Sigma will make new 17-70mm/2.8-4.0 HSM/OS

channeler · 01-05-2010, 04:15 AM

Yes, I'm interested in the new Sigma 17-70 too. Still no serious reviews, but did find some sample photos on the Sigma Japan site:

17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO OS HSM ƒTƒ“ƒvƒ‹‰æ‘œ@Š”Ž®‰ïŽÐƒVƒOƒ}

Did find an amateur review comparing three lenses on a Canon camera, but not sure how useful it is as the guy seemed to have some camera focusing issues:

Canon 15-85, Tamron 17-50 VC, Sigma 17-70 OS Comparison Pictures. - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Also came across this post comparing the old and new versions of the Sigma 17-70:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=33880489

The one thing that makes me hesitate on the Sigma is the colour/contrast rendition of the Sigma (images taken with old version) compared to the Pentax 17-70, though the better macro performance of the Sigma would be nice to have.

Paul

Last edited by channeler; 01-05-2010 at 06:00 AM.

PinarelloOnly · 01-05-2010, 05:51 AM

Originally posted by yeatzee

i vowed to never buy another lens that does not have a constant F-stop so I'll pass.....

+1 on that.

opiedog · 01-05-2010, 07:38 PM

as someone mentioned, you can think of it as an constant f4 lens with a bonus at the wide end.

channeler · 01-06-2010, 09:13 AM

Came across a slightly more detailed description of the new 17-70 at the Sigma Japan site:

Large aperture standard zoom lens designed Specially For Digital SLR Cameras. Macro lens level close up ability 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 EX DC - SIGMA CORPORATION

Paul

channeler · 01-08-2010, 09:34 AM

This seems to be the first serious review of the new lens though it is with a Canon camera. Trouble is it's in Korean. Any Korean pentaxforums members who would be willing to translate, at least the Critique at the bottom of the review page?

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=159

There are a lot of test images. Colours still don't seem as rich/vivid as with Pentax equivalents. Are some of them a bit cold/harsh? Can't quite put my finger on it. But I guess we need tests on a Pentax camera to get the full picture on this.

Paul

wallyb · 01-08-2010, 09:53 AM

They don't look any less rich/vivid than Pentax equivalents. It would be absolutely impossible to tell, anyway, without taking exact same shots with the same camera and settings with the lenses you're comparing.

Big G · 01-08-2010, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by wallyb

They don't look any less rich/vivid than Pentax equivalents. It would be absolutely impossible to tell, anyway, without taking exact same shots with the same camera and settings with the lenses you're comparing.

Agreed.

I am quite excited about this lens for several reasons. I love my Pentax 17-70mm f/4 for it's very usable "walkabout" qualities, but as you'll see on another thread the SDM isn't working very well at all. I have two screw driven Sigma lenses and they are both fast and snappy, so hopefully Sigma's HSM implementation of my already favourite focal length lens will be just as snappy as their screw driven counterparts.

It could be brilliant.

channeler · 01-08-2010, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by wallyb

They don't look any less rich/vivid than Pentax equivalents. It would be absolutely impossible to tell, anyway, without taking exact same shots with the same camera and settings with the lenses you're comparing.

I agree. The only way to be sure is to take identical shots with say the Pentax 17-70 and the Sigma 17-70 under the same conditions with the same camera and settings and see how the colours/contrast compare. I am just basing my comment on my overall impression after comparing many images produced by the two lenses. This also seems to be supported by a couple of guys who have owned both lenses and have been able to compare them directly. I am still hoping the new Sigma can deliver the goods overall as I would like the macro capability which the Pentax doesn't have apart from the price of the Pentax being significantly more.

Paul

rustynail925 · 01-08-2010, 06:29 PM

Does this Sigma 17-70 allow you to use the built-in flash ? or it the same w/ the 16-45mm which shows some shade below the image

channeler · 01-13-2010, 04:20 PM

Found another test of the new Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0, this time on a Nikon camera. The link below will take you to some images though these seem to have been shot in haste; some aren't very sharp. Colours look pretty good though. The other posts by wymjym in the thread are informative as there is some comparison with the old version. He also seems to have been able to make some sense out of the Korean review. Not sure how transferable all this is to a Pentax body.

Re: What do you mean with f/3 ?: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Paul

channeler · 01-16-2010, 01:38 AM

Comments from another person who has just purchased the new Sigma: 17-70 OS:

Just got Sigma 17-70 OS and Canon 15-85 IS: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

He reports problems with focusing. The Sigma 70-300 that I bought years ago was fine but is this another example of Sigma QC issues that people often report?

Paul

rustynail925 · 01-16-2010, 08:45 AM

does anyone in the forum have the new sigma 17-70?

**Rondec** · 01-16-2010, 09:12 AM

Not sure if the HSM and tiny difference in aperture on the long end is worth the 100 dollar cost differential from the old version of this lens. I have not heard great things about Sigma's HSM, but it does seem to be a little better than SDM.

KjetilH · 01-16-2010, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by channeler

(...)

He reports problems with focusing. The Sigma 70-300 that I bought years ago was fine but is this another example of Sigma QC issues that people often report?

Sigma is, according to most users and a certain store here in Norway (which happens to be the main importer of Sigma), much better now than they used to be. There are stlll reports of problems with Sigma, but not much more than with other brands.

My 30/1.4 and 50-150/2.8 are both very good. The former broke down, but Sigmas service solutions are top-notch, really. I got it fixed from Wednesday to Tuesday the next week (broken focussing mechanism). It's really good not to worry about spending two months without a useful lens, and I don't think the rumors about Sigma is just nowadays.

Regarding Canon and Sigma, there has "always" been problems. Of course this does not happen to everyone, but front/back focussing was/is not uncommon with those two paired. Nikon and Pentax did not have the same problems (though QC issues in general). The reason may be that the on-board focusing motor and electronic aperture means more problems than relying on the body for doing the work. Not a bad word about Canon, but more complicated (for Sigma) often mean more problems, right?

Over to the topic lens, the "old" f/2.8-4.5 version did have some flare problems, hopefully the OS version is going to be better (and the "christmas light test" doesn't translate into flare resistance).

Big G · 01-16-2010, 10:22 AM

Damn, I had such high hopes for this lens.

Here are some shots on a Canon mount compared to a Tamron 17-50mm and Canon 15-85.

Canon 15-85, Tamron 17-50 VC, Sigma 17-70 OS Comparison Pictures. - Canon Digital Photography Forums

The Sigma does indeed appear to be the softest of the three, but it looks more like a focus issue (see the focus chart on the first page, looks like front focus) and not that it's not sharp. This is a real shame, but it really shows how good the Tamron is - it's consistently sharper than the Canon lens.

As for Sigma QC issues, I have no problems with mine and I'd be more willing to shell out for a Sigma lens than a Pentax lens, especially since the SDM on my 17-70mm was rubbish and is now with Pentax for repair.

Mind you, once I get it back I won't be in such a rush to replace it now that I've seen these reviews!

01-08-2010, 09:34 AM	#35
channeler Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northwich Cheshire England Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,009	First Serious Review/Test of the new Sigma17-70/2.8-4.0 HSM/OS This seems to be the first serious review of the new lens though it is with a Canon camera. Trouble is it's in Korean. Any Korean pentaxforums members who would be willing to translate, at least the Critique at the bottom of the review page? http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=159 There are a lot of test images. Colours still don't seem as rich/vivid as with Pentax equivalents. Are some of them a bit cold/harsh? Can't quite put my finger on it. But I guess we need tests on a Pentax camera to get the full picture on this. Paul Last edited by channeler; 01-08-2010 at 09:42 AM.

01-08-2010, 04:34 PM	#38
channeler Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northwich Cheshire England Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,009	Pentax and Sigma 17-70 colours Originally posted by wallyb They don't look any less rich/vivid than Pentax equivalents. It would be absolutely impossible to tell, anyway, without taking exact same shots with the same camera and settings with the lenses you're comparing. I agree. The only way to be sure is to take identical shots with say the Pentax 17-70 and the Sigma 17-70 under the same conditions with the same camera and settings and see how the colours/contrast compare. I am just basing my comment on my overall impression after comparing many images produced by the two lenses. This also seems to be supported by a couple of guys who have owned both lenses and have been able to compare them directly. I am still hoping the new Sigma can deliver the goods overall as I would like the macro capability which the Pentax doesn't have apart from the price of the Pentax being significantly more. Paul

01-13-2010, 04:20 PM	#40
channeler Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northwich Cheshire England Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,009	Another test of new Sigma 17-70 Found another test of the new Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0, this time on a Nikon camera. The link below will take you to some images though these seem to have been shot in haste; some aren't very sharp. Colours look pretty good though. The other posts by wymjym in the thread are informative as there is some comparison with the old version. He also seems to have been able to make some sense out of the Korean review. Not sure how transferable all this is to a Pentax body. Re: What do you mean with f/3 ?: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Paul Last edited by channeler; 01-14-2010 at 06:47 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 IF EX DG HSM - VS - Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro	Braciola	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	10-15-2010 04:54 AM
Landscape Sigma 24-70mm f/ 2.8 HSM testing.	letgo12345	Post Your Photos!	2	05-12-2010 01:58 AM
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM	fredok1	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	05-07-2010 09:08 AM
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 HSM	Mystic	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	12-10-2009 03:41 PM

01-05-2010, 04:15 AM	#31
channeler Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northwich Cheshire England Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,009	Yes, I'm interested in the new Sigma 17-70 too. Still no serious reviews, but did find some sample photos on the Sigma Japan site: 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO OS HSM ƒTƒ“ƒvƒ‹‰æ‘œ@Š”Ž®‰ïŽÐƒVƒOƒ} Did find an amateur review comparing three lenses on a Canon camera, but not sure how useful it is as the guy seemed to have some camera focusing issues: Canon 15-85, Tamron 17-50 VC, Sigma 17-70 OS Comparison Pictures. - Canon Digital Photography Forums Also came across this post comparing the old and new versions of the Sigma 17-70: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=33880489 The one thing that makes me hesitate on the Sigma is the colour/contrast rendition of the Sigma (images taken with old version) compared to the Pentax 17-70, though the better macro performance of the Sigma would be nice to have. Paul Last edited by channeler; 01-05-2010 at 06:00 AM.

01-05-2010, 05:51 AM	#32
PinarelloOnly Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Shoreline CT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 86	Originally posted by yeatzee i vowed to never buy another lens that does not have a constant F-stop so I'll pass..... +1 on that.

01-05-2010, 07:38 PM	#33
opiedog Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: NC Posts: 787	as someone mentioned, you can think of it as an constant f4 lens with a bonus at the wide end.

01-06-2010, 09:13 AM	#34
channeler Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northwich Cheshire England Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,009	Came across a slightly more detailed description of the new 17-70 at the Sigma Japan site: Large aperture standard zoom lens designed Specially For Digital SLR Cameras. Macro lens level close up ability 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 EX DC - SIGMA CORPORATION Paul

01-08-2010, 09:53 AM	#36
wallyb Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: The Untied States Photos: Albums Posts: 1,881	They don't look any less rich/vivid than Pentax equivalents. It would be absolutely impossible to tell, anyway, without taking exact same shots with the same camera and settings with the lenses you're comparing.

01-08-2010, 11:08 AM	#37
Big G Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 581	Originally posted by wallyb They don't look any less rich/vivid than Pentax equivalents. It would be absolutely impossible to tell, anyway, without taking exact same shots with the same camera and settings with the lenses you're comparing. Agreed. I am quite excited about this lens for several reasons. I love my Pentax 17-70mm f/4 for it's very usable "walkabout" qualities, but as you'll see on another thread the SDM isn't working very well at all. I have two screw driven Sigma lenses and they are both fast and snappy, so hopefully Sigma's HSM implementation of my already favourite focal length lens will be just as snappy as their screw driven counterparts. It could be brilliant.

01-08-2010, 06:29 PM	#39
rustynail925 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,551	Does this Sigma 17-70 allow you to use the built-in flash ? or it the same w/ the 16-45mm which shows some shade below the image

01-16-2010, 01:38 AM	#41
channeler Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Northwich Cheshire England Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,009	Comments from another person who has just purchased the new Sigma: 17-70 OS: Just got Sigma 17-70 OS and Canon 15-85 IS: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review He reports problems with focusing. The Sigma 70-300 that I bought years ago was fine but is this another example of Sigma QC issues that people often report? Paul

01-16-2010, 08:45 AM	#42
rustynail925 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,551	does anyone in the forum have the new sigma 17-70?

01-16-2010, 09:12 AM	#43
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Not sure if the HSM and tiny difference in aperture on the long end is worth the 100 dollar cost differential from the old version of this lens. I have not heard great things about Sigma's HSM, but it does seem to be a little better than SDM.

01-16-2010, 09:24 AM	#44
KjetilH Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Oslo Photos: Gallery Posts: 309	Originally posted by channeler (...) He reports problems with focusing. The Sigma 70-300 that I bought years ago was fine but is this another example of Sigma QC issues that people often report? Sigma is, according to most users and a certain store here in Norway (which happens to be the main importer of Sigma), much better now than they used to be. There are stlll reports of problems with Sigma, but not much more than with other brands. My 30/1.4 and 50-150/2.8 are both very good. The former broke down, but Sigmas service solutions are top-notch, really. I got it fixed from Wednesday to Tuesday the next week (broken focussing mechanism). It's really good not to worry about spending two months without a useful lens, and I don't think the rumors about Sigma is just nowadays. Regarding Canon and Sigma, there has "always" been problems. Of course this does not happen to everyone, but front/back focussing was/is not uncommon with those two paired. Nikon and Pentax did not have the same problems (though QC issues in general). The reason may be that the on-board focusing motor and electronic aperture means more problems than relying on the body for doing the work. Not a bad word about Canon, but more complicated (for Sigma) often mean more problems, right? Over to the topic lens, the "old" f/2.8-4.5 version did have some flare problems, hopefully the OS version is going to be better (and the "christmas light test" doesn't translate into flare resistance).

01-16-2010, 10:22 AM	#45
Big G Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 581	Damn, I had such high hopes for this lens. Here are some shots on a Canon mount compared to a Tamron 17-50mm and Canon 15-85. Canon 15-85, Tamron 17-50 VC, Sigma 17-70 OS Comparison Pictures. - Canon Digital Photography Forums The Sigma does indeed appear to be the softest of the three, but it looks more like a focus issue (see the focus chart on the first page, looks like front focus) and not that it's not sharp. This is a real shame, but it really shows how good the Tamron is - it's consistently sharper than the Canon lens. As for Sigma QC issues, I have no problems with mine and I'd be more willing to shell out for a Sigma lens than a Pentax lens, especially since the SDM on my 17-70mm was rubbish and is now with Pentax for repair. Mind you, once I get it back I won't be in such a rush to replace it now that I've seen these reviews!