I am looking for a high quality wide zoom as a travel lens. Does anyone have experience with the new Sigma 24-70 f/2.8??

-- Leonard Forte (col@cujo2.icom.ca), June 23, 2001

Answers

if you really want high quality, the only way to go is canon. and in that range, the only lens is the 28-70 2.8L. yes it's (alot)more expensive than the sigma, but for USM, future compatibility, built, and image quality, i would go for the canon. another option is to find an used 28-80 f2.8/4 USM L, that might be a good choice also.

-- howard shen (hshen@praxdigim.com), June 25, 2001.

Why don't you try the Tokina 28-80/2.8 ATX PRO? Less expensive tan Canon, you know.... And the 1kg of the EF28-70 seems to be alot, I think, for a travel lens!!!!

-- Sylvain M (s_madelaine@hotmail.com), June 26, 2001.

IM CNSIDERING THE SIGMA 24-70 F2.8 MYSELF FOR PRO USE BUT FOR TRAVEL I HAVE BEEN USING A SIGMA 28-200 WITH A LOT OF SUCCESS. yOU NEED TO USE A SLIGHTLY FASTER FILM (200+) BUT FOR GENERAL NON PRO WORK ITS FANTASTIC VALUE AND V/GOOD QUALITY. LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU DECIDE ON

-- chris w (chris.williamson@kch-tr.sthames.nhs.uk), August 09, 2001.

i bought the sigma for just that reason - and for travel photos it's great, especially if you want to fit a lot in the frame the extra 9 degrees of coverage a 24mm gives you are worth their weight in gold(i used the 24mm setting mainly for architectural shots in vienna and munich). and the 2.8 is of course great - once you've had a zoom lens with a bit of speed you won't ever want to rejoin the "coach-class" with their 3.5-5.6's. the results i have got with it (so far only about 10 rolls of film) are just great - really proves what a lot of people have been saying about the shit canon lenses say - yes i said shit CANON lenses - that come with the kits most of start out with.

what i can't tell you is whether its as good as the canon 28-80 2.8 - probably not given the price difference AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT. if spending twice as much for what is probably a 5-10% increase in quality is what turns you on then go and stand over there with the "3rd party sucks" crowd. you gets what you pays for - all you have to decide is how much you want to pay!

at the end of the day its whats on the photo, not what name is on the lens. sometimes i wonder if the whole canon and nikon vs. the 3rd party debate is not really some obscure form of equipment snobbery.

And when they say your sigma will be junk in 5 years SO WHAT! in 5 years they will have made quantum leaps in lens design and you can use the money you saved not buying a canon lens to get yourself a nice new 3rd party lens once more - and improve your photography the real way by taking more photos (that you can now afford to get developed 'cos you're not saving like a madman for your lenses).

if i sound like an "i hate canon" loon, then you're in for a schock - canon make fantastic lenses, and as soon as i win lotto i'll replace all my 3rd party solutions with the real thing.

-- carl weller (carlweller@yahoo.com), November 30, 2001.