Which Sigma Lens

[jennifer ann]

I recently had my mind set on a Sigma 17-70 to replace my kit lens on my XTi, but I have stumbled across this

lens in my review searching:

 

Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF - I like the fact that it is a constant 2.8.

 

My question is which do you think will give me better optical quality and bokeh? I really want a sharp lens with

good contrast and color.

 

I will be shooting mainly landscapes and weddings.

Thanks in advance for your input.

[andrew robertson]

Zooms are not often noted for good bokeh, especially wide zooms.

 

I would consider something like the Sigma 20 f/1.8 and a Canon 50 f/1.8 or 1.4 instead, but I am biased against zooms.

[tdigi]

What do you value more. more wide angle vs variable aperture? Both are decent lenses.

 

IMO 1 lens to shoot landscapes and weddings is not really possible. Maybe consider a Tamron 17-50 or if you want to

spend the bucks the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS.

[tdigi]

Let me rephrase that a bit.

 

Sigma 24-70 2.8 - constant fast aperture but a bit long on a crop body

 

Sigma 17-70 2.8 - 4 - wider, cheaper but variable aperture.

[manuel barrera houston,]

have both the sigma 24-70 and the tamron 24-70, while it looks cheaper, the tamron is a better lens. The tamron 17-50 is also a very good lens(but it is for crop cameras ony), there are quite a few decent crop camera lens in the wide angle. Do not have the sigma 17-70 but can state that the 24-70 gets you very decent bokah.

[kari v]

Tamron 17-50/2.8 or Sigma 18-50/2.8 Macro. Ok build, nice general purpose range on crop body, not that expensive, not heavy, good image quality.

 

For landscapes it doesn't matter that much but action shooting (including weddings) with variable aperture is annoying.

 

Bokeh? Looks ok, nothing offensive to my eye. Here's a Sigma sample.<div></div>

[kari v]

Sigma also focuses very close and at 50mm you can get decent close-ups (nice for flowers and all). Tamron 17-50 focuses almost as close if I remember correctly.

 

Examples.<div></div>

[kari v]

100% crop.<div></div>

[matthijs]

I second all suggestions made.

 

The suggested primes are all pretty good (another nice prime would be the Sigma 30/1.4) and they would probably give you very nice results.

 

 

Personally I'd go for the flexibility of a 2.8 zoom if I wanted to shoot weddings. (In order of preference the Canon 17-55, the Tamron 17-50, the Sigma 18-50 or a Canon / Sigma 24-70.) As your shooting with a crop sensor the 24 might be a tad narrow for your intended usage.

 

I would suggest that after you've bought a 2.8 zoom to add a faster longer Canon lens. Either a 85/1.8, a 100/2 or a 135/2. (Prices rise in this list as the lenses get longer though these are still relatively affordable. You don't want to know what the Canon 200/2 IS costs...)

 

The trouble of course with multiple lenses is that at a wedding you start longing for a second body...

 

 

Anyway, have fun, Matthijs.

 

 

P.S. I reread your post. In answer to the IQ question: the better of the two lenses you named would probably be the 24-70/2.8.

[willhl]

I've got the sigma 17-70 and found it great for closeish shots and was invaluable when my macro died till I got a

replacement however I find it is weak when focusing at or close to infinity or even just a bit more distant. That said I

did use it in some fairly extreme circumstances as well. I've recently got the Tamron 17-50 and it seems to focus

well and be very sharp, I've got a few portraits taken with it here:</br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=693169">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?

folder_id=693169</a></br>

Quiet a few of the ones further down the page were taken with the 17-70.