sharp, good color, low distortion, low flare.

all plastic construction, bayonet mount is metal though. slight AF hunt.

i have the newer version with the 72mm filter thread. put it through the the usual photo subjects, very satisfied. if you can get a used one it is a great value. sigma QC is spotty. my example seems to be a good one. no purple fringing in corners at 4x mag. an excellent match for 6 mega pixel DSLR. i use the pentax k100d.

Images are very clear, and both ends of the max range deliver quality images

I have noticed some fuzziness when fully open, but minimal and can be compensated for. Also the hood is a good idea to utilize to eliminate flaring.

A decent better- than average lens suitable for use both as an amateur or professional lens. While still inferior to it's much more expensive counter parts. It is only mildly inferior. That said, for the price it is an excellent lens, and worth having as a part in a working kit. Generally I favor other brands in lenses, but I and my clients have been quite satisfied with the pictures delivered with this lens. Finally I recommend this lens for outdoor use for best results.

Astonishingly sharp at both 17mm and 35mm.
Very rectilinear at both 17mm and 35mm - straight lines stay straight.
Tough construction. I don't coddle my equipment and this has stood up to heavier than normal wear very well.

Rendition is a bit harsh. Don't overexpose unless you love gritty images.
Odd noises when focusing, which you learn to ignore once you realise it's doing its job.
Enormous filter ring, so budget a LOT for filters, if you use them.

It seems as if some of the previous reviews are of a different lens to the one I've been using for the last eight years, on both film and digital Canon bodies.

My specimen, bought new, has provided thousands of excellent images. I'm not one for test charts, so I go off the final product. Mostly, I use the lens at the extremes of its range and it does exactly what it says on the tin.

Customer Service

No idea. In eight years, I've contacted them exactly zero times.

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 20mm
Nikon 24mm
Sigma 16mm (fisheye)

fast

cheap built

i bought this lens in london 2 years ago and i used it with a nikon d50 and d70
this lens is a reallly bad lens takes horrible pictures,i am a photographer for 10 years and this is the worse lens i ever used in my career ,i do not reccomend it not even for fun
i had a party and i was hired and i took this lens to test it , i took around 200 pictures and only 10 were ok,i am glad i had the sigma 24-70 which is an ok lens
now i buy only nikon products i saved my money and i bought the nikon 17-35 and i saw/felt/impressed with the pictures
i sold it immediately i was no happy at all this is just my personal opinion

Fast focus, quiet, large aperture and extremely affordable!

Not as fast as the Nikkor lens. Also, hard to find 82 sized filters and caps. A bit soft when shooting in nightime

I must say, this is a great alternative to the more expensive Nikkor 17-35. While yes, it is not a true F2.8 and maybe it isn't as fast, it is extremely fast given the price and good first super wide zoom. Highly recommended

I have just bought this lens, during my visit to China in May 2008.I checked the lens on my Canon 350D when i bought it in the shop in China, and the Autofocus Worked well.I started taking Photos with this lens and the AF packed up within a day.I am From South Africa and the lens is now useless.I dont think the local agents will fix it.Keep away from this lens....and this make.(the lens is made in Japan).

None!

82mm filter!!!
Slow HSM focusing.
Soft when wide open.
Out focus when indoor.

I own a old model. It is 82mm filter size($$$$). Very slow and nosiey HSM motor. Cannot right focus indoor condition. Save your money go for Canon 17-40mmL.

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF20-35mm
EF-S 18-55mm

Sharp, consistent across imaging circle, fast focus

slightly warm color cast, concerns about Sigma quality control

I bought this lens 3 months ago as a backup moderate wide-angle to complement my EF-S 10-22 and 70-200 2.8 L. Purchased on sale-or-return basis, which for me was essential considering the mixed reviews I've read.

To my honest delight, I appear to have an absolute gem. Mine is evenly sharp across the imaging circle, with slight (1,2%) vignetting at the corners. Focus is fast, slightly noisier than I would have expected from HSM but up until now I've not experienced mis-focussing, back focussing or any other traumatic experiences.

To all intents and purposes, this lens is as sharp as my 10-22: a slightly warmer color cast but I prefer my images this way.

Based on my personal experience I thoroughly recommend this lens, but do check carefully because I've read that there are some lemons out there and Sigma's quality control isn't as tight as it could be. I was burned with a 28-70 2.8 EX DG which couldn't focus consistently and almost reduced me to tears on the few occasions I dared use it professionally. This 17-35 is a world apart.

Note: I have the older, non-DG version.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 10-22

Weight. Cost.

Flare. Blur.

If you need a wide lens on a budget and mostly shoot stopped all the way down this lens will perform nicely. As others have mentioned, when upi open it up the edges seriously blur. Always use the hood and watch where your light is as its prone to flare.

- Wide angle antics. - HSM. - Good build. - Relatively cheap.

- Blurry at edges. - Huge honkin filters that cost $$$$. - Focus ring is too loose.

At first, I was awed at the ability to capture so much image with a single frame. Wide angles are fun to use, no doubt. Over the years, as my eye becomes more keen towards the technical aspects of my photos, I've become more hesitant to use this lens. I've tried stopped down to f/8.0 and still get the edge bluriness. Even on a tripod, remote, mirror flipped, ect. Still can't afford the Canon equilivant but the new version of this lens (with the more sensible 77mm filter size) looks interesting. Just waiting for the reviews. A decent lens if you're interested in learning to use a wide angle on a budget but no point if the new version addresses the shortcomings of this lens. I'm not a professional but I think it's safe to say this is not professional quality optics.

Customer Service

n/a

Similar Products Used:

Canon