RCE Foto

(i) On JuzaPhoto, please disable adblockers (let's see why!)






Login LogoutJoin JuzaPhoto!
JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).

By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.


OK, I confirm


You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here

Accept CookiesCustomizeRefuse Cookies

Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX DG HSM : Specifications and Opinions




Reviews

The opinions of JuzaPhoto members who use this lens.. (Click here to come back to the main page of the Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX DG HSM)




What do you think about this lens?


Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 251000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.





Google Translate  The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.


avatarjunior
sent on January 31, 2017

Pros: Price optical yield strength

Cons: Autofocus sometimes capricious ....

Opinion: I bought this lens at a price I could not refuse (€ 150 !!!), made a few test shots to test if I had taken a rip-off or not, I realized that I got a great deal, more than affordable price I found in his hands a view to bad either. Absurd to compare it to the Nikon equivalent but even more absurd to pay certain figures for original optics if you are not professional. Made some shots with a friend to understand the differences between his Nikon 16-35 f4 and my paltry Sigma I find that this "glass" will enforce without problems, the FLARE occurs in certain conditions but also the Nik no joke, distortion minimal and negligible, good contrast and very life-like colors, no problem of over / under exposure autofocus sometimes uneven but this is the only weakness I found in comparison to the original, the highlight is the price ..... definitely I recommend it also because it is in used at attractive prices, much less than the 1,000 € of the Nik.rnP.S. tengo to point out that my sample has the small button for the AF / MF switch .... do not know what number it is but it works 100%

avatarsenior
sent on May 22, 2014

Pros: Crisp, light, good overall performance, construction, little AC

Cons: suffers from the flare, but the version DG much less vignetting at RT, but noticeable distortion corrected, filter diameter 82mm

Opinion: I purchased this objective (non-DG) because I needed a nice wide cheap prezzo.rnIl sigma has been proposed as the best among the options of buying a relatively cheap price for a good resa.rnA TA 2.8 is a little soft in the center but not a lot, but does not lose the edge vignetting is consistente.rnchiudendo to f8 sharpness is very good, the af is annoying but not bad; I also do not appreciate how many of the joint lining to Sigma, rnl'esemplare in my possession has no flaws in the headlights, so that as the only defect has the far right corner with a considerable drop in sharpness, but it is a very small angle the frame.rnA f16 starts to drop sharpness, f22 to lose tantissimo.rnNon use this light above the 24mm so I can not say, but the distortion is corrected and the vignetting is reduced considerevolmente.rncon the use of filters is a difficult use, but with a 100mm system filter holder with adapter rings WA everything is resolved without any sort of trouble as vignetting or otherwise.

avatarsenior
sent on August 30, 2013

Pros: Price, AF, FF format, costruzione.rn

Cons: Do you suffer from flare, coating Sigma

Opinion: I bought it as a "wide-angle" for APS-H as an alternative to 17/40. I consider it a bell'obbiettivo when you consider that it costs about half of the Canon and how quality and features is very, very similar (after a test between the two). In my opinion for quality / price ratio I see no other better optics for the FF.rnSe '"activities" were not the main landscapes (where spending more is better) I highly recommend it as a generic wide angle on APS-H or FF.

avatarsenior
sent on April 05, 2013

Pros: Price, lightness, velocita'af, minimal vignetting ..

Cons: little resistance to flare ..

Opinion: Possess this optic from one year in combination with a d3, I also tested for a certain period the equivalent nikon f4 .. frankly beyond the little resistance to flare in full backlight and a slight lack of sharpness workable quietly in pp. with a light mask contrast does not make me regret the expensive (relatively) nikon 16-35 f4, Sigma e'ben built with a nice touch and a lightning af if we think of a wide angle, but the highlight .. It is the price of less than 200 euro on the used market, I think a deal .. Optical irreplaceable ..





 ^

JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.

Mobile Version - juza.ea@gmail.com - Terms of use and Privacy - Cookie Preferences - P. IVA 01501900334 - REA 167997- PEC juzaphoto@pec.it

May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me