your job as a photographer and paying proper attention to your scene.

Update 6/17/2008
I've been shooting with this lens for a few weeks now and my above observations are accurate. However the lens flare issue is a bit more than I thought. I had a hard time getting the "touch of flair" I like in some backlit shots. It was more like "holy crap that's a lot of flair!" The hood does seem a bit useless but I tend to bump into stuff so it's good to protect the end of the lens. I'd still buy it and fully recommend it at 5 stars.

Great f2.8 for the price!
Disclaimer: used it for 4 months+, on Canon Rebel XT 350D and Canon 430 film camera, I am an ameteur shooter.

Pro:
Full time MF.
constant 2.8.
Great contrast and color, consistent with my other Sigmas,
nice weight, fit and finish.

Neutral:
OK AF speed indoor and outdoor
f2.8 isn't fast enough in many indoor situations with moving subjects. I have to use flash with it.

Con:
Arrived with severe front-focus problem. Fixed under warranty.
Zoom could be smoother.
AF whines a bit, but tolerable;
Border not as sharp as center.
Sharp only after stop down. But usable wide open for me



Conclusion:
Probably not pro grade, but for the build quality at this price, it's a winner! (I deducted 1 star because of the less than perfect IQ.)

Update:
This claims to be a macro lens without HSM, so the so-so AF speed is excused. Got a very shallow DOF wide open. So IQ can be very low if AF is not spot on wide open. This is not a great low light lens as I thought it would be. But with good light, the IQ is excellent with fantastic color and contrast. Considering the price, it's not a bad deal really.

Update: March 2009
Just got my used 28-70 2.8L. It looks used and the MF is problematic, but the IQ(sharpness/color/contrast) is so much better than this Sigma, not to mention flair resistance, light fall off on full frame, AF. Contrary to the Sigma, the Canon L is very much usable at f2.8. Only the border sharpness improves significantly stop down. And I got the L used for not much more than the Sigma brand new. The L is a bit bigger but not really heavier in hand, both feel handful. I am a pack-rat so I'll keep my Sigma. I guess without the Sigma I couldn't have really appreciated the L lens anyway! Sigma just came out with a Mark II of its 24-70 with HSM, priced into $800+ range. I think if you like it cheap, Mark I is a steal now, if you have the cash, go for the L. If you are lucky, there might just be a good used L out there for you somewhere :)