Jonathan-Mac
Well-Known Member
Where is that? Here in Spain it's €1349 less the €150 discount, so €1199.
L-MOUNT Forum
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 Contemporary
- Thread starter Markuswelder
- Start date
Where is that? Here in Spain it's €1349 less the €150 discount, so €1199.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Netherlands, same shop I just ordered the 28-70. Here
Markuswelder
Well-Known Member
This is just a personal thing, but it all depends on what/how you shoot. I don't really have the use for the 105mm end. I don't even use my Lumix 85mm 1.8 all that much, and that's the longest lens I own for my S5. So I'd personally go for the 2.8 zoom. As I like the larger aperture more. But that's just me.
I actually still own the Canon EF 24-105 L, never gelled with it on my Canon cameras, tried it on my S5 with an adaptor, nothing has changed
Now, if someone did a 17 or 18-50mm f2 or 2.8, my ears would prick up for sure
I actually still own the Canon EF 24-105 L, never gelled with it on my Canon cameras, tried it on my S5 with an adaptor, nothing has changed
Now, if someone did a 17 or 18-50mm f2 or 2.8, my ears would prick up for sure
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Received my brand spanking new 28-70, this one is more optical flawed than the previous 2nd hand item. But focus motor was quit though.. I have requested a return label.
- Panasonic - DC-S5M2
- 28 - 70mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary 021
- 70.0 mm
- ƒ/2.8
- 1/80 sec
- Pattern
- Auto exposure
- ISO 800
Markuswelder
Well-Known Member
There's got to be something wrong with your camera, to have killed 2 focus systems in 2 separate lenses.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Focus and focus motor is just fine
, aberrations are not. It really only happens on close focus, but I think it Is not acceptable. My camera seems then to only devour Sigma 28-70 lenses... really love this lens, that's why I ordered a new one. But for this kind of money (full retail) this is unacceptable (at least by me). Also my last try on this lens.RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
I did some more tests, and it only happens on closest focus distance, at 70mm. If at 35mm I reframe the image so that the object is same size (only background differs), so with 35mm closer at the object this does not happen. If I'm like a meter away (more then double the min focus distance for 70mm) it is not happening. Can some owners try this ? closest focus possible on a black/white at 70/2.8 ? Then I know if this is normal for this lens design, or that is something wrong with it.
On my first entry today with the LoCa I wrote quit, but I ment quiet. So focus, and focus motor is good, fast and silent and spot on.
On my first entry today with the LoCa I wrote quit, but I ment quiet. So focus, and focus motor is good, fast and silent and spot on.
GeorgeHudetz
Well-Known Member
Christopher Frost's review does point out that close-up performance is not good (I think he used the term "dreadful") wide-open at 70mm. Better at 28, as you found.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Forgot about this yt video. So as designed. I have 30 days to decide. Maybe a bit too harsh too soon. It complements the 70-300 and 16-35 very well. The 24-70 dg dn ii does the same thing close-up @70mm 2.8. And the 45/2.8 also. Maybe a Sigma thingy? To quote close focus figures too close, just for the specs? If they had limited this lens close focus at 60cm at 70mm they would have been roasted also.
I like to get close-up with flowers for example.
No zoom is perfect, 24-105 has “only” F4 and harsh bokeh at times. But also bulky to what I was used to, but on the ok side. It’s also not the sharpest or most contrasty lens. But overall very good.
16-35 is a lot better in sharpness, contrast and micro contrast. Giving the image almost a 3D effect.
The 28-70 is a bit sharper / contrasty then the 24-105, certainly when both af f4 but also already wide-open. Except wide open close focus. In that area the 24-105 excels. This Sigma feels less sturdy then the other two lenses. I even like the s primes build quality better, and those are better weather sealed.
The first one I had I liked very much. But somehow, maybe because I paid a lot more for this new one, I’m a bit more demanding somehow. At least I can now look beyond this close focus issue. It’s as designed and didn’t notice it on the first one so it got me a bit by surprise. I was sitting at my desk and it was one of the first snaps I took with it.
I like to get close-up with flowers for example.
No zoom is perfect, 24-105 has “only” F4 and harsh bokeh at times. But also bulky to what I was used to, but on the ok side. It’s also not the sharpest or most contrasty lens. But overall very good.
16-35 is a lot better in sharpness, contrast and micro contrast. Giving the image almost a 3D effect.
The 28-70 is a bit sharper / contrasty then the 24-105, certainly when both af f4 but also already wide-open. Except wide open close focus. In that area the 24-105 excels. This Sigma feels less sturdy then the other two lenses. I even like the s primes build quality better, and those are better weather sealed.
The first one I had I liked very much. But somehow, maybe because I paid a lot more for this new one, I’m a bit more demanding somehow. At least I can now look beyond this close focus issue. It’s as designed and didn’t notice it on the first one so it got me a bit by surprise. I was sitting at my desk and it was one of the first snaps I took with it.
Markuswelder
Well-Known Member
Ahhhh right. I thought you'd killed 2 focus systems one after the other.
I've never noticed it with mine, but I'm probably the worst person you could ask regarding chromatic aberrations. As some of my favourite lenses are well noted for it. Such as the m4/3 Panasonic Leica 25mm F1.4, Sigma 30mm F1.4, and Panasonic Leica 15mm F1.7, and Lumix 50mm F18. But, in return, they seem to be the lenses that give that 3 dimensional depth look.
I'll try it out, but I'm on holidays overseas at the minute, my mini computer I use for editing is back at our base, so might be a day or so before I manage it.
Last edited:
GeorgeHudetz
Well-Known Member
Yes, the 16-35 is quite good for that, particularly for wildflowers that are close to the ground. I have some nice shots somewhere where I relied on the 16-35 for a bunch of wildflower shots in Crested Butte when the flowers were at their peak & the camera was practically on the ground; mountain peaks in the background. I've been meaning to get a tripod that is well suited for that kind of work.