Sigma 17-70 OS or Canon 17-85 IS lens?

Started Oct 30, 2011 | Discussions
BobT Forum Pro • Posts: 13,192
Sigma 17-70 OS or Canon 17-85 IS lens?

Which lens would you suggest for use on my Canon T1i, and why?

Looking for a lens that covers W/A and Standard lengths, and currently have a possible offer for either of these particular lenses. So do not suggest any others at this time. Just, which of these 2. Other than a slightly faster aperture on the Sigma, is there much difference in IQ between them? Thanks

 BobT's gear list:BobT's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS +1 more
Franz Weber
Franz Weber Regular Member • Posts: 476
not easy, but if this helps...

The Canon has better colour, more reach on the long end, and a smoother autofocus.

The Sigma has less CA on the wide end, better image stabilizer, and IS one stop faster.

If you cant affort the even better Canon 15-85 wich I can really recomend and would be my first choice, I would go for the Sigma.

-- hide signature --

allways look on the bright side of live!

 Franz Weber's gear list:Franz Weber's gear list
Canon G7 X II Panasonic GH5 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic Lumix G 42.5mm F1.7 +3 more
mg_k Veteran Member • Posts: 3,030
Re: not easy, but if this helps...

Both of them are pretty bad imo and not worth the upgrade if you already have the kit lens (i,e, 18-55).

Have you considered Tamron 17-50 non-vc? Best bang for buck f2.8 general walkaround.

Or just continue saving and get Sigma 17-50 OS or 17-55.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kin2son/

 mg_k's gear list:mg_k's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R II Ricoh GR Leica M Typ 240 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Carl Zeiss Tele-Tessar T* 4/85 ZM +13 more
OP BobT Forum Pro • Posts: 13,192
Re: not easy, but if this helps...

mg_k,

In samples that I've seen of both of these lenses, they both appear to produce images that are just fine to my eye. What am I missing?

I am a little concerned about a somewhat common mechanical flaw inherent in the Canon lens. A zooming malfunction around the wide end of the zoom range. I'm also aware of the the IQ reported to be a smidge better in the earlier non-OS version of the Sigma. So neither is without their respective alleged flaws.

The Tammy 17-50 is just not long enough for me. Both lenses in question fit my desired zoom length and their prices are right. The 15-85 is just to pricy for me.

 BobT's gear list:BobT's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS +1 more
Dareshooter Veteran Member • Posts: 3,203
Re: not easy, but if this helps...

mg_k wrote:

Both of them are pretty bad imo and not worth the upgrade if you already have the kit lens (i,e, 18-55).

Have you considered Tamron 17-50 non-vc? Best bang for buck f2.8 general walkaround.

Or just continue saving and get Sigma 17-50 OS or 17-55.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kin2son/

That's a pretty bold statement to make.Have you owned both of the lenses that Bob is enquiring about ?

@ BobT. I once bought the 17-85 but wasn't that impressed with the image quality and it seemed to front focus.I took it back to the store and exchanged it for the original non IS 17-70 which has been my workhorse lens over the last three years.It's very sharp and rarely fails to find focus.The OS version is reputed to be just as good but I have no personal experience of it.

All lenses are prone to sample variation so good luck with whatever you choose

Goatruckus Contributing Member • Posts: 551
Re: not easy, but if this helps...

I have not used the 17-70, but I did own the 17-85 before I bought the T2i with the kit lens. After a week with the kit lens I sold the 17-85 because it was pretty soft in comparison . I was actually happy with the 17-85 on my older Xti before I tried the newer kit lens. I miss the range of the 17-85, but not the quality.

Save up for the 15-85!

mg_k wrote:

Both of them are pretty bad imo and not worth the upgrade if you already have the kit lens (i,e, 18-55).

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads