V. sharp with f5.6 and smaller.
Balanced design/ good weight.
Good bargain.

Cant think of any weaknesses

I've found this lense to be very useful and reasonably sharp. I think it's even better than the 24-120mm that I have for my Nikon. It focuses quick enough for my everyday photographs I would have no problem recommending this to others. It really sharpens up at f5.6 and stays that way to f22.

It has a nice build and I think it will probably outlive me.
It's balanced on the camera and is easy to focus manually.
72mm filter is large but not too inconvenient.
I shoot most of my pictures at f16-22 and I get high quality results with this Sigma.

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 24-120mm, Sigma 28-105mm, Canon 35-105mm FD,

Good DOP and colour reproduction. Worth its price, cant ask for more.

Slow autofocus

I currently use Sigma 28-105 D along with Nikon F75. Opted for this instead of Nikkor 28-70 as recommended by my Photography Trainer. As stated by other reviews, the autofocus is definitely slow. I have got some good DOPs especially on Flowers. Colour reproduction is good. Check out landscape shots taken on this lens in the below flickr links and give me your valuable feedback.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82663317@N00/sets/72157619728161480/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82663317@N00/sets/72157619728152010/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82663317@N00/sets/72157619642702637/

Not sure if I can use this on the latest Nikon DSLRs like D3000, D5000, D90.

Cheap and fastf/2.8mm at 28mm

The aperture ring is too thin. Construction can be better if price is higher for this lens.

The lens is not soft at all. It is actually pretty sharp. Make sure shutter is fast enough for hand held and the lens is focused on what you are shooting. Otherwise, the picture is not going to be sharp.

I bought it when it first came out due to the large f/2.8 aperture @ 28mm. I have been using this lens for more than 5 years.

I like using this lens very much due to it fast aparture and not too heavy.
Sigma has discontinued making this exact lens and replace it with no aperture ring.

What is in focus with this lens is very sharp! And at about f5.6 this lens is getting deeper and very crisp indeed! The whole thing also depends on distance. Read a book with a good DOF chapter, this is too much to write about here :) FAST focusing in autofocus I see no optical flaws to mention for a sub 2000 dollar piece. Nothing is perfect, and I am sure I can eventually find better, but this is one of the best lenses I have used. Any geometry complaints would be nitpicking, as the wide end looks a little odd in any case, but for an APS sensor digital body that issue doesn't even arise, as the 28mm focal length translates to about a 42mm equivalent, a modest but still effective wide end, so any potential negligable distortions are nil. For a film SLR or a full sized sensor cam the wide end would come to play much better of course. For wide angle shots I actually prefer a "funny" bulging psychedelic view, but this lens doesn't even deliver that. It's almost too d*mned straight for my taste (I'll learn to live with that...), so no worry about distortions. As far as sharpness on the edges is concerned, I will have to report on that later after doing some more shooting, but so far not bad at all. With my Pentax ist-DL I just made some shots in near darkness and the results blew me away. Very nice rendering,"bokeh" any way you want it, full subject isolation, or deep field, and the transition is nice looking. And sharp - one needs to know what one is doing though ;) This 28-105 is apparently not spec'd for digital, but works flawlessly with my Pentax ist-DL with the aperture ring in "auto". No complaints from me in digital operation!

And here comes the ONE snag I see with this lens, that will surprise many: The autofocus shaft causes friction on a manual focus body.. The rapid action autofocus gear (FAST focusing in autofocus) with the short throw on the front ring also makes the focus ring nearly impossible to turn and control smoothly on my old Ricoh and Pentax manual focus bodies. With the ist-DL it is NO problem, as the "manual" focus setting retracts the camera's shaft and makes for a cavity on top of which the lens shaft turns freely, and manual focus is ok, even though touchy. Then again with the DL the autofocus is neat and works just dandy. No weakness really, except two small accessories: The hood is a bit tricky to attach, very tight and notchy and could use a little better finish - then again, it is a "proper" hood, I have fiddled with others just as bad, and once on ... who cares. The K-Mount mount cover is a sheer nuissance though - will need filing and fitting or a replacement, as I do not want plastic chafings from a 5 cent lid to get on my D-SLR sensor when I take the lens out and mount it! Then again - the lens was cheap enough, and I'd rather have them cut a corner on a lid than on the glass and lens body!

I was skeptical, but for the price I figured I couldn't loose much on a reasonably fast zoom lens. This is a first impression: Right away: This is NOT a soft lens, it is actually pretty sharp. I just played with this little marvel and made a few shots after taking it out of the box, and I think I know why people made the comments about this lens being soft. Trust me, those soft shots are likely a victim of autofocus/bad-focus habits and not understanding depth of field. At f2.8 ANY lens is liable to have a shallow depth of field. It is a most basic photographic concept, that the wider a lens is opened, the better it needs to be focused, and the shallower your DOF is, ie your model may end up with a sharp nose but mushy ears and hair that almost looks like it was shampooed, with nothing visible in a fuzzy mess all around ... well, come to think of it, that might be an award winning portrait ... never mind ... Back to focus and sharpness: The whole trick is this: focus! With modern SLRs this is a bit tricky - with the average tiny digital viewfinders one is more or less at the autofocus system's mercy with several models out there, and with the autofocus, less is more. Forget your 11 point overkill systems in 128 zones etc - just measure light on subject, hit AE lock to lock exposure, concentrate on pinning the subject center in spot focus mode, hold it, recompose, fire. Under 2 seconds and well worth it and beats fiddling with AF zone selections until the last snail has run over the finish line. Just stay in spot mode. Simple! That way you KNOW what you're focusing on and shooting, and results are almost guarranteed. The technique is simple and can be much faster and more conveniently adjusted than fiddling with autofocus "intelligent" zones. Enough said. Once I said no more film from here on - but then of course the full sized viewfinders of my old Ricoh gear will have me burn a roll now and then. If you've never held an OLD Ricoh KR or Pentax metal body with their straight 1-1 views through a 55mm lens (keep both eyes open, and the viewfinder image is the same size as the naked eye's) you cannot appreciate this point. Sooo ... this lens might also come in handy with my "vintage" manual focus KR-5 and KR-10 Super, if it werent for a fairly stiff focus action in manual, especially with the little snag I mention below, ie friction by the drive shaft on a strictly manual-focus body. Thathowever, is not a problem on an autofocus body! So, if you're looking for a GREAT and fast lens for dim situations in those nightly showrooms and a range that makes it a near carry one for all occasions on an autofocus body on a budget, look no further, especially if you can snag this puppy at under $100 the way I did! For a manual focus body, hand focusing could become a problem, but if you're handy like I, a little filing down of a critical spot on your camera mount will make the action a lot easier. Considering the excellent optics with crisp and nicely conrollable definition good colors (more daytime shots are needed though for that to be 100% qualified, it's dark now and lamplight only), getting a zoom with f2.8 at 28mm through f3.5 in most of the midfield, and still a respectable f4.0 over about 70mm, and the low streetprice of well below 250 dollars, there is nothing to critique here in a bad way. The Sigma 28-105 qualifies as a bargain of the year as far as I am concerned!

Similar Products Used:

Pentax "F" 50mm f1.7, Rikenon 55mm f2.2, Sears 28-70mm f3.5-4.5, Rikenon 28mm f2.8, Rikenon 135mm f2.8, Kalimar 70-210mm f4-5.6

This lens gets good color performance, and it has a very solid build to it. It has a little weight to it, but it doesn't bother me because it helps with panning. Its also comparatively cheap, which is the biggest strength.

There are a few weaknesses to this lens. The main one is its lack of sharpness. The lens is very soft wide-open or at a wide angle. Soft is an understatement. Not only do parts of the image appear soft, but they appear distorted as well. Since I shoot in a lot of low-light situations, I haven't had a chance to find this lenses' sweet spot. The focus on this lens is also slow. Thats not much of a weakness if you're not shooting action, though.

I bought this lens in the summer of 2005 to replace the 18-55mm lens that came with my Digital Rebel. I've used this to shoot some sports, portraits, and landscapes.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF-S 18-55mm, Canon 50 f/1.4

Well constructed Tack sharp Great $$$ deals

none so far

If you want a lot of bang for your buck, then check out this lens! Well constructed, tack sharp (yes, I read the reviews saying the lens is soft)and fast. I have not had any issues with noise or slow focus, it has worked seamlessly with my 7N. Now, if I can just sell enough stuff on ebay to get the Sigma f/2.8 70-200mm all will be good!

In f:/8-11 you can get better image (sharper) but now below it.

Very-very soft in all range.

After reading alot aboaut this lens. I bought one. I read a lot reviews , some told bad, some told it's OK. I think I would get a better one than my Canon 15-55mm on my Digital Rebel. But.. I was wrong... This lens is very..ver... soft. It doesn't matter use in 28, 35, or even 105mm especially uding below f:/8. You got the soft images. Firstly, I think my technique or something that I could do with this lens..But after tried in 5 days..I am very disapointed.... Yes, It's could not compare with L lens but.. This lens could not compare with the cheapest one Canon 15-55mm. My canon 15-55mm much much better image tahn sigma 28-105 mm f:/2.8-4 After use in 5 days... Too Bad, in my country I could not return or change another lens. so I sold it very-very cheap...... Conclusion... This is a very terible lens that I have ever known.....

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 105 mm Macro f:/2.8 EX Canon 15-55 mm (standard EOS Digital Rebel)

Internal focusing. Good feel in my hand. Big petal hood makes people think it's a better lens than it really is. Pretty good range for the price.

Cheap MF ring. Terrible AF with my Canon. Soft images at most apetures.

I bought this for my new Canon when my old Minolta system from the 70's decided it wanted to be replaced. I opted for this zoom because I wanted to get the 100mm range on a standard zoom. I thought the 2.8 would be nice, but it turns out that I never use it lower than f8 (OK f4 if there is low light) because the focus is so soft. I also have seen some vignetting at 28mm when used with filters. All in all, I've had some amazing crisp shots around f11-f16 in the 35-75mm range. The rest are a little soft and sometimes disapointing. AF never works...or at least very rarely. It is so slow and loud that I never even bother to use it. I would rate this lens as average. If you aren't planning on getting serious in photography, this will do you well, otherwise I recommend saving up for a nicer piece of glass, that's what I'm doing now and then I plan on getting rid of this one.

Customer Service

Great. Had to have the chip replaced to work with my newer Canon. They had it back to me in less than a week, and they were very friendly about the whole ordeal.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 50mm f1.8 Tokina 16-35 f? Sigma 70-200 f2.8

Very good quality for portraits and general photography all around. The price is nice.

Slow auto focus -- then again I tend to stick with manual focus. A bit noisy. It can be a pest, when shooting in low light, when the aperature goes up and down, again I would prefer a constant 2.8 lens.

I was on a tight budget when I bought this lens. Originally, I bought it in December of 2001 and used it up to November 2003. During the time, I used it originally on the Sigma SA-9 then over then through 2003 used it on the SD-9. The overall quality of the lens (on Sigma models) was really good. I've probably shot over 3000 photos with the lens with subject ranging to night-time rodeo events, football, basketball, portraits, products, hot-air ballons you name it with high quality results. Overall, I was really pleased with the quality and price of the lens.

Customer Service

Very sturdy lens -- all around -- never needed repair or anything.

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 28-200 Minolta Primes, 28mm 55mm 105mm Canon 28-55mm

Great color/sharpness, nice zoom range, big 72mm filter, quick focus, tight zoom ring, big 2.8/f@28mm-4/f@105mm

Focus ring is loose, but you can still work with it. It's also a tad heavy.

It's a shame that there's so many bad reviews for this lens on this site. Obviously for $200, you won't get the best lens ever, but this still does a wonderful job! You can see some sample pictures I took with this lens at http://home.comcast.net/~epithius/rebel_ti/Deep_Blue_Flower.jpg also http://home.comcast.net/~epithius/rebel_ti/mom.jpg Hope these help!

Customer Service

Haven't had to work with Sigma, but etronics.com (where I ordered it) gave me my worst online shopping experience ever! Avoid them!

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 28-80mm 2.8/f