Pondering one of these, over my current everyday Canon 17-85IS. A bit shorter on range, but quicker.

It's an f/2.8-4.5, whereas the Canon's f/4-5.6.

Just wondering if anyone owns or has used one? Also in terms of motor speed & noise, build quality etc.

Also, what's that website that lists example photos by lens make/model? Was going to see if there was any examples with this lens. Think Xav linked to it a while ago, but I didn't bookmark it at the time.

Thanks,

Steve

Try Camera Price Buster or dpreview as good places to start from.

Sigmas tend to be variable in quality. I have had a couple and they are really an example of you get what you pay for imo. If you are just a happy snapper then it will perform okay if you are serious then save some money and get a better lens.

That particular lens is a bit of a strange one as well. It is only f2.8 at 17mm. Move the zoom ring a mm away from 17 and you loose the f2.8.

You can get a reasonable review and plenty of user comments on SLRgear.com

Edited 19 May, 201016 yr by K1W1

Try Camera Price Buster or dpreview as good places to start from.

Yep, already tend to use DPReview, but also like to gather personal reviews and opinions

Cheers,

Steve

Sigmas tend to be variable in quality. I have had a couple and they are really an example of you get what you pay for imo. If you are just a happy snapper then it will perform okay if you are serious then save some money and get a better lens.

That particular lens is a bit of a strange one as well. It is only f2.8 at 17mm. Move the zoom ring a mm away from 17 and you loose the f2.8.

You can get a reasonable review and plenty of user comments on SLRgear.com

Thanks for that. I've always had Canon lenses on the SLRs I've owned, hence the question about build quality really. I'm very happy with the quality and pictures from the 17-85, this one just caught my eye and started me wondering. The F speed issue is odd - thanks for pointing that out! That goes some way to explaining the lens speed vs. price issue, if it's only 2.8 @17mm!

Cheers,

Steve

Hi Steve, I don’t have the Sigma you mention but have owned a 18-200mm superzoom (my first DSLR lens) and I was pretty happy with it. It is still doing sterling work with a young girl who bought my old camera and stuff from me, so I think it is fair to say that Sigmas are tough lenses I currently have a 70-200mm f2.8 which I have had for a few years now and also have had almost no issues with it (except for slightly sticking aperture blades when using high drive speeds). This is an EX lens though and is Sigmas Pro end (still half the price of the equivalent Canon).

The way I look at it is, sure the Sigma isn’t a Canon and their EX lenses aren’t as good as Canon’s L series (except their amazing 50mm F1.4) but it’s a bit like buying a Skoda really. You get 90% of an Audi/VW for 60/70% of the money.

Here is a review of the version with OS if you haven’t already seen it.

ClickyClicky

I would say take you camera along and shoot a few pics in the store (good place to test out a fastish wide to medium zoom, take the card home and review the images. The Canon 17-85 is a decent lens, but I would have thought the Sigma would be simlar over all in IQ, plus a little bit faster. Or you could save up for some L glass :)

Edited 19 May, 201016 yr by Lady Elanore

I'd spend the little extra to get the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 if you don't need the length. A bit noisy but great performer for the price - and 2.8 throughout. Upgraded to the canon 17-55 IS a year or so ago from it and, quality-wise, the pics don't really differ unless you're really looking for it.

I'd spend the little extra to get the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 if you don't need the length. A bit noisy but great performer for the price - and 2.8 throughout. Upgraded to the canon 17-55 IS a year or so ago from it and, quality-wise, the pics don't really differ unless you're really looking for it.

I agree and would go for the Tamron.

Heard very good reviews on this and it will be my next move if i can find where i have put my camera.:S

Upgraded to the canon 17-55 IS a year or so ago from it and, quality-wise, the pics don't really differ unless you're really looking for it.

I have this lens and love it. Can’t believe how expensive it is now!!! And it isn’t quite as well built as an L lens either. I don’t like the build quality of the Tamrons as much as the Sigmas, but there are some very good deals on them.

Here's a link to some Sigma 17-70mm examples.

Steve

Have a look here

Clicky Clicky

Don't know if this is what your after but he is selling a Canon EF-S 17-55 IS F2.8 Lens

If you want i can PM him for you

Carl

Edited 19 May, 201016 yr by vRSCarl

Thanks for that. I've always had Canon lenses on the SLRs I've owned, hence the question about build quality really. I'm very happy with the quality and pictures from the 17-85, this one just caught my eye and started me wondering. The F speed issue is odd - thanks for pointing that out! That goes some way to explaining the lens speed vs. price issue, if it's only 2.8 @17mm!

Cheers,

Steve

Hi again Steve. You actually posted the lens was a f2.8-4,5 in your first post? I can vouch for the quality of the 17-55mm Canon and POTN has a gallery full of images. Have you thought about perhaps getting a couple of primes? I got the 50mm f1.4 at Christmas and it opened up a new world for me. If you wanted to save money and buy 2 primes then the nifty fifty 50mm f1.8 Canon prime is the bargin of the century. You can find them for about £80 new on the net.