Sigma 24-70mm HSM 2.8

Qarik · January 28, 2009

hmm..I heard canon mounts haved shipped already. Has anyone seen a review on this lens yet? I few minutes on google only show previews! :huh

ziggy53 · January 28, 2009

No reviews that I could find. Sigma has both lenses' specifications up at their site and it does look like the HSM version is a new animal.

Differences old/new:

Construction: 13 Elements in 14 Groups/14 Elements in 12 Groups
Minimum Aperture: F32/F22
MFD: 40cm / 15.7 in. vs 38cm / 15 in.
Maximum Magnification: 1:3.8/1:5.3

The HSM is also considerably shorter in length: Diameter 88.7mm X Length 115.5mm (3.5 in. x 4.5 in.)/Diameter 88.6mm X Length 94.7mm
(3.5 in. x 3.7 in.)

Looking at the MTF charts it looks like the HSM will have similar contrast and sharpness at the short end (24mm) and somewhat improved attributes at 70mm.

The HSM is considerably more expensive and, since Sigma says they will keep the older lens in production, it looks like the HSM will be quite a bit faster to focus.

Qarik · January 28, 2009

Thanks for info. It appears to be almost double the price of the non HSM which would really not be worth it for better marginal sharpness at 70mm. But sigma has really been putting out some good stuff recently that has rivaled the OEM lens. I am hoping this is the case for this lens as well. I guess we will see shortly.

cameralogic · January 28, 2009

Qarik wrote:

Thanks for info. It appears to be almost double the price of the non HSM which would really not be worth it for better marginal sharpness at 70mm. But sigma has really been putting out some good stuff recently that has rivaled the OEM lens. I am hoping this is the case for this lens as well. I guess we will see shortly.

What do you anticipate using the lens for? I own a Sigma HSM and I shoot indoor events and outdoor sports with it.

Manfr3d · January 29, 2009

I'm interested in the lens as well. Looking nice: http://dpnow.com/5276.html

Tee Why · January 29, 2009

I see them for sale online so I guess they are shipping. At $900 I think it's overpriced but as with most Sigma lenses, I would expect the price to drop to about $699 or so in a year.

Compared to the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 lens, the older non Sigma 24-70 is very comparable, so I'd think this should be in the same ball park with more compact design and a better AF system as well.

If you can hold on for a while, it maybe worth waiting for the price to drop before you buy it.

Qarik · January 30, 2009

hmm..supposed shipping since jan 25th. *somone* should have posted a hands on review by now?

nothing!

Manfr3d · January 30, 2009

Here in Europe the lens is listed as "available in 6 weeks".

Qarik · February 2, 2009

very strange..still no review out there and the cannon mounts have been available since the 25th of january. lol..maybe cannon folk are too snooty for sigma lens *zing*

Manfr3d · February 3, 2009

i dont't think its available yet. There are certain shops that sometimes list gear as available even if it isn't... you know the ones where you wait 6 weeks for a shipment and where they've never heard of costumer service

Arvan · February 3, 2009

looks like a sweet lens for the no-needing person of L..But the price ive seen here in sweden..Just not going to cut the cake..I mean i rather put up 1000-1500 swedish kronors and get the 24-70 L . .

To buy a 3rd party lens with this price and with such close price to the " real deal " is not a thing i would do..And for the extra 1000 kr ( 110 usd roughly ) you get weathersealing..Not like that is going to help on my 1000d anyway

Oscarc · February 3, 2009

Arvan wrote:

looks like a sweet lens for the no-needing person of L..But the price ive seen here in sweden..Just not going to cut the cake..I mean i rather put up 1000-1500 swedish kronors and get the 24-70 L . .

To buy a 3rd party lens with this price and with such close price to the " real deal " is not a thing i would do..And for the extra 1000 kr ( 110 usd roughly ) you get weathersealing..Not like that is going to help on my 1000d anyway

To me the big advantage of the Sigma is the weight -- from what I've heard, it's going to be much lighter than the Canon.

Qarik · February 20, 2009

still no sigma 24-70mm hsm reviews?
every day I wake up and do my google search for reviews on this lens..gah!!:cry still nothing even though it has been out on canon mount since late jan.

has anyon seen a review yet?

Art Scott · February 20, 2009

I simply googled SIGMA 24-70HSM and got a whole slew of returns

dunno

including this one:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092303sigma_24_70_lens.asp

UUUUhhhhhhhh that is for DP REVIEW'S review of the 24-70HSM:D:D:D:D
from back in 2008

an one from an "L" glass user:

http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/sigma_24_70mm_f28_ex_dg_hsm/

and my seach results here:

http://www.google.com/search?q=sigma+24-70+hsm&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

cmason · February 20, 2009

Scott, not sure if press releases are really what I would consider 'reviews'.

That being said, I haven't seen reviews in the usual places either, but, I suspect the newer lens is quite similar in performance to the existing 24-70 2.8, but with HSM:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-24-70mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-Lens-Review.aspx

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/318-sigma-af-24-70mm-f28-ex-dg-macro-canon-lab-test-report--review

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/2470exl

Qarik · February 20, 2009

scott none of theose are hands on reviews..they are all "previews" and "I can't wait till it comes out" links. heh

I scoured google with multple search parameters with no luck. Not even amazon has buyer reviews.

Qarik · February 20, 2009

Cmason,

Hopefully it is even better than the standard 24-70mm which is good but not quite the qaulity of the nikkor veriosn forexample. There are 2 reasons which I think it may be. The HSM version price at $899 is over double the non-HSM version. I don't believe the a simple addition of HSM would warrant that. Also sigma has recently been putting out lenses that are arguably better than the OEM lens. Take the highly regarded sigma 50mm 1.4 for example. I am thinking they are continuing in this vein for this new lens.

cmason · February 20, 2009

Qarik wrote:

Cmason,

Hopefully it is even better than the standard 24-70mm which is good but not quite the qaulity of the nikkor veriosn forexample. There are 2 reasons which I think it may be. The HSM version price at $899 is over double the non-HSM version. I don't believe the a simple addition of HSM would warrant that. Also sigma has recently been putting out lenses that are arguably better than the OEM lens. Take the highly regarded sigma 50mm 1.4 for example. I am thinking they are continuing in this vein for this new lens.

don't know, hopefully they will improve it.

However, as a contrary example: the Canon 70-200 f/4L is a very well regarded lens, and Canon recently added an IS version of the same lens, which obviously does wonders in situations where IS is handy, but otherwise, was not a change in the optics (at least that reviews can determine). So it appears to be a simple addition of IS, however this resulted in a doubling of price.

70-200 f/4L: $569
70-200 f/4 IS L: $1,100

kini62 · February 20, 2009

Qarik wrote:

Cmason,

Also sigma has recently been putting out lenses that are arguably better than the OEM lens. Take the highly regarded sigma 50mm 1.4 for example. I am thinking they are continuing in this vein for this new lens.

Not exactly. It's better from wide open to about F2.0. By 2.8 they're about the same and from 2.8 up the OEM 50s perform better. So the Sigma may be better in one area but not better all around.

Plus with Sigma you play the QC crapshoot with much worse odds than you do with OEM.

You also get the benefit of having to almost always send your Sigma lens in for "calibration" since it's highly likely it won't focus worth a sh!t.

Then there's the Jeckly and Hyde Sigma customer service. Never know which one you're going to get.

Then there's the pathetic resale value.

All and all it's usually worth it to stay with OEM.

BTW I own one Sigma lens and will never own another.

Gene

Art Scott · February 20, 2009

kini62 wrote:

Not exactly. It's better from wide open to about F2.0. By 2.8 they're about the same and from 2.8 up the OEM 50s perform better. So the Sigma may be better in one area but not better all around.

Plus with Sigma you play the QC crapshoot with much worse odds than you do with OEM.
You also get the benefit of having to almost always send your Sigma lens in for "calibration" since it's highly likely it won't focus worth a sh!t.

In over 20+ yrs of owning and shooting Sigma have I never had a problem and I am not that lucky to have never purchased a bad copy of a lens.
I have had plenty of bad camera bodies (pro models, nikon, pentax, fuji and minolta) that had to be returned for trade outs or repair from day one.

Then there's the Jeckly and Hyde Sigma customer service. Never know which one you're going to get.

Have always had great customer service.......in fact knowing I had a lens that needed servicing I called Sigma and was refered to a service center less than a 50 miles from my house......not that they (Sigma) did not want to service it.....but they knew their rate standard was more than it would cost from the service center near me. again I have always had polite curtious customer service from Sigma.

Then there's the pathetic resale value.

I have always gotten a fair market value for my Sigma Lensesas well as my Nikon, Pentax and Minolta lenses......never have I hadto give them away.

All and all it's usually worth it to stay with OEM.

BTW I own one Sigma lens and will never own another.

Gene

Comments in bold above

kini62 · February 20, 2009

Art Scott wrote:

Comments in bold above

Well I guess I'm just unlucky then. It only takes one really, really bad experience to have an affect.

As far as Sigma service being kind and curtious. That does not equate to competent. They can be the nicest people in the world but if they can't or won't fix the problem, who cares?

Gene

Robinivich · February 21, 2009

Qarik wrote:

The HSM version price at $899 is over double the non-HSM version. I don't believe the a simple addition of HSM would warrant that.

cmason wrote:

However, as a contrary example: the Canon 70-200 f/4L is a very well regarded lens, and Canon recently added an IS version of the same lens, which obviously does wonders in situations where IS is handy, but otherwise, was not a change in the optics (at least that reviews can determine). So it appears to be a simple addition of IS, however this resulted in a doubling of price.

If you guys want to get from speculation to knowing for sure about the possibility of design changes, head on over to manufacturer sites and check out either MTF graphs or lens diagrams.

(linked images from sigmaphoto.com)

The HSM is on the left, and has a design comprising 14 elements in 12 groups. The DG MACRO is on the right, with it's optical design of 13 elements in 14 groups (?!?!). Red lines should represent contrast, Green sharpness.

As for the Canon teles you mention cmason, IS isn't as simple as a new autofocus motor, the IS is 20 elements in 15 groups, the non-IS is 16 in 13. But your statement is certainly correct, both are still razor sharp, contrasty lenses, they just take different optical paths to get to the same place

As for the sigma quality control, I've got a couple sigmas and I'd buy again if I find a need that they serve well. Try and remember, not to minimize Kini62's unfortunate experience, but forums magnify issues out of proportion, they make defects that may only be occasional into seeming plagues. It's certainly true though that certain lenses have a lot of the interest taken away when I read reviews where the reviewer had to go through 3 copies to get one worthy representative.

Art Scott · February 21, 2009

kini62 wrote:

Well I guess I'm just unlucky then. It only takes one really, really bad experience to have an affect.

As far as Sigma service being kind and curtious. That does not equate to competent. They can be the nicest people in the world but if they can't or won't fix the problem, who cares?

Gene

Yeah having one bad experience could have an everlasting effect on some people........

A curiousity: if you have a flat tire do you stop buying that brand?
When your hair stylist accidentally nicks you do you automatically find a new stylist??? Just curious........no real need to answer.

As for Sigma not being competent......well.....by assisting me to get my lens serviced for less money and in less time than it would have taken for UPS just to deliver to them........I don't know......maybe that is showing just how incompetent they are.......you think...........

One thing is for sure and true about all camera and lens manufacturers....everyone of them will make a true piece of junk every once in a while and some one will buy it and swear the whole line before and after is worhtless and the qc is crap and the whole dang company is incompetent...........if you hang in camera shops long enuff you will even hear Hassleblad mention in their and Rollei also......I have and i just chuckle at the source....................

Qarik · February 27, 2009

finally an indepth review on the sigma 24-70mm hsm
http://review.fengniao.com/123/1231810.html

unfortunately it is all in chinese!!!

around page 5 or 6 though are MTF charts compaing to the cannon 24-70L.

The sigma wipes up.

We must have some chinese digrinners around? Anyone care to summarice the main points of the review?

ziggy53 · February 27, 2009

The last 2 paragraphs read (roughly):

"In short, this time, the Sigma 24-70 can be regarded as proud playing a pretty stand up battle to win the confidence. And this win is not a small-scale small victory, but in many respects, a comprehensive win, local advantage is also very prominent.

Now, we return to our heads to look at this lens pricing, the price of around 6,000 may seem expensive, but actually cost-effective or very high. Need to know it and head for the difference between the original enough to buy another one of the lens. Unless you have serious original complex, unless you have many money that they can not care about cost-effective, then whether it is worthwhile to buy Sigma 24-70, in front of the computer you certainly already have their own answers!"

Qarik · February 27, 2009

ziggy53 wrote:

The last 2 paragraphs read (roughly):

"In short, this time, the Sigma 24-70 can be regarded as proud playing a pretty stand up battle to win the confidence. And this win is not a small-scale small victory, but in many respects, a comprehensive win, local advantage is also very prominent.

Now, we return to our heads to look at this lens pricing, the price of around 6,000 may seem expensive, but actually cost-effective or very high. Need to know it and head for the difference between the original enough to buy another one of the lens. Unless you have serious original complex, unless you have many money that they can not care about cost-effective, then whether it is worthwhile to buy Sigma 24-70, in front of the computer you certainly already have their own answers!"

lol ziggy I didn't know you were fluent in Chinese.

Scott_Quier · February 28, 2009

ziggy53 wrote:

The last 2 paragraphs read (roughly):

"In short, this time, the Sigma 24-70 can be regarded as proud playing a pretty stand up battle to win the confidence. And this win is not a small-scale small victory, but in many respects, a comprehensive win, local advantage is also very prominent.

Now, we return to our heads to look at this lens pricing, the price of around 6,000 may seem expensive, but actually cost-effective or very high. Need to know it and head for the difference between the original enough to buy another one of the lens. Unless you have serious original complex, unless you have many money that they can not care about cost-effective, then whether it is worthwhile to buy Sigma 24-70, in front of the computer you certainly already have their own answers!"

6,000 ..... what currency and what's the conversion rate to green backs (OK, I'm a little provincial:D)

ziggy53 · February 28, 2009

I am merging these 3 threads about the Sigma 24-70mm, f2.8 HSM.

All I did was run the last 2 paragraphs against the Google translator:

http://www.google.com/translate

I understand that the new HSM version will be around $880USD (street price).

It is not a good idea to compare the MTF charts from different manufacturers because the testing procedures are not standardized.

The old Sigma 24-70mm, f2.8 is a pretty good zoom and, like I said before, "Looking at the MTF charts it looks like the HSM will have similar contrast and sharpness at the short end (24mm) and somewhat improved attributes at 70mm."

If you can't trust Sigma's own MTF charts then who are you going to trust?

Cygnus Studios · February 28, 2009

Scott_Quier wrote:

6,000 ..... what currency and what's the conversion rate to green backs (OK, I'm a little provincial:D)

B&H has it at $899 for Canon and Nikon mount, although Nikon mount not is stock yet

Scott_Quier · February 28, 2009

ziggy53 wrote:

I am merging these 3 threads about the Sigma 24-70mm, f2.8 HSM.

All I did was run the last 2 paragraphs against the Google translator:

http://www.google.com/translate

I understand that the new HSM version will be around $880USD (street price).

It is not a good idea to compare the MTF charts from different manufacturers because the testing procedures are not standardized.

The old Sigma 24-70mm, f2.8 is a pretty good zoom and, like I said before, "Looking at the MTF charts it looks like the HSM will have similar contrast and sharpness at the short end (24mm) and somewhat improved attributes at 70mm."

If you can't trust Sigma's own MTF charts then who are you going to trust?

Just went to the B&H site to look at what they wanted for it - before I found the merged threads - and then I told my wife that there's a new toy I want. Her response? "Does that mean I get the spinning wheel and loom I want?"

ntotrr · March 2, 2009

Art Scott wrote:

Yeah having one bad experience could have an everlasting effect on some people........

A curiousity: if you have a flat tire do you stop buying that brand?
When your hair stylist accidentally nicks you do you automatically find a new stylist??? Just curious........no real need to answer.

As for Sigma not being competent......well.....by assisting me to get my lens serviced for less money and in less time than it would have taken for UPS just to deliver to them........I don't know......maybe that is showing just how incompetent they are.......you think...........

One thing is for sure and true about all camera and lens manufacturers....everyone of them will make a true piece of junk every once in a while and some one will buy it and swear the whole line before and after is worhtless and the qc is crap and the whole dang company is incompetent...........if you hang in camera shops long enuff you will even hear Hassleblad mention in their and Rollei also......I have and i just chuckle at the source....................

I've been a Sigma DSLR user for some years now. I can tel you that Sigma USA takes great steps to "take care" of the SUG (Sigma User Group). On orgainzed shoots, they send a rep with lenses for us. When I've had an occasional issue with a lens or camera, I drive over to their headquarters and get taken care of immediately. I accidently damage a lens and it was repaired in under one hour on the spot. They even took me out to lunch while I was waiting!

Now all of this means nothing to someone who pays their hard-earned cash for a lens and then is disappointed. I know non-Sigma DSLR users who report great experience with Sigma's customer service. I've not know bad service nor have I experienced the spotty QC I hear of. True, their is an on-going issue with the SD14 but something that won't turn me off to theor product.