Following on from my short experience with my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX lens, I decided that for the money the lens just wasn’t cutting it. The quality was down a lot when wide open at f2.8, and that was one of the main reasons of buying.

I was tempted to swap the Sigma for another copy, but to be honest, I had already been let down by Sigma. I’ve already got two "cheapie" Canon lenses, and they were both better than this "EX"pensive Sigma lens! My other lens options were…

• Canon 28-135mm USM IS
• Canon 28-105mm USM
• Tamron 28-75mm
• Sigma 17-17mm

When I popped down to Jessops last night, they didn’t stock the Tamron, and the last Canon 28-135mm they had was sold that day. Shame, I was mainly looking into getting that lens. I was left with two options, the Sigma 17-70mm and the Canon 28-105mm. I tried both of them in store and they were both very good.

The Canon was my main choice – simply because it was a Canon, or maybe because it wasn’t a Sigma? Either way, the range was great, quality superb, and the focus speed and quietness was absolutely astonishing. I was impressed, but had to try the Sigma. It was not near as fast and the reach at the telephoto end wasn’t as much as the Canon, but at wide angle, it was almost fish-eye like. I liked that, it also meant I could do without my Canon kit lens all together.

However, the Canon got the best of me. The Sigma hesitated on focus just once in store, and that was enough. The Canon never missed a beat, and I was testing that for longer in store than the Sigma. The Canon was also £60 cheaper than the Sigma 17-70mm and £100 cheaper than my original lens, the Sigma 24-70mm EX.

Another positive (or downside?) of this lens is that its very small, about the same size as the Canon kit lens, 18-55mm. That’s a good thing, since its easy to walk around with, but a not so good if you want to "look" like a professional! Much better in the long run, at least I don’t have to fork out £50-odd just for a UV filter!