Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

LeDave · 12-11-2009, 05:12 PM

How come I've never heard of anybody speaking of this lens?

raider · 12-11-2009, 05:28 PM

Interestingly, this is one of my question too. I was told that this lens is a high quality lens and is extremely sharp. I just could not find much user feedback though.

Pentaxor · 12-11-2009, 06:38 PM

you can include the Sigma 70/2.8 as well. not too much thread regarding that lens here except from jsherman's. I give him props though for convincing me to get one. I have no regrets. I can't say nothing bad against that lens. IQ-wise, it can give the DA70 and FA77 a run for their money.

reason why they aren't given much credit, I suppose because they are Sigma lenses.

pxpaulx · 12-11-2009, 10:06 PM

there are quite a few more about the sigma f2.8 24-60mm - it is a very nice lens itself, though now discontinued alot of buyers snatched them up last year when they were selling new just over $200 - can only be found in the marketplace and ebay now.

Pentaxor · 12-11-2009, 11:52 PM

Originally posted by pxpaulx

there are quite a few more about the sigma f2.8 24-60mm - it is a very nice lens itself, though now discontinued alot of buyers snatched them up last year when they were selling new just over $200 - can only be found in the marketplace and ebay now.

that's a great deal. a good and cheap alternative for the 16-50/2.8.

snofox · 12-12-2009, 09:00 AM

There are now two versions of the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 lens in Pentax mount: the "old" Ex DG Macro version; and a new IF EX DG HSM version. The first one sells for $750 in Canada, the second costs a whopping $1200 (prices from Vistek). The "old" one is a lens I would love to have.

netuser · 12-12-2009, 09:22 AM

So, why no love for it ?

kenyee · 12-12-2009, 09:44 AM

The old version had lots of flare issues and is somewhat mediocre for what it should be.
The new version beats Canon's L version of it and is competitive w/ Nikon's version on APS-C cameras (Nikon's is far better at the edges on FF).

jsherman999 · 12-12-2009, 12:38 PM

Part of the reason might be the existence of the Tamron 28-75 2.8 - one of the sharpest zooms you can get for Pentax, and it can be had used for under $300.

That Sigma's a nice lens, but I know that if I got one, I'd just end up missing my 28-75's blistering sharpness.

wllm · 12-12-2009, 12:57 PM

I'am also wondering why you don't hear/read a lot about this lens, I guess jsherman999 got a point about the competition against the Tamron 28-75 2.8.
The Sigma is heavier, bigger diameter 82mm (expensive, hard to get, filters) and the price is more expensive than the Tamron.
Maybe that are some reasons, why people choose a Tamron in stead of the Sigma.

Pentaxor · 12-12-2009, 02:30 PM

the only downside of the Tamron is it's slow and noisy AF speed, zoom creep, built and QC issues (centering defect). getting a lemon is the last thing that you would want. it is said that the Tammy is a monster on an APS-C dslr, but not as quite as great on a full-frame but still display an excellent center sharpness. although what confuses me is that the MTF results on a FF has an outstanding score as compared to the APS-C, but the APS-C verdict is a lot higher than the FF. I dont know how photozone arrive or use and interpret these MTF results, but it seems it is inconsistent or does not reflect on the final conclusion about the lens. could anyone explain how a lens with a 3000 MTF mark on a FF gets only a 2 and a half approval, while a 2000 MTF mark on an APS-C gets a 4 approval rating. maybe photozone mixed up the MTF results?

Fixcinater · 12-12-2009, 02:45 PM

My copy of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 is a good lens. It's not a great lens, and the colors aren't fantastic, and it doesn't really stand out. It's not super easy to use, it's not super cheap, it's not a lot of things. It's heavy compared to primes (duh), it's not great with flare, filters are expensive and a pain at 82mm, and I hate the double switch to go from AF to MF, but I don't MF with it anyway because it's such a fast ratio I can't be very accurate with it except in tripod mounted 10X zoom-check-focus situations, and then I might as well have brought 2-3 primes.

It's a good zoom lens and I've made most of the money I've made with a camera with this lens on, but it holds no warm place in my heart. I'll keep it and continue using it for all-around stuff because I value the acceptable to very good IQ that I get from it along with the versatility of the wider end, though.

kenyee · 12-12-2009, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

the only downside of the Tamron is it's slow and noisy AF speed, zoom creep, built and QC issues (centering defect). getting a lemon is the last thing that you would want.

I got 3 lemons in a row w/ the Tamron...BF/FF issues and in one case, 75mm was so fuzzy (no pixel peeping) it was useless...

knyghtfall · 12-12-2009, 07:08 PM

I have one and like it a lot. just a tad soft wide open, very sharp from f4 onwards. I'm a primes user, and have sold off all the zooms I had or passed through my hands. But this Sigma's a keeper for me, even though it doesn't see that much use due to competition with my primes. But when I do use it, it doesn't disappoint.

digital, wide open. 70mm

on B&W film. The softness is something I PP'ed in, not something from the lens.

EricT · 12-13-2009, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by netuser

So, why no love for it ?

The obvious reason is that it's really a full frame lens. That makes it large, heavy and expensive compared to APS-C alternatives like the Pentax 16-50 and the Tamron 17-50.

I've seen some reports from CaNikon land which says this lens rivals the 1st party alternatives, so it's definitely a good lens.

12-11-2009, 05:12 PM	#1
LeDave Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,067	Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 How come I've never heard of anybody speaking of this lens?

12-12-2009, 12:38 PM	#9
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	The Tamron 28-75 looms large in this space Part of the reason might be the existence of the Tamron 28-75 2.8 - one of the sharpest zooms you can get for Pentax, and it can be had used for under $300. That Sigma's a nice lens, but I know that if I got one, I'd just end up missing my 28-75's blistering sharpness.

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
Pentax 17-70mm f/4 or Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 or sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4?	shang	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	05-24-2010 05:30 AM
Sigma 24-70mm, Sigma 28-70mm, or Tamron 28-75mm?	gkreth	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	05-23-2010 01:01 PM

12-11-2009, 05:28 PM	#2
raider Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,989	Interestingly, this is one of my question too. I was told that this lens is a high quality lens and is extremely sharp. I just could not find much user feedback though.

12-11-2009, 06:38 PM	#3
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	you can include the Sigma 70/2.8 as well. not too much thread regarding that lens here except from jsherman's. I give him props though for convincing me to get one. I have no regrets. I can't say nothing bad against that lens. IQ-wise, it can give the DA70 and FA77 a run for their money. reason why they aren't given much credit, I suppose because they are Sigma lenses.

12-11-2009, 10:06 PM	#4
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	there are quite a few more about the sigma f2.8 24-60mm - it is a very nice lens itself, though now discontinued alot of buyers snatched them up last year when they were selling new just over $200 - can only be found in the marketplace and ebay now.

12-11-2009, 11:52 PM	#5
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by pxpaulx there are quite a few more about the sigma f2.8 24-60mm - it is a very nice lens itself, though now discontinued alot of buyers snatched them up last year when they were selling new just over $200 - can only be found in the marketplace and ebay now. that's a great deal. a good and cheap alternative for the 16-50/2.8.

12-12-2009, 09:00 AM	#6
snofox Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Fredericton New Brunswick Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 334	There are now two versions of the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 lens in Pentax mount: the "old" Ex DG Macro version; and a new IF EX DG HSM version. The first one sells for $750 in Canada, the second costs a whopping $1200 (prices from Vistek). The "old" one is a lens I would love to have.

12-12-2009, 09:22 AM	#7
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	So, why no love for it ?

12-12-2009, 09:44 AM	#8
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	The old version had lots of flare issues and is somewhat mediocre for what it should be. The new version beats Canon's L version of it and is competitive w/ Nikon's version on APS-C cameras (Nikon's is far better at the edges on FF).

12-12-2009, 12:57 PM	#10
wllm Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 710	I'am also wondering why you don't hear/read a lot about this lens, I guess jsherman999 got a point about the competition against the Tamron 28-75 2.8. The Sigma is heavier, bigger diameter 82mm (expensive, hard to get, filters) and the price is more expensive than the Tamron. Maybe that are some reasons, why people choose a Tamron in stead of the Sigma.

12-12-2009, 02:30 PM	#11
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	the only downside of the Tamron is it's slow and noisy AF speed, zoom creep, built and QC issues (centering defect). getting a lemon is the last thing that you would want. it is said that the Tammy is a monster on an APS-C dslr, but not as quite as great on a full-frame but still display an excellent center sharpness. although what confuses me is that the MTF results on a FF has an outstanding score as compared to the APS-C, but the APS-C verdict is a lot higher than the FF. I dont know how photozone arrive or use and interpret these MTF results, but it seems it is inconsistent or does not reflect on the final conclusion about the lens. could anyone explain how a lens with a 3000 MTF mark on a FF gets only a 2 and a half approval, while a 2000 MTF mark on an APS-C gets a 4 approval rating. maybe photozone mixed up the MTF results?

12-12-2009, 02:45 PM	#12
Fixcinater Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: San Diego, CA, USA Posts: 409	My copy of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 is a good lens. It's not a great lens, and the colors aren't fantastic, and it doesn't really stand out. It's not super easy to use, it's not super cheap, it's not a lot of things. It's heavy compared to primes (duh), it's not great with flare, filters are expensive and a pain at 82mm, and I hate the double switch to go from AF to MF, but I don't MF with it anyway because it's such a fast ratio I can't be very accurate with it except in tripod mounted 10X zoom-check-focus situations, and then I might as well have brought 2-3 primes. It's a good zoom lens and I've made most of the money I've made with a camera with this lens on, but it holds no warm place in my heart. I'll keep it and continue using it for all-around stuff because I value the acceptable to very good IQ that I get from it along with the versatility of the wider end, though.

12-12-2009, 05:09 PM	#13
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by Pentaxor the only downside of the Tamron is it's slow and noisy AF speed, zoom creep, built and QC issues (centering defect). getting a lemon is the last thing that you would want. I got 3 lemons in a row w/ the Tamron...BF/FF issues and in one case, 75mm was so fuzzy (no pixel peeping) it was useless...

12-12-2009, 07:08 PM	#14
knyghtfall Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 348	I have one and like it a lot. just a tad soft wide open, very sharp from f4 onwards. I'm a primes user, and have sold off all the zooms I had or passed through my hands. But this Sigma's a keeper for me, even though it doesn't see that much use due to competition with my primes. But when I do use it, it doesn't disappoint. digital, wide open. 70mm on B&W film. The softness is something I PP'ed in, not something from the lens.

12-13-2009, 11:20 AM	#15
EricT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 484	Originally posted by netuser So, why no love for it ? The obvious reason is that it's really a full frame lens. That makes it large, heavy and expensive compared to APS-C alternatives like the Pentax 16-50 and the Tamron 17-50. I've seen some reports from CaNikon land which says this lens rivals the 1st party alternatives, so it's definitely a good lens.