1. Incredibly sharp optics, at f/3.5 or above. At f/8 to f/22, its almost ridiculous, reminds me of the finest Schneider optics on Hasselblad and 4x5 shot on a locked tripod. Many say this lens is noticeably sharper than the Canon L or Nikkor ED equivalents at any aperture. I agree. The sharpness of this lens is truly amazing.

2. Finish. Good as anything out there. Strong, durable. Some people don't like the flat matte finish, but it offers a more solid grip surface than a polished surface, especially when hands are cold, sweaty or when wearing gloves. The flat finish is much easier to hang onto and control under these conditions. Function always tops good looks to me.

3. Fast, accurate operation. Screw focus goes from closest to infinity very quickly. Lens is not prone to hunting or AFC dancing, even in low light. And spot on, too. No front or back focus issues, hits the target every time.

4. Price. Not really cheap, but more affordable than inferior counterparts, especially OEM. Sigma could charge more for these EX lenses, considering their image and build quality.

A few, and minor at best:

1. Size-weight. This is no weenie, it's a bit of a bear. Big and on the weighty side, but featherweight gear is not as stable, and therefore more prone to camera and mirror slap shake at lower shutter speeds. This lens on a D3x or D300 is quite stable.

2. Plan on an investment into the 82mm filter size. Optics this good need protection, and a UV or haze protector is a must. And don't skimp here! Why degrade such fine imaging ability with a cheap filter? Get a B+W if you can afford it.

3. Zoom creep. only at extreme ups and downs. Usually only a problem when on a tripod, so it's nothing a tab of duct tape can't solve. Small price to pay for such a silky smooth and fast zoom ring.

4. Shade size. Could be longer, it's the exact same perfect shade that comes with the 20mm f/1.8. But that's whining.

Third Sigma EX series lens I've purchased, also have the 20mmf/1.8 and 10-20mm f/3.5+, both are truly fine lenses in build, sharpness, color rendition.

Even with regular professional use, I have found the Sigma EX lenses as good as equivalent Nikkor lenses.

The 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG DF is a truly amazing lens. My copy was bought used, in pristine condition. It is not the HSM autofocus, it uses the 'screwdriver' focusing mechanism. It is extremely fast to focus, all the way from closest focus to infinity.

A word about 'noisy' focus this lens is blamed for. One simple fact that is terribly overlooked is that when people evaluate the noise factor, they are most often looking through the viewfinder with the lens only inches from their ear, which is an unfair evaluation. Try listening from a 6 foot distance, with someone else prefocusing. Maybe my copy has quieter than usual gearing, since the noise isn't distracting or a nuisance, even when looking through the viewfinder. I guess there's people out there that actually feel the extra cash paid for USM is worth the silence it provides. Not me.

Customer Service

Only called Sigma once, they were quick to answer, and very informative.

Never had to use warranty repair.

Similar Products Used:

10-20mm Sigma EX HSM DG
18-55 f/3.5 Nikkor ED SWM
18-105 f/3.5 Nikkor ED SWM VR
20mm f/1.8 Sigma EX HSM DG
28-80mm f/3.5 Nikkor AFS-D
50mm f/1.4 Nikkor AFS
85mm f/1.8 Nikkor AFS
105mm f/2.5 Nikkor AIS
180mm f/2.8 Nikkor ED IF AFS
70-200 f/2.8 Nikkor ED IF AFS VR
70-300 f/3.5 Nikkor ED IF AFS VR
300mm f/2.8 Nikkor AIS

A slew of Nikon bodies, film and digital

* sharpness from 3.5 and upwards (indeed very soft at 2.8, but DOF is really minimal than too)
Good sharp pictures from f4 and up.

* build quality seems very decent

* af sound doesnt trouble me at all, it might be 'loud' for some users, but i honestly didnt even notice. Sometimes u read stuff like its real real bad, but i think thats to be taken with a grain of thick salt.

* soft at 2.8

The sigma 24-70 1:2.8 EX macro is one of my best purchases till to date.
The copy i tested (and own now) has great sharpness, no hunting and focussing right on target.

B4 buying this one i tested the older version which was real crap (2470 df dg) on my D300. Focus was not accurate and sharpness was nowhere to be spotted.

Similar Products Used:

sigma 17-70 which was a overal good lens too, but not as sharp and no 2.8 over total range

1. Very affordable for an EX lens at 2.8.

2. The weight. I use a Samsung GX-10 with SBG-D1V battery grip. It's nice to finally have a lens that counteracts the weight of the camera.

3. EXtremely well built. It feels very solid.

4. The focus is fast, and accurate.

5. The lens does not suffer from zoom creep.

6. It performs, and looks like a lens that costs at least three times more.

7. Lens hood is included.

8. The focus ring just works. It's large, and very comfortable to use.

1. The 82mm filter size WILL hurt and you definitely need to take the prices of filters into the consideration.

2. The weight can be a PRO or a CON. Make sure you know that this is a heavy lens for its range.

3. The zoom ring also tends to be a bit hard to use due to stiffness. I have found that with use the stiffness loosens to a more comfortable degree.

4. On a DSLR, the crop factor will turn it into a 36-105 which puts it in the "Standard Zoom" category.

The most affordable lens in its specs. I was able to purchase this for £220 from Onestop Digital and am very happy with it. I can heartily recommend this to anyone looking for a standard zoom lens moving up from the kit lens.

The closest competitor to this lens would be the Tamron 28-75 which is a winner in its own right. The Tamron is lighter, which can be a good or bad thing for you.

I love the weight of the lens. I also like the finish of the lens overall. Finding a filter was bit of a pain because it uses 82mm filters so take that into consideration.

The Macro function and the capability to focus to very close objects is a very good feature as well, and it works!

The color rendition is just spot on.

Others claim that the auto-focus is noisy, and I feel that it's overly exaggerated. This is my personal opinion

With this lens, I am now thinking of getting these other EX lenses:

10-20 4-5.6 EX
70-200 2.8 EX

If ever Pentax/Samsung release a full frame camera, I think I got the wide angle covered then!

Customer Service

I have not been able to contact their customer service yet.

Similar Products Used:

Tamron 28-75 2.8

Price, build quality, fairly fast focusing, good looking, feels like a pro lenses should

LACK OF SHARPNESS. Dull images. No pop. Did I mention lack of sharpness?

20+ year Nikon user - 3rd Sigma EX lens purchased. Purchased this from B&H. As with the others, this one was inexpensive (especially when compared to Nikon's), well built (lots of metal), & 2.8 throughout. At 82 mm, the filters are necessary but rather pricy. While the motor wasn't as quiet as those on NIkon lenses, it wasn't loud. Not blazing, but fairly fast when focusing, even when changing targets. Zoom ring very stiff. When comparing this lens to other Zigma lenses, fairly sharp, although not as sharp as the 105 macro from identical 28" focal distance. Forget about comparing it to any Nikon lens - Nikon beats it hands down when you're talking sharpness. The Sigma performed terribly compared to a Nikon 18-70 3.5-4.5 from identical 28" distance & focal lengths. From a tripod mounted D300 using the camera's auto focus & a remote release, I tested both lenses shooting a printed document. Comparing 3 shots for each lens @ each setting, both set @ f4.5, 5.6, 8, & 11 & zoomed to 35mm, 50mm, & 65mm respectively. The Sigma wasn't nearly as sharp @ any of the tests. Tried the Sigma @ f16 & the Nikon @ f 4.5, still not as sharp. Contacted B&H the next week, returned the lens with no problem. Reading other reviews, I was hoping for something close to the Nikon 24-70; however, I must have gotten one from a "bad" lot. I couldn't have been more disappointed. This is the last Sigma purchase I'll make. If you're serious about sharpness, totally forget this lens, you'll be sorry. But if you just want a lens that has 2.8 so you can say you have a 2.8 lens, go ahead. But don't way you weren't warned. And be ready with your supplier's return policy, you'll need it.

Customer Service

No problems with B&H

Similar Products Used:

Nikon zooms & primes, Sigma EX 10-20 & 105 mm

Great!

None

I have both Sigma 24-70mm f2.8EX, Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 HSM and Sigma 15-30mm, all give me best results by far as what i have owned before, i personally sold all my Canon and Nikon gears to stay with Fuji DSLRs and Sigma. With that said! i did have alot of problems using 3rd party lenses on my Canon and Nikon DSLR body. its frustrated me after a couple of years i sold all my C&N gears.
With my FUJI DSLR i have no problem with any Sigma lenses at all..I am very happy with its performance, from sharpness to contrast to colors. But most of all the price that wont make me claim bankcrupcy.
All my fotos go thru CS3 before prints, all i have to say is that Sigma produces razor edge sharp images, so sharp i have to reduce USM sometime..People normally ask me what lens of those pics come from? They would think i must used thousand of dollars lenses.
In conclusion, for the price buy Sigma, its the best buy you can get. If you would compare same price lenses from C&N Sigma would beat them all easily. But if money is no object to you then spend on C&N prime lenses.

Customer Service

None

Big 82mm objective lens for all low-light applications. It's a fast lens and well constructed. Exceptional all around great lens for wide angel to standard work.

None.

I purchased the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG MACRO lens just over a year ago. I wanted a fast lens and something that was good in low-light situations. I shoot a lot in low light situations specializing in sunrises and sunsets. This is my main lens I use when I'm out in the field and it has far exceded my expectations. With the big 82mm objective lens, I am able to shoot almost all my landscapes on f/32 guarantying crystal clear images every time. This lens is fast and great for all low light applications. I would reccomend this lens to everyone. This is a must have lens!!!

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 APO HSM Telephoto lens.
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 APO MACRO DG HSM D lens.
Sigma 170-500mm 5-6.3 APO DG Telephoto lens.

PRICE !!!!!!!!
Constant aperture at 2.8
Sharpness wide open At F2.8 on both ends 24 and 70
Vivid Colors
Lens Hood included

82 MM filters are expensive
Cant use built in flash on 30D due to shadows cast by lens, external flash no problems.
A big lens,and little heavy, over 25 ounces
Lens hood design not good
Manual focusing clutch is a ring to dis engage the autofocus (Canon model has a switch for selecting manual or autofocus as well )
Zooms backwards to Canon lenses, Sigma 70 to 24 versus Canons 28 to 135 for example.

This lens has got mixed reviews on line, My copy is for a Canon. I tested my copy for front and back focus issues and am happy to report that my lens has no issues. This lens has a fast autofocus and does not seem to hunt in low light situations. I have 2 Canon lenses with USM autofocus the Sigma makes a buzzing noise during focusing sometimes some revewers said this lens is noisy but the shutter in my 30 D is louder than the Buzz of the autofocus (for the price I will not complain.) Sharpness on this lens at F2.8 on my copy is excellent and when stepped down is even sharper, I think Sigma has been reading on line reviews and has addressed the QC issues or I just got lucky and got a good copy. Colors are vivid and very true. I could not be happier with this lens. Some reviewers compare this lens to the Canon L series lens. I have a 70-200 F2.8 USM Canon zoom lens, and am familiar with the image quality of L lenses. I will not compare a lens that costs $ 800 less to a L series lens. There is a difference in build quality, although the Sigma seems very well constructed.

Customer Service

Hope I never need to call, standard one year warranty

Similar Products Used:

Canon 28-135 USM IS
Canon 70-200 F2.8 USM L

-Image quality
-Price
-Sigma black coating is a nice touch
-Fixed aperture
-Quick focusing
-sharpness when stopped down
-durability

-filters are expensive (82mm)
-a bit soft wide open
-noisy AF motor that makes it seem as it is slower focusing
-AF MF controls are strange
-zoom works opposite direction (only problem for some)

While not a very well-known or popular lens, the Sigma 24-70mm is a great piece of glass, especially for its price. While many people own mid-range lenses, this seems to be a lens that is overlooked quite frequently, for no good reason. The fixed aperture is a huge benefit to this lens, and for 300 dollars, a fixed f/2.8 is rare to see on a mid-range zoom.

I bought this lens a few months ago, and is the lens that I use the most for any portrait and studio stuff. While not exceptionally sharp wide open, stopped down to about f/5.6, it is tack sharp. Pretty impressive, and it has done well with every situation that I have thrown at it.

I think some of the reasons that this product is so overlooked is that 1) It is a third party product, 2) It is a very large lens and 3) it is more expensive than other mid-range lenses.

1) Yes, it is a third party product. Many people complain about contact issues between canon and third party such as sigma or tamron. Speaking from experience, I have never run into any problems that a simple eraser-cleaning of the contacts will not fix. Sigma markets these products directly for canon cameras, and designs them exactly for the EOS system, so I feel they are reliable.

2) Yes, it is a very large lens. If you own a small camera like the xt or xti, this lens will most likely not be for you. But to get the fixed aperture, you're usually going to run into a large lens. But if you have a metal body, prosumer level or up, this shouldn't really cause any problem. If you want to travel light, then stay away from it.

3) Yes it is more than other mid-range lenses. But the important spec is that it is f/2.8 among all zoom lengths. Many other lenses will be less, but you will have to deal with variable aperture. If you want the canon version, expect to pay at least $500 more for it.


There are a couple very interesting features of this lens that are both good and bad. First off, the AF motor. It is quick focusing, yes. Works well for sports, even in dark gyms. But the AF motor is loud. where's the silent focusing? The louder motor makes it seem to focus slower, but it really doesn't.

Another strange feature is the AF/MF mechanism. To switch from AF to MF, the way to correctly do it is to flip the switch like most canon lenses, but then you have to pull the barrel of the lens into the desired position as well. Not hard, but sometimes can be forgotten and puts strain on AF motor if still in AF mode. Also, no full time manual focus motor.

A common concern is the fact that the zoom works the opposite way than a normal canon lens. There have probably been 1 or 2 instances where i tried to go the wrong way and it caused a problem. It's quite easy to get used to, and when I switch back to the canon 70-200, there is no problem

All in all, I think it is a fantastic lens for its price. there are a couple features that I would like to see implemented, such as full time MF and silent AF motor, but for the price, it is a fantastic lens.


*used primarily on a canon 1d

Customer Service

Not needed.

Similar Products Used:

sigma 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

Feel solid, looks good, good value (on paper anyway)

Very stiff zoom ring, some zoom creep when pointed upward at wide angles (or possible the other way around), 82mm filters are expensive.

I bought the lens due to its fixed f/2.8 aperture, and anticipated also picking up Sigma's 70-200mm f/2.8 at a later date if things worked out. I spent a half-day with it over this past weekend taking pics (at between f/2.8 and f/4) of whatever I could find in a little park in San Francisco (trees, butterflies, etc), and loaded about 70 pics onto my laptop when I got home. I have a Canon Digital Rebel XT / EOS 350D.

To my dismay, nearly *all* of them were very soft, so much so that they were essentially beyond help from Photoshop. I wondered how on earth I could have just shot 70 out-of-focus photos with an autofocusing lens at 1/1000th + shutter speeds, so I began to play around with it in my living room on a tripod. Again, most photos were quite fuzzy.

I decided to shoot two groups of photos (using my car's finely-patterned proof of insurance as a subject), at 24mm and 50mm, using all apertures between f/2.8 and f/8. I then did the same with the little plastic Canon 18-55mm lens that came with my camera and compared the two where applicable (the Canon is only an f/3.5-5.6 lens).

The Sigma proved less than acceptable wider than f/5.6 and basically unusable at f/2.8, focused both manually and automatically. This defeated its reason for existence, in my opinion. It was unable to resolve the small dots, at any aperture, that the Canon was able to resolve at all apertures. Text was very soft wider than f/5.6, and merely "decent" at f/5.6 and smaller. At its very best, it managed to merely match the Canon's clarity. For the record, all of my crops were taken from the *middle* of the image. The results were so shocking that I am left to conclude that there must have been a problem with my lens, and when I showed my crops to the Wolf sales rep, he was very surprised too.

Not wanting to further mess around though, I exchanged the lens for a Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS, with which I am very happy.

This lens *may* have been a defect, so take my ratings with a grain of salt.

Customer Service

I've always had great service at Wolf, didn't ever contact Sigma

Similar Products Used:

Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

-Image qulity
-Price

-Weird Flare Characteristics
-Focusing Clutch
-Stiff zoom ring

The immediate tendency is to compare the Sigma to true pro lenses like the Canon 24-70L & 28-70L. This is really an unfair comparison. The build is not the same, optically the quality is not the same in fact the only thing that is the same is the maximum aperture and the zoom range. Having said that, nor is the price. Are you going to get 1/3 of the performance for a lens that is 1/3 the price of the “pro” lenses? Not likely. The Sigma has optical qualities that will rival any of the Canon L zooms. As far as sharpness goes this lens is easily on par with the canons. Where it does tend to fall down on sharpness is when focused to or close to infinity but this is true of most wide angle zooms anyway. Not one of my L series zooms are sharp once you approach infinity. This, however, is not true of the fixed focal length lenses. Contrast on the Sigma is phenomenal, better IMHO than that of the canons. Colour rendition is stunning with bright greens and punchy reds. Did I say at the beginning of this review that the Sigma was not up to the optical quality of the Canons, well this is where the Sigma falls down. In a word flare. This lens exhibits the strangest flare characteristics that I’ve ever seen. While shooting in a semi darkened studio I experienced a lot of flare with the lens. The flashes were set at about a 45o angle to the camera and slightly behind with ambient light coming from behind at a very low level. It appeared I was getting the flare from the back ground. To check I put the 17-40 on the camera and lo & behold no flare. The next morning I took the sigma and the canon outside and did several shots with each directly, offset and obliquely to the sun. No surprise the 17-40 exhibited flare, but now the Sigma didn’t. No flare was so ever. I am absolutely bafooled by this and if anyone can give an explanation I’d be grateful. Unlike the other Canons I have used This lens doesn’t show an appreciable amount of vignetting wide open. Where the lens does skimp compared to the “pro” lenses is in the build and the autofocus. The body not nearly as heavily built as the Canons nor is the precision of build there either. The zoom ring is stiff and clunky at best but the are ways around this. If it sticks at 24mm, which is quite common, just give the front of the lens a little push and it will happily zoom from there. The autofocus system is, to me, quite bizarre. I know that Tamron uses a similar system with the clutch for the focusing ring. What an awkward system. It’s not HSM or USM so you can’t manual focus in auto focus mode so what’s the point of the clutch? Why not have it like Canon with simple M/AF switch which this lens does have in addition to the clutch. The clutch is redundant. It should also be mentioned that the auto focus motor is far from silent. In the end would I recommend this lens? Absolutely! It’s short comings are certainly made up for with the drop in price compared with it’s pro brethren and as long as it’s freaky flare characteristics are kept under control it is an fantastic lens.

Customer Service

None needed yet

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF 24-70 F:2.8 L USM
Canon EF 28-70 F:2.8 L USM
Canon EF 17-40 F:4.0 L USM
Canon EF 16-35 F: 2.8L USM