Sigma 17-70 os
Sigma 17-70 os
Jul 25, 2011
Why does this lens test out so bad. Or am I missing something? I have this lens & it seems fine. Maybe I don't know how to read the chart??
There are other lens tests that have been positive (i.e., lenstip), but, since they vary and your own eye does not, go with what you see. I have the lens and enjoy it. Does it have limitations? Sure. It is a versatile, value lens much less expensive than most of its competitors. Perhaps you could post a pic or two that you think rises above the review. I think lens testing websites have limitations and are subject to a skeptical approach. For just one example, they cannot test for copy variation. As CSNY sang, "Love the one you're with."
I understand what you are saying & I agree. The lens works perfectly fine for me on a D90 & 5100 but according to that chart it looks like crap. I thought maybe I am reading the chart wrong.
It could be true, that the Lens is crap! but they are talking about the one they tested.
Mine is not OS and is slightly back focused but it is not Crap, actually @ 70mm is quite close to my 70mm prime.
This Lens starts at F2.8, has macro capabilities (although not 1:1 but its there), sharp across the frame, small, inexpensive; all in all a great Lens.
I have a 24-70 F2.8 EX but prefer by far the 17-70.
Just a very quick glance tells me that you have two different apertures, but, more importantly, two different cameras. Comparing apples to apples is one of the benchmarks of scientific analysis. I looked at this website myself before I made my purchase and was able to find much more favorable comparisons. Unless you are thinking of selling and you are happy, why worry?
Thanks for the replies but could someone click on the link I inserted in my first post & tell me what they think.
There is always copy variation and sometimes a lens that is tested is not the best copy. That's why you need to look at more than one pro review before forming an opinion. I have the Sigma 17-70mm OS and I tested more than one copy against the Nikon 16-85 VR and chose the Sigma. That being said it doesn't seem possible that the Sigma would be this bad. Even a bad copy would sharpen up stopped down to f5.6.
Profile is wrong, I've been on Dpreview since June 2006.
There is variation with Sigma.
I had gotten a not so good copy and went back to my LCS and did some in-house testing against another sample and the other sample was significantly better.
This is a very good lens that in my testing (and MHO) trumps a good Nikon 18-105.
Regards Craig - D90