6 out of 10 points and recommendedcheap, lightweightAF slow, sometimes inaccurate
This is good for a cheap lens. I couldn't use my 50 1.8 for many shots. I've owned it for three years and found that I could only take some close-up shots to my satisfaction.reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $80)
8 out of 10 points and recommendedzoom range is flexible, IS, quality "L" constructiononly 2 stop IS, zoom nopt smooth after a while
I loved this lens! It got stolen last month, but was quickly becoming a favorite. Great for birding and wildlife. Ultimate zoo lens!reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $1,200)
Too slow for indoor shots.
9 out of 10 points and recommendedzoom range, IS, constructionf/4
I love this lens! After having my gear stolen last month, this is the only lens that was stolen that I repurchased. Great zoom range. 24mm might be too long on a crop body, but I love it on my 30D. It's wide enough for me.reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $1,200)
9 out of 10 points and recommendedIS, fast 2.8, good for sports and my marching bandI am sometimes wishing for more range, price
I've always wanted this lens, and bought it last month. Terrific quality! Great wide open, and even better after stopping down. I wish I had bought this earlier!reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $1,599)
I've taken great shots of my marching band under stadium lighting, and they turned out fantastic.
I owned a 70-200 f/4 in the past, and hardly used it. Now, I use the 2.8IS all the time. IS lenses spoil me!
8 out of 10 points and recommendedlightweight, great colorf/4 aperture is slow
I owned this lens and then sold it on ebay. It was good, but I just couldn't like it enough. I eventually got a 2.8 IS version and love it much more.reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $600)
I would recommend this lens as a lightweight or traveling telephoto lens.
6 out of 10 points and not recommendedlight, cheapflimsy, not a good lens wide open, manual focus ring a joke
This lens came bundled with my old 300D, so it was a good starter lens for me. I kept the thing stopped down at 7.1 or f/8 most of the time, so things came out pretty good most of the time. Any larger apertures would result in softness. Don't even think about manual focusing with this thing.reviewed November 25th, 2006
7 out of 10 points and recommendedcheaper than canon version, comes with a good case, blackmine was soft wide open, even after recalibration
I had a bum copy after purchasing new, so I sent it into Sigma to have it repaired. It came back a little better, but was still bad (Not sharp at all at 2.8. It was great at f/4 and above). I found that many people had this problem with several types of sigma lenses (I also had problems with a sigma 30 1.4). I sold it on ebay.reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $750)
The only reason I recommend this lens is because of the number of peopl who have received good copies. I have just not had good luck with Sigma Corporation.
5 out of 10 points and not recommendedcheaper than canon 35 1.4mine wasn't sharp at 1.4, could not focus well even after sending to sigma
My copy was horrible out of the box. It front-focused horribly. I made the decision to send it in to Sigma instead of playing roulette with the mail-order store. I sent it in twice to be fixed, and although it came back a little better, it could not focus at infinity. It produced sharp shots only up to six feet! It is an actual problem that several people have had, if you search other forums. I decuded to cut my losses and sell my lens.reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $400)
Although Sigma works for many people out there, my personal experiences have led me never buy Sigma again. I'm sticking with Canon lenses.