----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary A. Thurlow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 8:51 AM
Subject: EOS Sigma 17-35 HSM


> For some reason, I have not received any messages fro the list for over a
> week.  I posted this message and never saw it posted and, of course, saw
no
> responses.  So please - I'd like to have your input.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
>
> I find that my normal wide angle of 28-105mm (Canon USM) is no longer wide
> enough when connected to my D30.  I would love to get the newest Canon
wide
> angle zoom, but I don't have the admission price.  Absent someone giving
me
> one, I am, for the first time, considering non-Canon glass.
>
> As you can see by the Subject, I am considering the Sigma 17-35mm wide
> angle zoom.  Its specifications look pretty nice, as it goes from f/2.8-4,
> it incorporates aspherical lens elements in the front, as well as rear
lens
> groups.
>
> It also has internal focusing and an included perfect hood. What I have no
> experience with is the HSM drive that is purportedly "almost" as good as
> Canon's USM.  I must admit that I am spoiled by USM lenses and couldn't
> accept anything less than speed and silence.
>
> So my question is - does anyone have some practical experience with this
> lens in comparison to the equivalent Canon?  How good is the HSM?  I have
> one experience with a Sigma lens and it was horrible.  That's when I swore
> to never buy anything but Canon.
>
> Will I be disappointed by this lens' performance or is the top of the line
> Sigma equivalent to Canon "L" glass?  Thanks for any and all help you can
> provide.
>
> Gary Thurlow
>
I have this Sigma lens, and I'm pretty happy with it.  Lens flare seems
pretty much under control, and distortion isn't too bad for a lens this
wide, on a par with the Canon 17-35, but not as good as the newer 16-35.
BUT!  The HSM on this lens is of the "micromotor" variety, fairly fast, but
noisy.  And no full time manual focus.  Construction seems pretty good,
sturdy, but who's to know what's going on inside.  I've had the lens for
less than 2 years, and used it lightly, but I haven't had any reliability
issues with it.
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to