Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

  1. #1

    Smile Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Hi guys, I'm currently using a Canon 500D and i'm looking to upgrade my 18-55 kit lens. I do walk-abouts most of the time and i was thinking of getting the Sigma 17-70 with OS as my next lens.
    However, i've had quite a few friends telling me to get the Tamron 17-50mm instead. Thing is, the 17-70 appeals to me because of its additional zoom range, improved aperture and doubles as a Macro lens. I thought since i'm doing walk-abouts, these features are pretty good for me. But is the Tamron 17-50 really that good?
    I went around and found the 17-70 with OS at $795. The Tamron of course is such more affordable at $580..
    So i'm kind of in between right now. Can you guys give me some pointers? THanks!

    Anyway, i found some pretty neat images on flicker taken with the sigma 17-70mm. Maybe you guys can tell me whether this lens is worth getting?
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=sigm...l&s=int#page=7
    Last edited by musebox; 10th July 2010 at 01:38 PM. Reason: Left out URL for len's sample images

  2. #2

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    I have the non-OS one and I love it.
    Chanxj
    my blog @ http://sgsnap.com

  3. #3

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by musebox View Post
    Hi guys, I'm currently using a Canon 500D and i'm looking to upgrade my 18-55 kit lens. I do walk-abouts most of the time and i was thinking of getting the Sigma 17-70 with OS as my next lens.
    However, i've had quite a few friends telling me to get the Tamron 17-50mm instead. Thing is, the 17-70 appeals to me because of its additional zoom range, improved aperture and doubles as a Macro lens. I thought since i'm doing walk-abouts, these features are pretty good for me. But is the Tamron 17-50 really that good?
    I went around and found the 17-70 with OS at $795. The Tamron of course is such more affordable at $580..
    So i'm kind of in between right now. Can you guys give me some pointers? THanks!

    Anyway, i found some pretty neat images on flicker taken with the sigma 17-70mm. Maybe you guys can tell me whether this lens is worth getting?
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=sigm...l&s=int#page=7
    mind sharing where can you get the tamron at $580?

  4. #4

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by musebox View Post
    Hi guys, I'm currently using a Canon 500D and i'm looking to upgrade my 18-55 kit lens. I do walk-abouts most of the time and i was thinking of getting the Sigma 17-70 with OS as my next lens.
    However, i've had quite a few friends telling me to get the Tamron 17-50mm instead. Thing is, the 17-70 appeals to me because of its additional zoom range, improved aperture and doubles as a Macro lens. I thought since i'm doing walk-abouts, these features are pretty good for me. But is the Tamron 17-50 really that good?
    I went around and found the 17-70 with OS at $795. The Tamron of course is such more affordable at $580..
    So i'm kind of in between right now. Can you guys give me some pointers? THanks!

    Anyway, i found some pretty neat images on flicker taken with the sigma 17-70mm. Maybe you guys can tell me whether this lens is worth getting?
    http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=sigm...l&s=int#page=7
    Price
    Luckily you didn't buy, I was quoted $595 for the Sigma 17-70mm.

    Lens
    First of all, you have to ask yourself, why you wanna change your lens. There are many who upgraded theirs after they know what they are going to shoot.
    You have a 18-55, so I guess the Tamron 17-50 is quite similar to your 18-55 in terms of focal, but aperture is constant at f/2.8.

    Sigma 17-70 is definite better than your 18-55 in terms of focal. But aperture is around the same. Just that the aperture at 17 is around f/2.8, but no constant.

    I almost get the Sigma 17-70, but hesitated as if i were to get, then my 18-135 will be left alone. And also I need the range. In addition, the images I took isn't that bad after all, as it comes with IS.

    Thus in the end, I decided to stick to my 18-135 for walkabout. And maybe I'm going to get a UWA like Tokina 11-16 for landscape. And a 55-250, and that's the end.

    Unless you are very itchy and always get poisoned by other users during outings, then you would start to buy L lens or even upgrade your body.
    Think fast, aim for the best !

  5. #5
    Senior Member ovaltinemilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sin jia Po lah
    Posts
    2,820

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    I think you might also consider the built of the Tamron and Sigma.
    Last edited by ovaltinemilo; 10th July 2010 at 04:44 PM.
    ...:::..::.Nikon.::.:::..
    RGB Metering & Focusing.

  6. #6
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,392

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    What kind of improved aperture are you talking about? Still it's not a constant aperture lens as the Tamron 17-50 and the Macro capabilities should not be taken too serious. It's a close focus option, not macro.
    EOS

  7. #7

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    I would get a Canon 100mm macro if I am serious in Macro photography like insects/ plants.

    Tamron focusing is quite noisy in my opinion. Using it in events like wedding is quite troublesome.
    Think fast, aim for the best !

  8. #8

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    it depends on you.

    some people will never touch third party lens, are you one of them?

    what is your tolerance for sharpness? must it be sharp wide open? so many factors - only you know what you want, only you can decide what you want.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    17-70 OS is onl $715 @ SLR-Rev... Great Lens! Built is very good. IQ is also very good!
    Canon 550D + Some Lens + Love for Photography + Love for Cinematography

  10. #10

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Hey thanks! The one you got quote for 595 is it with OS?

  11. #11

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by dodongdodong View Post
    mind sharing where can you get the tamron at $580?
    At peninsula

  12. #12

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by Odyssey-Boy View Post
    Price
    Luckily you didn't buy, I was quoted $595 for the Sigma 17-70mm.

    Lens
    First of all, you have to ask yourself, why you wanna change your lens. There are many who upgraded theirs after they know what they are going to shoot.
    You have a 18-55, so I guess the Tamron 17-50 is quite similar to your 18-55 in terms of focal, but aperture is constant at f/2.8.

    Sigma 17-70 is definite better than your 18-55 in terms of focal. But aperture is around the same. Just that the aperture at 17 is around f/2.8, but no constant.

    I almost get the Sigma 17-70, but hesitated as if i were to get, then my 18-135 will be left alone. And also I need the range. In addition, the images I took isn't that bad after all, as it comes with IS.



    Thus in the end, I decided to stick to my 18-135 for walkabout. And maybe I'm going to get a UWA like Tokina 11-16 for landscape. And a 55-250, and that's the end.

    Unless you are very itchy and always get poisoned by other users during outings, then you would start to buy L lens or even upgrade your body.
    Thanks for you reply! The one you found at $595 is it with OS? I don't mind grey sets. May i know where?

  13. #13

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    What kind of improved aperture are you talking about? Still it's not a constant aperture lens as the Tamron 17-50 and the Macro capabilities should not be taken too serious. It's a close focus option, not macro.
    Thank you so much for your reply! I know that the 17-70 isn't a full Macro, it's only half macro. But because it sort of does several things in one lens that attracted me to it. I don't need a serious macro. But from what i saw at flicker, the macro shots are perfectly fine for me. And i meant improved aperture as in bigger aperture than my kit lens. Cause F4 at 70mm, i know the bokeh it gives will be quite decent.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    i also have the same qn... tamron 17-50 or sigma 17-70..

    the sigma F2.8 is constant until which focal length ah?

  15. #15
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,392

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by tecnica View Post
    i also have the same qn... tamron 17-50 or sigma 17-70..
    the sigma F2.8 is constant until which focal length ah?
    Less than 40mm based on the tests by Photozone on the non-OS version: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/31...review?start=1
    If you need f/2.8 at 50mm then either you get the Tamron or the Sigma 17-50, not sure whether the latter one is available in SG. Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 seems to be available (in Canon price guide).
    EOS

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ha Noi, Vietnam, Vietnam
    Posts
    646

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Just FYI, the semi-macro capabilities of the 17-70 is adequate for subjects like flowers, from my own experience, you only need true macro for things smaller than 1cm, like bugs
    Canon Kiss X3 BG-E5 | Canon 135 f2 | Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 | Sigma 50 f1.4 | 430EXII
    View my gallery

  17. #17

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    I have the non OS version of the Sigma 17-70mm lens. I like the edge sharpness compared to the Canon 17-85mm which is really quite bad. Haven't tried the Tamron but I saw a review that rated it similar to the Canon, so I suggest you test first before deciding.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by Soundaholic View Post
    Just FYI, the semi-macro capabilities of the 17-70 is adequate for subjects like flowers, from my own experience, you only need true macro for things smaller than 1cm, like bugs
    idk if my lens has a bug or smth but i can bring my camera to within less than 10cm of the subject and still be able to focus! anw i hv the 17-70 non-OS too. i bought mine 2nd hand but if i were to buy first hand i would have paid the extra $200 for OS partly cos i hv been using IS lenses for a while and so am not comfortable with shooting with no stabiliser. but now got used to it alr... i had the same qns u had only mine was vs 17-85 (which i found out sucked more than 18-55 IS). image quality is what u see in these pics. would recommend u make ur own decision on whats best for u. for me i dont need constant 2.8 cos i got prime lens so the extra focal range is good. tbh would have prefered the 17-85 if image quality was better or 15-85 if price was cheaper though..

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/50524731@N06/4781118317/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/5052473...n/photostream/
    Last edited by killerslayer92; 11th July 2010 at 10:02 AM.
    Canon 550D Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 HSM OS | 50mm f1.8 II | 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS | Di622 | BP-550D

  19. #19

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by Soundaholic View Post
    Just FYI, the semi-macro capabilities of the 17-70 is adequate for subjects like flowers, from my own experience, you only need true macro for things smaller than 1cm, like bugs
    Precisely! That what i meant when i said i don't need a true macro lens cause it's close focusing feature is fine for me... Are you using the 17-70? Can you tell me more about the sharpness and vignetting at 17mm? Is there any serious problem for you?

  20. #20

    Default Re: Is the sigma 17-70mm worth getting?

    Quote Originally Posted by musebox View Post
    Thanks for you reply! The one you found at $595 is it with OS? I don't mind grey sets. May i know where?
    Alan Photo
    Think fast, aim for the best !

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •