#1  
Old 01-05-2006, 10:13 AM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
Sigma 17-70 lens

I picked up a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 Macro lens to replace the cheap 18-55 Kit lens for my Canon 350D and am quite impressed. The price is also right for a lens of this standard (tip : Photocontinental in Brisbane are selling the Canon mount for $430).

Here is my quick evaluation including star test:

http://www.pbase.com/terrylovejoy/sigma1770

There is also a detailed review at:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...2845/index.htm

Terry
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-05-2006, 11:07 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Very interesting, Terry, especially considering i'm looking for replacements to my kit lenses too.

When you say $430, do you mean the lens + canon mount is $430?

Does the mount change the focal length at all?

Can you do some macro tests?

Can you do a CA test versus the 18-55 stock lens?

Thanks for taking the time to do this.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-05-2006, 01:09 PM
fringe_dweller's Avatar
fringe_dweller
on the highway to Hell

fringe_dweller is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 2,623
Yep thanks Terry! wow that is impressive value, hope more lenses start coming along like this one its on my wish list now!
Mike, the photozone link Terry suplied answers all those questions in spades
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-05-2006, 05:52 PM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
Hi Mike,

My wording was slightly confusing. Sigma make the lens in different versions to suit different camera manufacturers. You need to make sure you specify which camera you are using when you order - i.e Canon EF mount in your case. All the metering and autofocus functions are implemented.

CA is there but well under control.

Sorry Macro is not my thing, I can't hold the camera steady enough! But attached is a small crop from a macro shot with a 5c piece sitting on top of circuit board. You can basically get close enough so that a 50c piece fills the entire frame.

Terry
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (macro.jpg)
51.3 KB73 views
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-05-2006, 06:37 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Hi Terry, thanks for the extra info. I'm a newbie when it comes to camera lenses.

Looks like a very good performer for the price.

And thanks Kearn, i'll take the time to read that review before I make any rash purchases!

Does the focal length range of a zoom lens make a difference to its quality? ie: is a 12-24 going to be generally easier to produce (better quality?) than a 17-70?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-05-2006, 07:04 PM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
Generally, the greater zoom range compromises optical quality. The tradeoff being versatility of course. The link I gave to photozone has lots of lens reviews including centre/edge sharpness at various apertures and focal lengths.

However, the 12-24 is an ultrawide angle and a problably very challenging to design to start with, so that in itself will compromise the sharpness. There is a review for 2 12-24 lenses here:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...4556/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...24_4/index.htm

The Tokina 12-24 looks excellent.

Terry
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-05-2006, 08:48 PM
cjmarsh81's Avatar
cjmarsh81
Registered User

cjmarsh81 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FNQ
Posts: 405
What is wrong with the supplied Canon Lense? Is it of poor quality?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-05-2006, 09:19 PM
tornado33
Registered User

tornado33 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,931
I find the suplied Canon lens is okay at 50mm or so but at 18mm edge sharpness falls off consiferably.
I have a Sigma 28 to 300mm ( a huge zoom range) that performs poorly at 28mm, but at 300MM is quite good, though the Autofocus doesnt handle action well, (I took it to a Newcastle Knights game and it struggled with the players against the green grass to get accurate focus). Apart from that it performs well as a telephoto lens, and zoomed in is almost as compact as the supplied Canon kit lens and fits nicely into my camera bag while attached to the camera.
Scott
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-05-2006, 11:52 PM
Gama's Avatar
Gama
Registered User

Gama is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjmarsh81
What is wrong with the supplied Canon Lense? Is it of poor quality?
I wouldnt say poor quality, but just wont give a sharper and better quality image as a more expensive good lens.
Its like refractors, you can get a cheap APO, then you could get a really expensive APO, just quality of light at the end of the image plane.
You gets whats ya pays far !.
having said that, in most of our cases, we aint goingto see a shrippens of difference for most everyday things.
Dont forget the expense goes up when the f ratio goes down. A f4 or f5.6 lens is OK, and cheap, but the similar lens in a f2.8, f3.5 is going to cost quite a bit more.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-05-2006, 05:42 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
I agree with what has been said regarding the supplied 18-55.

At 18mm, there is considerable coma/abberations around the edge of the picture. It's mostly not noticable in daytime terrestrial shots, but i've noticed it in some of mine where straight lines don't go straight near the corners.

See the attached image taken last week, and look in the top left hand corner at the bridge.. the structure gets quite blurry near the edge.

And in star shots it's immediately noticeable.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (city_at_night.jpg)
97.6 KB83 views
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 18-05-2006, 08:03 PM
acropolite's Avatar
acropolite (Phil)
Registered User

acropolite is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Launceston Tasmania
Posts: 8,985
Based on what Terry has said and the reports I have read, I've bought the 17-70 too, can't wait to try it. The macro capability looks good as well. On the wish list still is the Tokina 12-24 and the Sigma 50-500 (APO) that h0ughy (and others) speak highly of, as well as a 50mm f1.8 for portrait work.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 18-05-2006, 08:39 PM
leon's Avatar
leon
Registered User

leon is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: ballarat
Posts: 10,814
Hi Guys.

Just to put my two bobs worth in, i often shot macro but never use any of the big lenses anymore, or even my SLR.
As a point any shot camera i bought the Canon IXUS 50 Digital, and is that impressive.
Put it on macro mode and you can hand hold and shoot at 10mm without flash and get great results every time.
This little camera out performs my Pentax IstD every time.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (IMG_0006_1_3_1.JPG)
98.1 KB46 views
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 12:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement