Reading mode: Light Dark

New Sigma 1770DC v Canon 1785IS

Go to last post
I see very minor optics differences. Looks like the debate between these lenses is starting to heat up. I think both lenses make sense depending on usage.
 
You steal all these lenses and then sneak in at night and return the ones you don't like.

Am I close? ;-)

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
most of the lenses I am able to sell off fairly easily if I don't choose to keep them (whether eBay, craigslist, or locally). I've got a bunch of photog peers (from an old photog school) as well as friends who shoot Canon who are always wanting to buy lenses and try new things out. Works out perfect for me.

I actually got this 1770DC from B&H (I don't get a lot of stuff from these guys). No one else really has them in stock yet. I don't think I am keeping it (although it's tempting), and will be selling it off to a friend this weekend who wants it already. LOL..

so no, you're not close ;)
ljfinger said:
You steal all these lenses and then sneak in at night and return
the ones you don't like.

Am I close? ;-)

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
 
It makes me glad I have the Canon 17-85IS. Not a lot of f2.8 in the Sigma, quite a bit of flare. OK, the Canon isn't as sharp at the wide end, but correcting the CA helps a lot. And the IS is just fantastic.

I hope that whenever it becomes available you will be able to get hold of a Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I'm hoping that will give the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 a run for its money.

The macro capabilities of the Sigma are remarkably good. Way better than the Canon, and also way better than the Sigma 18-125 I used to have. This really does look like a capable walkaround lens for people who do not value IS.
fStopJojo said:
just posted at my site some test shots:
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/17701785

--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
Click to expand...
--

Slowly learning to use the DRebel (only around 20.000 shots) and now also the Fuji F11.
Public pictures at http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~debra/photos/
 
Paul De Bra said:
It makes me glad I have the Canon 17-85IS. Not a lot of f2.8 in the
Sigma, quite a bit of flare. OK, the Canon isn't as sharp at the
wide end, but correcting the CA helps a lot. And the IS is just
fantastic.
Click to expand...
yeh, i've used a whole lot of standard zooms and i'd agree that having IS is such an invaluable boon to have as a walkaround.
Paul De Bra said:
I hope that whenever it becomes available you will be able to get
hold of a Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I'm hoping that will give the Sigma
18-50 f2.8 a run for its money.
Click to expand...
i'm going to venture to say they'll be similar, both remarkably good optically. the sigma 1850 is a proven, solid optical performer, and tamron tends to make good glass too.
Paul De Bra said:
The macro capabilities of the Sigma are remarkably good. Way better
than the Canon, and also way better than the Sigma 18-125 I used to
have. This really does look like a capable walkaround lens for
people who do not value IS.
Click to expand...
you've hit one of the fun and strong points of the new 1770DC: it's close up ability. 1:2 ratio in this little zoom makes for a fun/creative bugger.
Paul De Bra said:
fStopJojo said:
just posted at my site some test shots:
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/17701785

--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
Click to expand...
--
Slowly learning to use the DRebel (only around 20.000 shots) and
now also the Fuji F11.
Public pictures at http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~debra/photos/
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
 
jojo: if you still have that 17-70mm Sigma, can you show us one people image & 1 scenic, if not a hassle. Any compatibality issues with the Canon body?
Thanks a lot for all of your input.
DH
 
nope, only the product shots were "sloppy"; i took my precious time with the test shots. i always do for those.
Lemming51 said:
The sloppy product shots tend to leave the impression that the test
shots taken with each lens were done with a similar lack of
attention to detail or expertise.
fStopJojo said:
just posted at my site some test shots:
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/17701785

--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
 
Great insight thanks jojo, I've been waiting a while for some reviews of this one.

Just one note on price, here in the UK the Canon has a RRP of £599 and the Sigma £269, that's a pretty huge difference. Street prices are different probably because the Canon has been out so long.

Cheapest ebay prices are around £245($425) for the Sigma and £345($600) for the Canon, both the cheapest prices off ebay inc delivery. Still more of a difference than in the USA by reading your review though.
 
The canon is definately sharper at 70mm which is both the shots you mention, the sigma looks a little sharper at 17mm with less CA, has F2.8 and is about 1/3rd cheaper. Not all bad.
 
making accurate assessments on these 2 lenses, the basic point being that each one has its strengths and weaknesses. as always, deciding between these lenses depends on each person and what each person "values more" in a walkaround. while i am keeping my canon, the sigma "grows" on you more and more especially for its amazing close focusing and ability to shoot at 1:2 reprod. [the canon is 1:5] but at day's end, the IS is a huge boon.

as for pricing, i didnt know the price difference was so great outside of the USA. that is a key factor more then.

--
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
 
One more time - maybe I will e-mail Chuck Westfall on this one.
This is what I would Love to see Canon make:

17-85mm 2.8 L IS - EF (not EF-s). To me that would be one Baddd boy lens. But then, it could be quite expensive. Or maybe even a 14-55mm 2.8 or 3.5 USM EF lens. Right now, I'm not gonna hold my breath.

One more question for jojo. Have you ever made an enlargement from your 17-85 bigger than an 11 X14?
 
David Hurt said:
One more time - maybe I will e-mail Chuck Westfall on this one.
This is what I would Love to see Canon make:
17-85mm 2.8 L IS - EF (not EF-s). To me that would be one Baddd
boy lens. But then, it could be quite expensive.
Click to expand...
Canon made a prototype of a 24-135/2.8L IS and didn't produce it because of its huge size. An EF 17-85/2.8L IS would be as big or bigger. Figure about 3kg and $2500.
Funkyd3121 said:
Or maybe even a
14-55mm 2.8 or 3.5 USM EF lens. Right now, I'm not gonna hold my
breath.
Click to expand...
Something like that would be a lot more possible.
Funkyd3121 said:
One more question for jojo. Have you ever made an enlargement from
your 17-85 bigger than an 11 X14?
Click to expand...
I've printed 13x19s from a Rebel XT and 17-85IS. They are fantastic.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top