Fun lens for serious photographers
Written: Jun 09 '01 (Updated Jul 14 '07)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Sharp! No vignetting from single filter; Good focal length range at a good price
Cons: 82mm diameter (for filters) might mean having to buy more filters.
The Bottom Line: The focal range of this lens inspires creativity, with quality (sharpness) of professional-level lenses.
|
|
|
| ovenden's Full Review: Sigma AF 17-35mm f/2.8 4 EX HSM Lens |
UPDATE: I switched cameras from my old film camera to a new Canon EOS-20d digital. In doing so, I lost some of the functionality of my lens. My lens required shipping back to Sigma to be "re-chipped". I have since learned that this is also true for the more popular Canon EOS Digital Rebel. Please note, however, that re-chipping may not be necessary for lenses that were more recently purchased new. I purchased mine about 8 yeara ago, before the EOS digitals were released. I still enjoy using this lens. Now back to the original review:
I don't want to duplicate the litany of specifications that previous e-pinions writers have written. I would say that I recommend this lens. I have definitely found it to be good value for money.
At the widest (17mm) focal length of this lens, you can take some fun photos and play around with perspective. One of my favorite things to do with this lens is to get low to the ground with my dogs and shoot them from very close up (although they've put their wet nose on the lens several times). The minimum focus point on this lens is mere inches. Don't try this with a human face, unless you want to really emphasize that person's nose. The lens has a lot of utility at the 35mm focal length, especially if you're doing landscape shots that require a slightly tighter perspective.
I compared the lens to the much cheaper Vivitar 19-35mm and the Canon 17-35mm ef (L-series) lenses. The Canon lens is twice the price of this one, and the Vivitar lens is just less than half the price of the Sigma. I did not like the construction, focus-speed, and noise of the Vivitar. In spite of the $500 difference between the Sigma and the Canon lens, there was little difference in the quality.
Some of my primary concerns when I bought this lens were image quality and vignetting when using filters.
First, I've been very impressed by the sharpness and contrast of the photographs I've taken with this lens. In my opinion, the photographs I have taken are indistinguishable from those I've taken with a borrowed Canon 17-35mm L series lens. I must admit that I've not enlarged any photos from either lens beyond 5"x7" yet. At that size though, the Sigma lens is definitely on par with the Canon lens.
Second, I was concerned about whether I would be able to use standard 82mm filters with this lens. Vignetting occurs with wide angle lenses when the corners of the photograph are obscured by the rim of any filters or lens attachments. Using one filter is certainly possible without any vignetting. Stacking filters would not be advisable. I originally thought that I would have to purchase expensive "slim profile" filters to avoid vignetting. Slim filters have no threads in front of the glass to make them less prone to vignetting.
However, having said that, this lens does take 82mm filters. Since all my other Canon lenses take 72mm and 77mm filters, I have had to buy filters specifically for this lens. An alternative is to use a step-up ring, but this increases the chance of vignetting. The comparable Canon 17-35mm EF L-series lens has the same diameter as several other Canon EF lenses. However, that same lens is twice the price of the Sigma lens.
Another thing to remember when comparing Sigma's lenses that have the HSM (Hypersonic Motor) is that HSM is not quite the same thing as Canon's USM (Ultrasonic Motor). That is, with USM you can manually focus the lens without having to flip the lens' switch from auto to manual focus. With Sigma's HSM lenses, you cannot (should not) fight against the focusing motor (or risk damaging the motor). You can switch from auto to manual focus, though, and I will say that the manual focus on this lens is very smooth. It's almost too smooth, however. (I would personally prefer a slightly stiffer focus mechanism, but that's from so many years of using manual focus cameras).
The lens comes with its own "bayonet-style" hood and a nice soft case. The hood makes using polarizing filters a little tricky, but not impossible.
Overall, I enjoy using this lens. It's light, in spite of its size and diameter. It's definitely sharp. One can get very creative with the 17 to 35mm focal range.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
ovenden
|
|
Member: Andrew
Location: Durham, NC
Reviews written: 10
Trusted by: 3 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.