Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC A-mount lens reviews

reviews found: 57    1 2 >>
reviewer#21433 date: Nov-26-2015
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.9
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:This replaced my Sigma 17-35mm F2.8 which was good but I wanted a bettr range.
price paid:£105
positive:Sharpness, light, unobtrusive and has a decent range.
negative:Barrel distortion at the wide end but easily sorted with software.
comment:I bought this used for £105 and am delighted with it. An excellent walk about lens with a good range which is also light and is a good upgrade.
reviewer#21430 date: Nov-21-2015
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:- Sony DT 18-70 3.5-5.6
- Sony DT SAM 18-55 3.5-5.6 (v1)
- Sigma 15-30 3.5-4.5
- Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX DG
- Sigma 70 2.8 macro EX DG
- Minolta 35-70 4
- Minolta 24-85 3.5-4.5 v1
price paid:190 USD (used)
positive:- At the long end: sharp wide open, really sharp stopped down
- At the wide end: really sharp stopped down (except corners), can get very close to small subjects for closeups with strong perspective lines into the background
- Zoom lock
- Front element doesn't rotate
- Good build and size without getting into hefty or heavy territory
- Good colors, though not as vivid as minolta colors
negative:- At the long end: way too little working distance to make much use of the 1:2.3 max magnification; focusing close plays internal tricks that reduce the actual focal length to way less than 70mm (even though the zoom ring stays at 70).
- At the wide end: soft corners, especially wide open
- Zoom lock only works at 17mm, zoom creep at any other focal length
- 72mm filter thread, wide front element
- Very short turn (only 45 degrees or so) of focus ring from infinity to minimum distance
comment:A very capable walkabout solution that is remarkably sharp and distortion-free at its long end, especially for a reasonably-priced 4x zoom. AF has so far worked fine on my a65, although focus is noisy even with MF.

At the wide end I would rate its corner performance as better than the 18-70 DT kit lens, but not as good as the 18-55 SAM, and of course its aperture is a stop ahead over the kit lenses throughout its zoom range. It does show purple/yellow corner CA at the wide end, and is susceptible to glare and flare outdoors, but both types of distortion are nevertheless pretty mild for a 17mm. At the long end it is much sharper than I expected, especially towards the center and with tighter apertures, rivaling even my Sigma 70 macro's sharpness on a 24 mpx aps-c image.

The distance markings on the focus ring are not aligned very precisely at all, and actual minimum focus distance at maximum magnification is only 183mm from sensor to the subject's focused plane. This corresponds to a working distance of only 13mm (from front edge to the plane in focus, not from front glass which is recessed by 3mm) = way way way too little to make effective use of the maximum magnification. Bugs will not let the large front element come that close, the lens rim inevitably casts a shadow and any flowers or leaves stirring in the breeze will leave a smudge on the glass.

Also, such a short working distance means that the real focal length at max magnification/min focus distance is actually a lot less than 70mm. For comparison, Sigma's 70 macro prime goes all the way to 1:1 at a minimum focus distance that's still 25% greater than the 17-70's MFD at 1:2.3 maximum magnification, and the 70 macro's working distance is still a good 2 inches even when it has reached 1:1 already.

So a really competent closeup lens for living critters it is not. This is also evident from its focus ring's much too short turning range, which would make precise manual focusing next to impossible if it weren't for focus peaking tricks. On the other hand, it has a lot more going for it in composing wide angle closeups: its max mag/min working distance with 17mm is only 5 cm or so, allowing plenty of creative framing and DOF fun with small subjects prominently magnified in the foreground against strong perspectives for sweeping backgrounds.

I bought this lens in the hope of using it as a travel solution for combined macro and walkabout uses: where I would normally bring the 18-55 SAM plus Sigma 70 macro, I thought the 17-70 2.8-4.5 might substitute for both in a space-saving and lens-swap-saving single lens. It doesn't look like it will really work that way, but instead I think it will provide me with a lot more fun at the wide end than I anticipated, and it does please very much with its prime-like sharpness at the long end. Like many of the preceding reviewers, from now on I don't expect to use the kit lens much at all anymore!
reviewer#10420 date: Aug-1-2012
sharpness: 2.5
color: 3
build: 4
distortion: 3
flare control: 2
overall: 2.9
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sigma 24-135, Sigma 12-24, Minolta 28, Minolta 50, Tamron 18-250, Minolta 70-210 BC
price paid:$400
positive:Size, zoom lock, price
negative:Sharpness, white balance, CA, focus
comment:I purchased this lens to determine if it would be an upgrade walk around lens. The price was right, and the build appears to be solid.

I put the lens through a complete test review. I analyzed the lens at comparable focal lengths to each of my other lenses. I set f to wide open, 5.6, 7 and 8. I took indoor shots, bright sunshine shots, and cloudy shots.

The bottom line is that indoor this lens did not have a clue about white balance on either my A700 or the A57. It missed upwards of 30% of the dimly lit indoor shots. Outside the lens lacked sharpness, the colors were mediocre at best. In sunlight conditions the lens was a mess (flare everywhere).

I had myself and three others review the shots. The bottom line is that for more than 50 compared shots, the lens finished either last or next to last every time. Bad copy? Obviously.

My apologies for being so blunt, but based on what I worked through, this is close to the worst lens I have ever taken a shot with. Given a choice, I would probably select my original Minolta kit lens. Frankly my Android phone shots are probably comparable.
reviewer#10359 date: Jul-6-2012
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:KM 18-70
CZ 16-80
Sony 18-55
Sony 16-102
price paid:
missing
positive:range
wheight
aperture
negative:plastic feeling
af slow
no HSM
comment:this lens is a good compromise
a good lens to go out light

AF is to slow on Dynax 5D, and acceptable on Alpha 700 and 450

a lot better than the 18-70 or 18-55

A very good lens to replace basic kit. I would prefer an SSM version because of Sigma mechanics problems. That's why I sold it
reviewer#10200 date: May-14-2012
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Zeiss 16-80 and Sony 16-50
price paid:£280
positive:build, sharpness, zoom lock, bokeh
negative:colours a little flat (correctable in pp)
Big filter thread = expensive filters
comment:A very good lens for APS. Colours not as saturated as minolta but ok. Sharp and good aperture range.
A little big and heavy but balances well.
Faster than the zeiss but the zeiss had the wow factor on IQ.
reviewer#10166 date: May-2-2012
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 5
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Sony 16-50 f/2.8
Sony 18-70 f/3.5-5.6
price paid:350€
positive:Good all-round lens
Lightweight
Excelent image quality
negative:Lacks HSM and constant 2.8
Build quality could be better
Some distortion at wide end
comment:Being a traditional replacement for the provided kit lens, this lens is a great choice. Great image quality at all apertures, lacks the all important constant 2.8 aperture.

Better build quality than the Tamron 17-50mm and the Sony 18-70mm, it can´t match the overall feel and quality of the new Sony 16-50mm.

Lacks HSM which may be a deal breaker for some...however AF is good, even if a little noise. My unit has a minor zoom croop at 60mm, nothing to worry about. Also, this unit didn´t need any chipping with the A77.

Good choice for its price, if you don´t have the money for the Sony 16-50 f/2.8 SSM.
reviewer#9853 date: Jan-27-2012
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:kit lens sony , minolta ,tamron 17-50 f2.8
price paid:1000 RON
positive:color,sharp,build,
negative:.....none for the price
comment:good for the price
reviewer#9687 date: Dec-11-2011
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:
missing
price paid:+/- 400 USD (new)
positive:very sharp
nice colours
value for money
very useful range
negative:zoom creep
lens hood loose
comment:My most used lens since I bought it two years ago. Sharp across the frame at all apertures, very sharp when stopped down a bit. Very pleasing colours.
My copy has very bad zoom creep, and the lens hood doesn't 'click in' in reversed position. The lens itself feels nice and solid though. Weight/balance is good on both my A700 and A100.
All together a very good all-round/travel lens.
reviewer#9500 date: Oct-14-2011
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 24-85mm
price paid:264 GBP (new)
positive:Price, colour rendition, sharpness, weight
negative:Build, filter size
comment:An excellent walkabout lens, almost as sharp as my primes (Minolta 28/50mm). Good wide angle, and top end of zoom, with excellent sharpness from f/5.6 to f/16. As most of my lenses are full frame the only drawback I see with this (apart from build quality!) is the fact that it is APS-C only. Buy this, as you won't be disappointed!
reviewer#9399 date: Sep-7-2011
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 4.9
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:18-70 min
50 1.7 min
beercan
baby beercan
price paid:£235
positive:build hood macro 2.8f
negative:none
comment:bought second hand on ebay and few days after got rid of min kit lens for good
love everything about this lens
reviewer#8971 date: Apr-28-2011
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.8
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sigma 20-40 f2.8
Minolta 35-70 f4
Sony 18-70
price paid:165 GBP (mint)
positive:Very sharp
Colours
Macro capability
Close focussing
Range
negative:Not a constant f2.8
comment:Blows the kit lens out of the water.

As good as the others.

Highly recommended.

reviewer#8680 date: Feb-20-2011
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.8
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:Tamron 28-75/2.8
Sony 50/1.4
price paid:500 USD
positive:Sharpness
Colors
Very short MFD
Very good build
negative:Vignetting at wide end
Some distortions at wide end (but what lens at 17-20mm don`t have it?)
comment:Bought this lens new with A350 couple years ago.
Liked it in everything. Sharp (not as 50/1.4, but this is a zoom!), colors are very saturated and vivid - very rare for SIgma.
It can focus even on dust at protecting filter!
Good as travel zoom, and I liked it macro, and even portraits at long end.
Now I made a gift to my sister A350 with this Sigma and beercan, and it still surprising me with results!
So I recommend it without any doubts!
reviewer#8614 date: Feb-4-2011
sharpness: 5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.2
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:kit lens
price paid:$225
positive:close focusing ability
value
sharpness
negative:nothing stands out to me here
comment:Needed something wider after getting rid of kit lens. Looked at this and the tamron 17-50, found this at a nice price and liked the extra range. The 2.8 of the tamron would have been nice as well.
No real complaints, lens does what I need it to. Colors are a little less saturated than minolta/sony, but this lens focuses very close. I have bumped it on items when shooitng so look out, or get a filter. Nice kit lens replacement and if you do not need the 2.8 of the tamron this is a nice choice. Bokeh is OK as well, and decent for portraits.
reviewer#8010 date: Sep-22-2010
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.3
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:sony 18-70 kit
Minolta 28-70 2.8
price paid:$450
positive:Very useful range
Macro capability
Reasonably fast
Sharp
Very versatile
negative:None that I've seen
comment:This is an excellent walk around general purpose lens for APS-C cameras. The zoom range is very useful, (much better than a 24-70 IMO)it focuses quickly and the images are very satisfactory. This isn't a WOW lens like the CZ 16-80 or the 24-70 2.8 but for the price, it really is one worth considering. I'd buy it again in a minute. I'm not sure about the advantage of the newer OS version but I don't think I'd pay extra for OS for my SSS Sony.
reviewer#7801 date: Aug-9-2010
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.6
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:SAL-1680CZ f3.5-4.5
Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 EX DC
Sony 70-300 F4.5-5.6 G
price paid:
missing
positive:Amazingly Sharp, (except at f2.8)
Very close focusing
Excellent color & contrast
High resistance to flare
Low CA
Very accurate focus (with a700)
negative:Zoom creep
Not sharp at f 2.8 @ 17mm
Edge distortion at wide end
comment:In my opinion, this is THE perfect walk-around lens for my a700! I rated this lens a "5" for sharpness because after months of pixel peeping, I decided my particular copy of the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 matches or exceeds the sharpness I found with my copies of the CZ 16-80(now sold), and the Sony 70-300 F4.5-5.6 G, at the same apertures.
However,at 17mm and f2.8 this lens will disappoint with softness, but as soon as you stop down to f4.5 everywhere else it just excels at all focal lengths! The close focusing (about 2 inches from the front lens), has stopped me from buying a macro lenses for photographing flowers, as I just do not need one. In their common range of 17-20, this Sigma beats the Sigma 10-20 in every respect by a good margin.

After having owned and used this lens extensively for almost three years, I highly recommend it!!
reviewer#6838 date: Jan-28-2010
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 4.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Tamron 17-35, kit 18-70, Sigma 18-200
price paid:$290 USD (new)
positive:close focus, max. aperture wider than average, light/compact, minimal flare
negative:max. aperture falls off fast
comment:Exceptional for the price, a very versatile and talented lens. It does everything I ask, takes sharp images nearly from front element to infinity. Distortion at wide end much less than 18-200. Other than becoming f/4 by 35mm I have no issues - and since my Tamron 17-35 was also f/4 at 35mm, I have double the focal range with no real penalty! I rarely use the hood and notice no flare degradation, so if any it's pretty minimal.
reviewer#6464 date: Nov-25-2009
sharpness: 5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:SONY 18-70 DT
Minolta AF 50mm f 1.7
price paid:429USD (NEW)
positive:-build
-good range
-sharp!!!
-close up focusing is fantastic
negative:-72mm filter diameter
comment:
missing
reviewer#6431 date: Nov-22-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 5
flare control: 4
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Konica Minolta DT 18-70
Minolta Original 50 mm f/1.7
price paid:E 325 (new)
positive:- extremely useful zoom range
- large aperture at wide angle
- relatively sharp
- good build quality
- VERY close focusing, and VERY sharp results in doing so
- zoom lock switch
negative:- largest available aperture drops quickly when zooming in
- trouble focusing below 24 mm in low light
- when AF hunts, it takes a long time to refocus
- zoom mechanism not very smooth on my copy, even though I put it through its paces
comment:This lens is meant as a step-up from the kit lens, and it does an excellent job at that. It's better in nearly every aspect. It has a larger aperture, has much better build quality, feels more solid, focuses closer, the front doesn't rotate, distortion at wide-angle is significantly less, and it has a zoom lock switch. I've found the colour from this lens also more pleasing than the 18-70 kit lens.

When comes to image sharpness, things are different. Or should I say: there's no real difference between the two. The Sigma, however, is sharper at the long end. In fact, at 70 mm, sharpness easily matches a prime lens.

But the real kicker is the close focusing capability. It's not a dedicated macro, but it's pretty close. The sharpness is there, like I said above, and up to about 1:2 magnification it puts many much more expensive macros to shame.
reviewer#5968 date: Sep-3-2009
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.6
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:
missing
price paid:259USD
positive:Doesnt get any better as a walk around lens!
VERY SHARP!
negative:
missing
comment:GET A UV FILTER SO YOU DONT SCRATCH YOU ELEMENT!! SUPER CLOSE FOCUSING!
reviewer#5835 date: Aug-9-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 50mm f1.7
price paid:Ł150
positive:Sharp
Good bokeh
Good AF
Relatively cheap
Satisfying Build
Not prone to flare or CA
Pretty much no minimum focus distance unless at wide end (still under 20cm)
negative:Variable sharpness/focusing at 17mm
Colour a little cold but easily changed in cam
Zoom creep past wide end but it's never really been a problem for me
comment:Coming up to a year i've had this and was the first lens i bought for my a300 as i opted not to have the kit lens (although two of my friends have the sony kit and it's definitely capable). I am really pleased with this lens and don't plan on replacing it even when next body cameras come out (i'm not looking at full frame). I noticed the cold colour when i got the minolta prime but just warming the picture up, generally anything other than auto wb really helps. The macro capability is probably what makes me love this lens the most and the fact that if something else happens you can zoom right out and not miss a thing. There is a mini fish-eye effect at 17mm but tbh i like it. Main advantage with the af 50 is the f1.7.
reviewer#5607 date: Jun-28-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 35-70mm F4
Sony 16-105mm
Minolta 24-85mm
Sigma 24mm F2.8
Zuiko 14-54mm F2.8-3.5
price paid:340 USD (new)
positive:-great sharpness
-close focus distance; especially in manual focus mode
-quite a nice landscape focal range
-solid build
-F2.8 at wide end
negative:-72mm is a weird filter size
-F2.8 only at 17mm
comment:I used ot shoot Olympus and really liked my Zuiko 14-54mm F2.8-3.5 with it's close focusing distance. The Sigma 17-70mm was the closest thing I could find to the Zuiko, so I got the Siggy.
While not quite as good as the Zuiko, this lens does perform very well throughout it's focal range and gives a nice bokeh. I like shooting close-ups as well, so the 17-70mm remains as my favorite despite my also having the Sony 16-105mm; I just find the 17-70mm to be a bit better optically and more useful with it's close focusing distance.
This coupled with the 70-300mm G that I have on order will be my main lens combo.
Corner sharpness isn't quite as good as the Sigma 24mm F2.8, but on the other hand I'd expect a bit more quality from a prime.
The build of the 17-70mm is quite solid and has a good feel to it. Definitely a great buy.
reviewer#5471 date: May-30-2009
sharpness: 5
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 4.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Mi 18-70
Mi 24-85
Mi 24-105
Mi 50/1.7
Mi 24/2.8
price paid:300 euro (new)
positive:sharpness wide open, focusrange, low distortion, incredible macro.
negative:zoom ring rotation. It broke after just a bit less then one year.
comment:I bought this lens a year ago to replace the 18-70 kitlens of my A100. I made my mind up based on all internet info (dyxum, slrgear, ...) and I was not disappointed.

The sharpness wide open is very good and I am pretty pleased with the distortion. Bokeh I find somewhat difficult to jugde: it sometimes seems to be a matter of taste.
Colors need to be tweaked (I fiddled with the whitebalance when this one was on my camera).
The zoomring turns the other way round and it takes some time to get used to it. I find the hood to be rather effective.

After 360 days of use (yes, 5 days before the end of warranty) the zoomring went bananas. And I was on holiday on the top of a mountain (d.mn!)!
I find it difficult to believe that a zoomring can come loose so I hesitate replacing it with same type (if I need to). That's the reason for my "3" on build quality.

sept 2013:
I recently purchased an A580 to take with me on my backpacking. I also found a good copy of this lens and decided to try again. My son has one on his Pentax that developped the same problem my Sigma had (see above). We decided I should try to repair it and to my astonishment repairing the Sigma was a piece of cake (at least the loose zoomring problem).
reviewer#5380 date: May-14-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 4
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:tamy 24-135
price paid:330 new
positive:range
MFD
decent build
quite sharp
72 mm filter thread
fast
negative:rumors of poor quality sigma focusing gear; my copy might have a soft(er) corner wide open at wide angle and I may send it back for recalibration.
comment:This is a clear winner: great walk around lens at a great price. I did not use the CZ 16-80 but I find it hard to believe it is so much better to justify the price tag. Overall much more convenient on APS than the tammy 24-135 that I used before as my walk around (and currently retired on a film body)

Totally love the wide angle and the closeup capability. The sharpness is very good wide open in the center and gets better across the frame with stepping down one notch. (comparable with the M50 1.7 in my opinion)

The colors are not as vibrant right out of the camera as the minolta staples but can pop out with little processing.

Combined with the minolta 50 1.7, the beercan and the A200 makes a nice travel kit good for almost anything life throws at you without much headaches in case things get damaged or stolen

reviewer#5320 date: Apr-30-2009
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 4.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Sony 16-105
CZ 16-80
Minolta 35/2
Minolta 50/1.7
Sigma 10-20
price paid:
missing
positive:Really great set of features. Does them all quite well.
Great price.
negative:I'm used to Minolta primes (not the Sigma's fault). Bokeh so-so. Reverse zoom ring.
comment:I bought this used and feel I got a good copy. I'll provide general comments and two comparisons: other mid-quality zooms; Minolta quality primes.

First off, I think Sigma came up with a great hybrid lens here. It's like a crossover vehicle, offering a decent amount of lots of things. It offers a large aperture 2.8 for some of it's wide range. It offers a good 'non-dedicated' macro mode. It has a better than average range for a standard APS-C zoom, and it goes just a bit wider with 17mm. The build quality is right up there with EX but not quite. And the price is right. Many say that there are sample variations which is frustrating if you can't try multiple copies. I felt mine was good.

I found that in many situations 70mm didn't feel all that much shorter than the 105mm of the Sony 16-105 (especially with 12MP to crop from). The quality and colour were very comparable between the two in most instances. And the Sigma offers a macro mode to boot.

But I'm used to classic Minolta lenses, and the Sigma can't compare in smoothness and colour. So it comes down to one's needs and wants in terms of image quality and price as well as shooting style.

I've since gotten a CZ 16-80 and prefer it enough that I'm glad I made the investment. Better bokeh, sharp wide open, a little more range. Better colour. I feel I can trust the output more.

But with the Sigma, I would put it in the "if you only have one lens" category and "on a budget". If that fits your needs, you will be pleased.
reviewer#5317 date: Apr-30-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 35-70 f4
Minolta 35-100
Tamron 24-135
Sony 18-70 kit
Sony 55-200
price paid:319 USD (new)
positive:Sharp
Accurate colors
VERY close focus distance
Finish
Range
Cost
negative:Nothing that comes to mind.
comment:I wanted a nice walk around lens with a range that complemented my Sony 55-200 (which is a very nice lens). The kit lens, although a nice range, really wasn't very good. After reading various reviews, I decided on this Sigma. I'm very pleased with my purchase. The bang for the buck is outstanding. The colors aren't as warm as the old Minolta glass, but honestly, it's probably more accurate and if I want it warmer that's easy to do in post processing.

The lens focuses pretty quickly, has better than expected IQ and can focus so closely you have to watch out you don't bump the front of the lens. Incredible actually.

I don't think you can do much better for twice the money.
reviewer#5253 date: Apr-19-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6
Minolta 50mm f/1.7
Minolta 70-210mm f/4
Minolta 35-70mm f/4
Minolta 28-105mm f/4-4.5
Minolta 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
price paid:125 € (Second Hand)
positive:Minimal focussing distance!
Size
Range
Nice bokeh
negative:Not build in focusmotor.
comment:This is a great lens to upgrade your Alpha kit with the 18-70mm lens.
The construction is much better, no rotating front element, a nice lens hood, a practical size.
At 17mm there is a bit distortion visible.
With sunny wheather I use it mostly on f/7.1 or 8.

The old '85 Minolta lenses are a bit sharper.
reviewer#5251 date: Apr-19-2009
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sony 18-70 Kit
Minolta 70-210 BC
Minolta 70-210 (non BC)
Minolta 75-300
Minolta 35-70
Minolta 50mm 1.7
price paid:280 USD new
positive:Build
Sharp
Good range
Close focusing
Hood included
negative:Can't think of any
comment:I got this lens brand new with warranty for a pretty good price IMHO.
I love the sharpness of this lens! You can look at the other lenses I currently have, and this is my favorite for sharpness when wide open. The range is perfect for me indoors and the distortion is pretty controlled imo.
It's built very solid. I love the colors it produces also. And the hood that is included works great.

Given, I haven't compared this to any G lenses, but I think it is a great value and a great step up from the kit lens.

UPDATE: I now have the Sony 70-300G and these two lenses make a killer combination for around $1,000. Both are amazingly sharp and have never let me down.
reviewer#5033 date: Mar-14-2009
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:16-80, 16-105, 18-250
price paid:
missing
positive:Close focus!!

negative:Backwards zoom
comment:I am an amateur. An accomplished photographer will do better with their tools than I can, but I want to have nice tools to learn with.

I had the 16-80, 16-105, 17-70 and 18-250 all at the same time for about a month. I expected the 16-80 to blow the rest of the lenses away, but that never really happened and I was about equally happy with the 16's and 17.

Update 5/2009: The 17-70 really delivers pleasant bokeh and the close focus capability is extremely fun if you're walking around looking at flowers, bugs or whatever. The build quality is quite satisfying.

I think the 17-70 represents a great value for someone wanting an upgrade from the 18-70 or other low end lens. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to someone who wanted to spend $400USD or less for a walkaround.


reviewer#4860 date: Feb-13-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:SAL 18-70mm
Minolta 24-105mm (D)
Sigma 24-70mm EX DG Macro
price paid:£212.99 (new)
positive:Finish (feels like EX grade)
IQ is excellent
Can get VERY close to subject
Far superior to kit lens
Sharp
negative:Nothing
comment:I think Sigma took a kit lens, ripped it to bits and made it so much better. It has the look and feel of an EX grade lens but without the price tag. It certainly punches above it's weight, and though I'm not a Sigma-ite, they've put together a cracking lens in compact body with superior build and image qualities.

The zoom motor is pretty quiet. It has that EX grade tactile feel to it. If you're considering a kit lens replacement, then take a close look at this lens. After over 2 years of using it, I can honestly say it's one of the very best lenses I've had the please of owning and using.

The pseudo 'macro' or very close focus capability, is exceptional for a lens of this type, and you can almost touch your subject and it still focuses at almost 1:2 which is great for close quarter photography. Great bang for buck optic and highly recommended if you're on a budget and want superior grade glass to the standard kit offering with a similar range. CZ & Tamron have their offerings too, but this one will do just fine thank you very much.
reviewer#4671 date: Jan-11-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:SAL 18-250;
Min 24-105;
Sigma 24-70 EX DG Macro.
price paid:324.95 New
positive:Sharp
Light weight.
Close ups.
negative:None
comment:What a great lens for the price and performance.
This lens is extremely sharp and delivers incredible bokeh.

I highly recommend this lens to anyone.
reviews found: 57    1 2 >>

rating summary

lens image
  • total reviews: 57
  • sharpness: 4.51
  • color: 4.37
  • build: 4.32
  • distortion: 4.16
  • flare control: 4.51
  • overall: 4.37

to add your review
you need to login

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania