Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canon 17-85 Vs. Sigma 17-70  
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2899 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 10 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 13522 times:

Hi all,

After considering the Canon 28-135 and 24-105L, I realised I wanted something wider than 24mm, and cover the tele end by a 70-200 f/4L (still to be purchased). I've been reading mixed reviews on the Canon 17-85, and quite reasonable ones about the Sigma 17-70, did anybody compare them? Any thoughts, experiences?


I scratch my head, therefore I am.
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineChris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2820 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 13511 times:

My dad has the 17-85 and really likes it. Ive used it and it's nice but not perfect.

I havn't heard anything but praise for the Sigma. Go with the 17-70.

Chris



5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13466 times:

Chris's right, Siggy wins. No IS and 15mm less range but better optics.

User currently offlineMartin54 From Netherlands, joined Aug 2007, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13465 times:

During my Canon days I have owned the 17-85 and it was the worst lens I have ever had. Probably I had an extra bad copy but the general opinion on this lens is not very positive, especially if you look at the rather hefty price tag for a consumer lens.
My experience with Sigma is a lot better and I am considering the 17-70 myself to replace my ancient and rattling Nikkor 18-70.


User currently offlineBruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5056 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13461 times:

The Canon 17-85 tends to have a lot of barrel distortion at the wider ranges. How is the Sigma?

I have the 17-85 and its just ok.

Bruce



Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
User currently offlineMfz From Germany, joined Aug 2004, 259 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 13343 times:

Keep away from the Canon 17-85 IS! After having had good results with the EF-S 10-22 as my first EF-S lens in a line-up of L-series-lenses (17-40L, 100-400L) I decided to try the EF-S 17-85. The worst lens I've ever owned! Massive barrel distortion, completely unsharp at 17-30mm, soft contrast, etc.! Borrowed a 24-105L from am colleague for my recent New Zealand-trip and I am totally happy with it! My recommendation: get yourself a 24-105L and enjoy some really nice photos!

Cheers,
Mike



Extra Bavariam non est vita et si est non est ita! --- My flights: http://my.flightmemory.com/mfz
User currently onlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3244 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 13329 times:



Quoting Mfz (Reply 5):
My recommendation: get yourself a 24-105L and enjoy some really nice photos!

I have this and it's a great great lens. BUT on a 1.6x body, you need something wider than 24 in a lot of cases. I compliment it with the 17-40 and the combination is awesome. However, I wouldn't have the 24-105L as my only lens on a 1.6x body. It's just not wide enough. For me at least.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 13323 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There is also the third option of the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Not as long but it's f/2.8 all the way through and tack sharp. Combine it with a circular polarizer and you get awesome results.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dan Vincent



I hear the new Canon 18-55 IS is kicking butt and taking names in the image quality department, which is very surprising considering it's just a kit lens but it looks like a really good deal if you're broke and don't mind plasticky build quality.

[Edited 2007-11-30 10:00:33]


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2899 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 13262 times:



Quoting Mfz (Reply 5):
Keep away from the Canon 17-85 IS!

I will, it seems the recommendations on the site regarding this lens all say the same thing!

Quoting Mfz (Reply 5):
My recommendation: get yourself a 24-105L and enjoy some really nice photos!

As said before, with a 1.6x crop factor, 24 would be a bit long. I'm trying to get a Sigma 17-70 for a reasonable price on Ebay. If that doesn't work, I can buy it new for 309 Euros.

I'm also trying to get a Canon 70-200 f4L IS but they're difficult to get 2nd had. May go for the non-IS one, it is way cheaper.



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineXenon From Belgium, joined Aug 2001, 494 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 13248 times:

I have the Canon 17-55IS 2.8 and love it!

Cheers,

Daniel



AirTeamImages -ATI-
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon 17-40 Vs. Sigma 17-35 posted Mon Dec 27 2004 23:50:31 by WorldspotterPL
Canon 17-40L F/4 Vs. Tamron 17-35 F/2.8-4 posted Sun Dec 19 2004 20:29:50 by Mfz
Canon Vs Sigma, The Big 70-200 Battle. posted Wed Aug 20 2003 13:41:25 by JoakimE
Is The Canon 17-40L Enough.... posted Wed Nov 10 2004 20:57:12 by Gmonney
Canon 17-85mm Is Experience posted Fri Nov 5 2004 12:35:18 by Maiznblu_757
Canon 17-40L? posted Fri Sep 3 2004 23:12:18 by BA747-436
One More Canon Vs Sigma Lens Battle posted Fri Nov 7 2003 18:16:35 by JoakimE
Nikon 80-200 F2.8D ED-N Vs Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX? posted Tue Apr 1 2003 00:02:45 by Richie777
Canon Eos 30D Vs Digital Rebel XTi posted Thu Jul 12 2007 04:12:31 by Ceph
Request Opinion On Sigma AF 70-300mm F2.8 posted Sun Apr 2 2006 15:13:05 by AirMalta