Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Third-Party Pentax Lenses - Reviews and Database » Sigma Lenses » Legacy Zoom Lenses
Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5 Review RSS Feed

Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5

Reviews Views Date of last review
9 42,107 Sat May 30, 2020
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
100% of reviewers $175.56 8.38
Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5

Focal length 24 - 135 mm
Minimum aperture F32
Maximum aperture F2.8 - F4.5
Construction 16 elements in 15 groups
Focusing System Internal Focusing
Angle of View (35 mm) 84.1 - 18.2
Number of Diaphragm Blades 9 pieces
Minimum Focus Distance 50 cm (19.7 in)
Maximum Magnification 1:4.5
Filter Size 77 mm
Lens Hood Petal Hood
Dimensions (dia x len) 83.6 (3.3 in) x 90.9 mm (3.6 in)
Mounts (AF) Sigma, Canon, Nikon (D), Minolta (D), Pentax
Weight 530 g (17 oz)
Mount Type:
Price History:

Add Review of Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 1-9 of 9
Junior Member

Registered: February, 2017
Posts: 31
Lens Review Date: May 30, 2020 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $160.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Very good zoom range, good center sharpness, fast AF, aperture, size, weight, balancing
Cons: curved area of sharpness, most negative at 24mm, small zoom ring with unsmooth movement
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 10    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 9    Value: 10    Camera Used: Pentax K1    Autofocus: 9    New Or Used: Used   

Real rare lens, I got mine from a seller who didn't know what he sold. There were no caps and lens hood, but my Sigma 24-60 has the same hood, so it fits perfectly.

The sharpness in the center can be excellent, but the area of focus is curved, that the center is really sharp but the edges aren't. It is worst at the shortest focus range (24mm).Compared to the Tamron 24-135, the IQ at the long range is much better.

The micro-contrast at larger apertures is not so good, it needs to be stopped down a litte bit (nearly to the same range which is open aperture at the Tamron).

With direct light from the front the contrast goes down even more and some flares occur. On the other hand, as soon as the source of light doesn't shine directly into the lens there is nearly no influence and the contrast can be corrected in ACR.

Very positive: My lens has nearly no CAs [lateral Chromatic Aberrations (color shadows at harsh contrast transitions) ]. Amazing, like top modern lenses (like the Pentax D-FA70-210), even better than the Sigma 35 F1.4 ART. Also bokeh fringing (shows up as magenta colored halos in front the focus point and green beyond) is nearly neglegible; it shows only a slight amount at open aperture and the issue is largely reduced at F5.6 and gone by F8.

The distortion characteristic is quite heavy, but I found the Sigma 24-70 DG profil fits quite well with 175% distortion correction in ACR to correct the distortion.

Vignetting is quite heavy too, but with 175% correction in ACR it is also nearly invisible.

The bokeh is a point to worry; sometimes it comes quite harsh, but when a suitable background is selected, the out-of-focus highlights are perfectly circular and the inner zone is quite uniform.

The weak point is the mechanics of the zoom ring; it is small and need some torque to move in the range above 70mm. On the other hand my lens does not show zoom creeping.

The AF is somehow tricky; my lens needed a compensation of +7. In most cases the AF is on the point, but at the shorter ranges of the zoom some misshits occur; but as the lens is parfocal, I can focus at ~100mm and go back to 24mm and have a perfect focus. On the other hand the AF is quite fast and with the K1 the noise is okay (not for a classical concert, but in normal situations no issue).

The pictures show a quite good bokeh

and a good sharpness (here a 1:1 crop of the center)

New Member

Registered: December, 2016
Posts: 22
Lens Review Date: December 2, 2019 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $130.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: sharp at f2.8 & 24mm, Useful zoom range
Cons: AF is very unaccurate, need to be stopped down for useful sharpness at long end
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 10    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 8    Value: 10    Camera Used: Pentax K70    Autofocus: 7    New Or Used: Used   

Very rare lens. I found mine at local market - almost like a new.
The long end 135mm need to be stopped down from f4.5 to f5 or f5.6 to be fully useful with sharpness.
The 24mm it very nice at f2.8 and with every step getting sharper and sharper.

The AF can hunt but's normal.

Anyway im happy with it but i wouldn't trust it to much - in stress situation it's better to use MF i guess

Photo at 24mm f2.8

Photo at 135mm f4.5

Photo at 80mm f4 ( wide open )
Forum Member

Registered: June, 2016
Location: Paris
Posts: 80
Lens Review Date: November 8, 2019 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $300.00 | Rating: N/A 

Pros: optics, range, aperture, size, weight
Cons: exif compatibility on recent dslr, zoom creep
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 10    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 10    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-1    Autofocus: 10    New Or Used: New   

excellent walk-around zoom lens for full frame!
highly recommended if you can deal with the fact that on the k-1 & k-3 Exif reads up to 80mm only, and that lens has zoom creep if you turn it 90 fronting the ground..
good investment for full frame camera
Senior Member

Registered: February, 2011
Location: Brno
Posts: 266
Lens Review Date: May 10, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $200.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Useful range, fast aperture, build quality, good on film
Cons: Softer image on digital sensors until F8
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 9    Value: 8    Camera Used: MZ-10, K20D, K5    Autofocus: 8   

This lens has usefull range for fim body, where it proves to be quite good for day-time trips. Stopped down it offers nice range from wide angle to telephoto with wery good results.

On demanding hi-res APS-C digital body it needs to be stopped down to about F8-F11 range to get sharp images. Starts to be usable from F5.6 at 24mm to F8 at 135mm.

So I would recommend this lens for film shooters mainly. If you use APS-C digital, then just get the DA18-135/3.5-5.6WR.. it is sharper and has better contrast.
Loyal Site Supporter

Registered: June, 2007
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Posts: 518

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: April 30, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $130.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Nice range, great build, bright aperture
Cons: A bit large, needs to be stopped down for max sharpness

I bought this lens to try in my search for the ultimate walkaround zoom. My expectations were very low considering the large range and the bright 2.8-4.5 apertures. I got the lens and my first impression was this is a heavy piece of glass! It's not your typical compact 'kit''s definitely a step up when it comes to build quality.

Image quality is good wide open. By 'Good'...I mean 'usable', but you won't be cutting your eyeballs with these images...wide open the lens is short on contrast and sharpness and the images have a 'dull' look to them. You can definitely pretty them up with post-processing. However, stop it down to f/5.6..and better yet, f/8 and you have a pretty sharp and contrasty walkaround zoom. Bokeh is nice, and autofocus on the K5 is fast and accurate.

All in all...I like this lens. I'm trying to switch to mostly primes for serious photographs but for snapshots or casual events, you can't beat having lens like this. If I was rating on IQ alone it would probably be a 7.5 to 8, however I give it a '9' simply for the Value/Performance ratio. Considering you can find these for $150 or less and you get a good lens with a great range and Very Good image quality. I was seriously considering the Pentax 18-135...however I'm not sure I'd need the extra 6mm on the wide side, and after seeing the reviews/samples of the new Pentax lens, I'm not sure the difference in price is worth it for me so I will probably wind up keeping this in my kit.
Site Supporter

Registered: December, 2008
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 650

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: March 20, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $180.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: focal range, IQ, Speed, build quality, hood
Cons: weight
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 10    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 8    Value: 10    Camera Used: K-5    Autofocus: 10   

I rate this lens a 10 due to it's wonderful flexibility. It has replaced the 18-55 and 50-200 lenses(both 2nd gen.) in my kit. When I wish for the widest angle I have a prime same for telephoto reach. I leave this on my primary digital camera all the time since I can quickly pull it out to take a shot with out worrying to much about light or distance or any other settings. I also always have great IQ from even the snap shots. The K-x seems to complement this lens very well plus it focuses much faster on it than on the K100D. I have not noticed any color problems or flare in any images from the lens. The only drawback and to me a small one is the lenses weight. I use an very fine after market neck strap that cushions lenses weighing 3-4 times this much. I am used to old metal film bodies and big manual lenses which can be much heavier so I do not have a problem with it's weight. However my wife does have the problem but still likes to use the lenses due to it's versatile focal length in family snapshot situations. This lens is also rather large in diameter so I would recommend the use of a flash unit on the shoe of a camera rather than the built in flash. I personally hate flashes so this gets used with ambient light. Great lens if you can find it and you can use it on a film body too! Good Luck!
Alan in MN
Veteran Member

Registered: February, 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,756

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: July 20, 2008 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $150.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Good Range, Sturdy Build, Good IQ
Cons: Heavy, Aperture Ring Cramped, Zoom Creep

One of my first lenses after my kit and I was quite impressed. The colour rendition was quite nice if not a bit warm. It wasn't exactly tack sharp but for the cost, its hard to beat. The range is quite nice whether you got a film body (24mm wide to portrait) or on a digital cropped body (35mm normal-wide to 200mm tele). Great for event coverage.

Some minor negatives are the size and weight. If you can strain your wrist somewhat shooting for extended time with this or any other heavy lens. The diameter of the lens is very large and so you'll find that you'll have to cram your fingers a bit into what little space there is between the aperture ring and flash housing.

The focus rotation is very about 50 degrees so while rough AF/MF acquisition maybe achieved rapidly, its easily to overshoot. Focus carefully.

All in all a great walkaround and jack of all trades kinda lens.
Loyal Site Supporter

Registered: January, 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 266

2 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: May 13, 2008 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $100.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Range, Sharpness
Cons: Weight, length of zoom ring.

First off, I have to say after taking this lens on a trip, I really like it for its range and flexiblilty. It is not quite as wide as some may like, but for the way I shoot, it is great. The images are real sharp and the color/contrast it gives really pops. It is a heavy beast tho, quite a bit heavier than my 17-70 and larger in diameter too. But unless you are toting it around all day, it probably won't be an issue. I go out and shoot a few shots, put the camera down or back in the car, drive to another location or play with the kids some, then shoot some more.

Yeah, the 18-250 gives more range, but this one is quite nice. I bought it for going on weekend trips to keep on the camera and to use in the backyard while playing with the kids. With the 17-70, I just have to get in too close and they want to come play with me when I am trying to take a picture. This way I can get back a bit more and still get the shot. It seems to focus real fast, faster than my 17-70. It is real bright in the viewfinder too. I did mention in the cons about the zoom ring. It is smaller in size, probably about 3/4 to 7/8 wide. Not bad, but your hand has to be right on it, where the 17-70 is almost twice the size. The 24-135 is not as forgiving in a hurried situation. Something you need to be aware of.

Overall, I recommend this to anyone if you can find one, and I would have given it 9-9.5, but it is a heavy lens. That is all that dropped it down. But, hey, I haven't found a 10-400 f1.8 that weighs less than 200g yet.


ps: I bought this lens used from another forum member. It was in like new condition when received.

Registered: August, 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 765

2 users found this helpful
Lens Review Date: May 5, 2008 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $230.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Full frame, moderately fast, includes aperture ring, excellent build quality, good IQ, good corner to corner sharpness and lack of vignetting, nice bokeh, nice colour rendition
Cons: Lens creep, weight, not the fastest focusser

This is the lens that I use most on my *ist DL. I had considered the Sigma 18-125 but was put off by its poor IQ and APS-C-only image circle. All of the sample images I saw from the 24-135 looked great.

The best aspects:
Moderately fast - I have shot outdoor events at night in available light (downtown.) Because of the variable maximum aperture, you must shoot wide (24mm) to maintain f/2.8.

Excellent build quality - this is a sturdy lens, with a similar feel and construction to EX lenses. It inspires confidence. The included petal hood is sturdy and handsome. Zoom and focus have smooth action, with wide enough rings to easily grasp. Lens cap needs to be exchanged for a Tamron-style centre grip cap to allow it to be removed when the hood is on the lens.

Good IQ, even wide open. Very sharp by f8. Good corner to corner sharpness and lack of vignetting throughout the range. Nice bokeh from 9 bladed aperture. Nice colour rendition, very comparable to my Pentax FA 28-90, and warmer than my Pentax FAJ 18-35.

Lens creep is an issue if you wear the camera on the street. The substantial weight and size of the lens ensure that it will slowly double in size if you don't baby it.

This is not a light-weight lens. Packing a 24-135 range into a full frame lens that achieves 2.8 (however briefly) means there is quite a bit of glass. Filter size is 77mm, on the large end of commonly available filters, which can get expensive.

Focus speed is reasonable, but not the fastest. Comparable to my FA 28-90, and faster than a Tamron 28-300 LD that I tested.

This lens is fully compatible with my *ist DL and my MZ-M. Unfortunately it is not fully compatible with my Program Plus. It's a shame because this lens is a nice match to the body. The Program Plus doesn't recognize the minimum aperture being communicated by the lens, so in program mode the body will meter F stops down to F/1.2. Aperture priority also seems flaky, so that leaves the lens full-manual only.

Final verdict, good lens, great buy.
Add Review of Sigma 24-135mm F2.8-4.5

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:49 PM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]