Interactive Lens Reviews and Opinion.
Digital Camera Reviews

Reviews Views Date of last review
16 136193 10/11/2012
Recommended By Average Purchase
88% of reviewers $463.33
Reader Review Rating Averages
Readers' rating for
Construction Quality
Readers' rating for
Image Quality
Overall Rating

Keywords: Sigma Canon Nikon Minolta Pentax Wide Mid Tele Zoom 35mm DG


Registered: October 2012
Posts: 52
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro review by dugong5pm
Review Date: 10/11/2012 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $400.00| Rating: 8 

Pros: usable (wide open), smooth bokeh, fast AF, cheap!
Cons: lens creep, finishing paint, takes 82mm filter

for the price.. it really does worth your money. IQ is nice.. not as good as Canon's or Nikon's 24-70 but it's really ok considering the 1/3 price. Mechanics & build quality are also nice. It feels solid in your hand. AF is somewhat quite fast & silent, that's a good thing.

Now the bad thing are.. it's big & heavy.. so big that it won't take your usual 77mm filter. Front glass is quite heavy, the lens creeps down when facing downward. For me, the worst of all is..the Sigma's finishing paint! it easily worn off in no time.duh.. thank God they have fixed this issue on their newer version.

Registered: September 2010
Posts: 5
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro review by hackmann
Review Date: 9/25/2010 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $400.00| Rating: 8 

Pros: Cheap, high performance with correct exposure, aperture and ammount of light
Cons: Bad performance at night

I bought a used copy of this piece to use in my nikon D90. The lens is 3 years old and it is perfect, no problems due age, except to the rubber focus ring that is a little "dry". No front or back focus.

English is not my mother language, I will try to be "understandable" Smile.

Well, first of all is a big, heavy and bulky leans and it uses a big filter. People get intimidated by that lens, its nice!

About IQ I can tell you I like when used at day, despite being a f 2.8. Its a little soft at wide open and you need to step down a little bit. Center shows a very high quality image and borders are a little soft. I found some distortion CA and purple fringe wich is 100% correctable (at least with the lens profile in Lightroom 3). So, if you are shooting landscape, or buildings at wide open, I can tell you, with the correct exposure, you have a very high picture quality. I can tell also, in this scenario, it perform better than D90 18-105mm lens kit. It produces a warmer tone than 18-105mm lens, I love it, and 90% of shots I do only need to apply lens profile, because image is very well balanced (colors and the exposure) already. This is the kind of lens that dont give work to you on the post processing. AF works great and it is not as noisy like people complain. To be honest it produce less noise than my nikkor 50mm 1.8D.

But, here comes the bad part.

I am disapointed by lens performance at night. When you shoot, the darken part of the image get blurry, like a out of focus blurry noisy image. In this case, the darken area of the image have a very poor quality and it is not sharp. I know you are thinking "that´s is normal, it is the dark problem", but it is not. I can tell that because the 18-105 kit lens, in same scenario, perform 200% better, and even with the noise, the image is focused in dark area, not blurry or out of focus..... I found this problem in every aperture range. In other hand, noise in dark area is better than the 18-105mm, because somehow does not show purple dots, only black ones.

The bottom of line is, it is a very good lens for the price charged and the performance to shoot landscapes or portraits with the correct exposure, aperture and with the right ammount of light, do a high quality sharp image. It captures a very good skin tone also.

The zoom ring is not smooth in all range, maybe because the front element is heavy.

If you have a nikon and want to have a lens that suit FX and DX sensor and you want to save some cash this is the lens for you.

Here you can see some samples about its image quality:

Registered: June 2008
Posts: 6
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro review by MrAdventure
Review Date: 10/7/2009 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $350.00| Rating: 7 

Pros: Build Quality, Smooth Zoom without creep, Finish Texture is nice, good general purpose range
Cons: Slightly soft wide open, extends to go to wide angle, loud AF

I've used this lens for over a year now and it's certainly true what is generally said about it; soft wide open at 70mm and f/2.8. It get's much sharper on the wide end, even at f/2.8 but even better from f/3.5 onwards. You don;t realize the softness until you actually use a sharp lens by comparison. My 70-200 F4L is sharp wide open from corner to corner. My 50 1.4 is much sharper from f/2 onwards. I would say the optimal sharpness is reached somewhere around f/5.6 or so.

Aside from that I've found this lens extremely useful. The images are very close to Canon's 24-70 glass with slightly muted colors and contrast as compared to the Canon.

It's a perfect lens for studio work which I do. At small apertures from f/8 down to f/11 this thing rocks. The fun continues even for hi-iso applications when stopped down.

It's also a good piece of glass to have in your gear bag when travelling. My copy has been to several countries in all kinds of conditions from snow, rain to hot. It's never failed at the only reason to own it - it's wide focal range. The build is rugged and you pay for it in the weight. I'm not complaining though...I was hiking on Baffin Island and dropped it and my 1D when I lost my footing. The lens had minor scuffs but the camera had to be sent in for repair.

It's much better than the average kit lens, but if wide open performance is important, look elsewhere. It's passable but if sharpness is critical, you have to stop down or use something else.

NOTE: I had mine calibrated when I discovered it was out of tolerance to my crop body. Since then it's been fine.

Many of the images on my Flickr and Blog were taken with this glass.