Matt Golowczynski
WDC Technical Writer
Reged: 07/08/2007
Posts: 149
Loc: London
|
|
Hi all,
In a continuation of our DSLR systems feature, we are looking for some comments on users' experience of Sigma lenses. Do you have any personal favourites? Or any gripes? What are their best and worst aspects? Why did you choose Sigma over the manufacturer's equivalent, if there was one? Selected comments will be published in the February issue of What Digital Camera and the lucky entrants will not only recieve a complimentary copy of What Digital Camera but also a free hotshoe spirit level, worth £10. So get posting! Closing date will be in the first week of January; come on people, we need you! Post, post, post!
Matt
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 37690
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
I've used a number of Sigma lenses on film and digital over many years. My experience of the cheaper lenses has not been all happy - I've had a couple of lenses fall apart, and some lenses simply not work on modern cameras - and are too old to re-chip to be usable. My experience of the EX range, however, couldn't be more different. These are lenses built to an exacting quality standard both optically and mechanically - very much on a par with my L-series Canon lenses - and offer options that are unaffordable or non-existant in the manufacturer's ranges. Currently I use the 18-50 f2.8 EX on my APS-C DSLR - this provides excellent image quality and a fast maximum aperture at a very keen price. I also have a 70-200 f2.8 EX HSM and 1.4x convertor that I've had for quite some years but that still delivers great results now, and focuses very quickly and silently, too. And then I have the 12-24 EX - a lens that not only provides a respectable wideangle on APS-C, but that is usable on full-frame giving the widest angle available with a rectillinear lens. It's brilliant fun, and a great lens to boot.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
Nod
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 08/04/2006
Posts: 4311
Loc: Devon, UK.
|
|
The only Sigma lens I have is the above mentioned 12-24.
Pros:-
18-38 equivalent field of view on a DX sensor.
No visible vignetting on a DX sensor.
Wider than a wide thing with extra width (© Edmund Blackadder) on 35mm.
Cons:-
Awkward to fit filters (if you use them).
I chose the Sigma over the Nikon equivalent because it gives full frame coverage on 35mm as well as being considerably cheaper.
--------------------
MATWSIJ.....
To avoid being offended, please insert apropriate smiley.
|
Dave_Cox
old'n'grumpy
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 3053
Loc: somewhere in Sussex
|
|
I have a couple of autofocus Sigmas and never had any complaints either on the quality of the optics or the build standards; but my favourite is a 20+ year old manual 70-210 zoom that's currently on my K10. Sharp pictures and still a great lens with a 1:4 close-up that on the digital gives pretty good sized flowers and larger insects.
--------------------
Growing old disgracefully!
http://snapper56.deviantart.com/gallery/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dave2006/
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 4091
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
I rate them very highly.
I use 4 at the moment, 10-20 EX, 18-50EX, 28-300, 400.
The 400 is 17 years old and it works just as well on my Dynax 7d as it did on the 7000i and 7xi bodies. I see on ebay that people who have one to sell, say that it will not work on the digital bodies but I can state that they do.
The 10-20 Ex and 18-50 Ex are both excellent optics.
--------------------
She (Avro Vulcan XH558)Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
|
Hotblack
Dead Horse Flogger
Reged: 07/03/2006
Posts: 7317
Loc: Upstairs in the spare room.
|
|
Of the four lenses I have three are Sigma EX lenses. They are all excellent and give great quality at a very competitive price.
I use the 10-20mm, 50-150 f2.8, and my favourite, the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8. This last one, coupled with the Sigma 1.4x converter I generally use for wildlife photography although it's also really useful for picking out detail in landscapes. Even with the converter the images are very crisp. Being such a big and heavy lens it must be tripod mounted to get the best from it.
For more general use out and about I love the 50-150 f2.8. despite some slight vignetting when wide open. This disappears very quickly when stopped down slightly. The lens gives the equivalent on my DSLRs of 75-225mm and when coupled with the 1.4x converter gives a very useful 105-315mm f4. Again, images are lovely and sharp and the wide aperture gives better creative opportunities than slower lenses. Being such a compact lens it's quite easy to handhold at it's long end with sufficient shutter speed. It's a bargain at around £500.
The 10-20mm is an excellent lens for wide open vistas or playing with perspective. I find that the petal lens hood can easily be knocked off as the positive 'click' when fitting the lens seems to wear. I've lost one and nearly lost the replacement I bought several times over.
--------------------
Cheers
David
David J White Photography
|
Rivvyrover
newbie
Reged: 12/09/2007
Posts: 41
|
|
My Sigma 17-35 EX lens worked perfectly well till I bought a 40D, every picture I took using it on same was out of focus, it's currently with Sigma in Japan being (hopefully) fixed.
As other posters have said,there are sometimes compatibility problems with newer cameras.
|
pompeysnapper
Reged: 18/08/2004
Posts: 281
Loc: Portsmouth, England
|
|
I have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and it's one of my most used lenses. I use it as the standard lens on my Canon 20d. Mainly used for indoors available light photos.
--------------------
Robert
|
Rivvyrover
newbie
Reged: 12/09/2007
Posts: 41
|
|
Quote:
I have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and it's one of my most used lenses. I use it as the standard lens on my Canon 20d. Mainly used for indoors available light photos.
I've just looked at your pictures, that looks like a cracking lens, (and the pictures are great)
|
FujiSigmaNolta
I can pan!
Reged: 21/06/2005
Posts: 1473
|
|
I have the 18-125mm on my Fujifilm S3 pro and I would rate it a very average lens, soon to be upgraded (some people rate them high and there were concerns about Sigma's QC when I bought mine, so opinion will differ on this one). Soft corners and only really sharp from f8. Some could say that's pretty much the same with all amateur zoom lenses, but then I have the 70-300mm APO DG lens for my KM 7D and I rate that very very high. I have taken shots that can be printed at A1 from the 6MP sensor of the 7D. This lens is sharp as razors and at fraction of the price of Nikon or Canon equivalents. Very well worth it if you can live with the relatively slow f4-f5.6 apertures. I recommended it to all of my friends looking for a decent and affordable telephoto and all were very satisfied with it.
If your camera has built in stabilisation it is certainly a good starter telephoto lens.
On my Sigma kit I have a 24-70mm HF lens and I find the lens pretty good for what it is, but then again I think the Foveon sensor may be helping things a bit. I have used it on my Sigma film camera with BW film and the results were ok, with good contrast corner softness was there but not really that noticeable.
But I will be being some EX glass soon enough for my kits as some serious work may be coming up and I don't want to get caught short so might as well spend the money on the best glass.
--------------------
Regards,
FujiSigmaNolta
My Flickr mess
|
pompeysnapper
Reged: 18/08/2004
Posts: 281
Loc: Portsmouth, England
|
|
Thanks! it is a good lens but very shallow DOF at f1.4 so you have to select your point of focus carefully if you are using it wide open. Nose tips are out of focus when eyes are in focus...
--------------------
Robert
|
IvorETower
Little Buttercup
Reged: 15/11/2006
Posts: 1742
Loc: Camberley, Surrey
|
|
I rate them selectively ... I have the 10-20mm HSM which produces some great indoor shots on my D40 and D80. Maximum aperture wasn't too critical when I was looking for a true wide-angle lens and I have to say that I am very pleased with the results I get.
Recently I bought the 28-300mm lens but have not had much chance to use it. I got it at a very reasonable price and reconed it would make an excellent "walk-about" lens, better than an 18-200. However it does not auto-focus on the D40. If I get a chance to use it a bit more over the next 10 days, I will try to post some comments back here......
--------------------
Too many cameras, too many lenses.......
|
Scphoto
Little Fruitbat
Reged: 13/11/2005
Posts: 2537
Loc: Birmingham, UK
|
|
I've only had one, a 28-80 Canon Mount lens. It also has been the only lens I've had fail. Also it doesn't work with my 5D.
So this does cloud my judgement of them. When the lens was working I found it to a decent (albeit budget) lens.
I know some lenses can be rechipped but I'd rather not have this lens lottery with any future lenses I buy. Unless they can guarantee future compatibility then I'll stick with Canon EF lenses.
(Maybe they might be able to put the firmware on a plug-in module. Which could be updated by the end user. Or another idea might be an adapter with new firmware, just a couple of thoughts, excuse my rambling. © S.Cooper 2007!).
--------------------
Happiness is a Kebab call donor - Pictures/Blog
|
Steve52
old hand
Reged: 08/04/2007
Posts: 789
Loc: Dawlish, Devon, UK
|
|
I have got 4 Sigma lens which I use with my Sony alpha A100. 18-50, 28-80, 70-300 and 170-500. The only thing I have had go wrong was when the drive went on my 70-300. I couldn't be bothered to spend another £90 to get it repaired and so bought a new one instead.
I have had no trouble with them, and any picture that does not come out how I expected I put down to my inexperience.
I have used them from photographing the Red Arrows to Landscapes and Macros to tribute bands (indoor pics with no flash).
--------------------
FRIPN. Nostalgia just isn't what it used to be.
www.flickr.com/photos/mrsony/
|
weasley
addict
Reged: 11/01/2006
Posts: 501
|
|
Almost all of my after-market lenses have been Sigma - I will usually look for a Sigma before considering other options, including Nikon. Why? Because they are affordable but, in my experience, produce results that are top notch; and that's not just the high end ones either. They are also reliable - I have only had to retire one after it took one too many bashes and, after 10 years and a digital upgrade, was due to be replaced anyway. I have also never had one that didn't work perfectly with the body every time.
My Sigma history (all Nikon AF):
75-300mm f/4-5.6 APO (mid 90s vintage) - many hundreds of pictures taken with this, both film and digital. It faithfully and dramatically recorded my honeymoon safari, for which I owe it dearly. This was the one that finally got bashed into retirement, but I still have it.
EX 100 - 300mm f/4 APO DG HSM - bought to replace the above lens for use on action and sports photography, for which it has, so far, acquitted itself with honours. It's big and heavy but very well-built and sharp across the range (save for a little softness wide open, usually no more than unsharp mask can deal with). I love this lens and it's nice that Sigma offer an affordable alternative to the f/2.8 long zooms.
EX 10 - 20mm f/4 - 5.6 DC HSM - I'm still getting the hang of this, but a recent trip to New York proved its worth as a close quarters lens as well as for the widescapes. Not one for the architectural enthusiasts but I like a bit of dramatic convergence of parallels! Good for those quirky portraits too.
EX 105mm f/2.8 DG macro - again, Sigma come up with an affordable lens that gives outstanding results.
55 - 200mm f/4.5 - 5.6 DC - very recently acquired as a cheap walkabout lens for when the 100-300 is too large or heavy, or conditions mean I don't want to risk it. In its first outing in New York it performed well beyond its very modest price; it is slow to focus as it doesn't use an in-lens motor but as I have another sports lens so it suits me fine. It even has a metal lens mount, unlike certain alternative options...
EX 1.4× teleconverter - I haven't used this yet so can't comment, but it is in my bag so thought I'd mention it!
So, in summary, I do rate Sigma lenses... very highly.
|
Mojo_66
Rain Kat
Reged: 25/05/2006
Posts: 3360
Loc: Lancs
|
|
Another vote for the Sigma 70-300 Apo. It's a great lens, very versatile and when used with the Sigma achromatic close up lens it will give 1:1 magnification. The only negative point I can think of is that it's a little slow to focus and does hunt sometimes.
--------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojo_black/
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2283
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Yes and no.
I rate the 10-20 very highly.
I replaced a 105 macro with a Nikor. What a revelation that was.
I should have mentioned the Sigma 400mm f5.6. It is still my only lens of this length and works as well on my D200 as it did on my F100. It would have been a good buy if I had more use for it.
Edited by Learning (30/12/2007 16:54)
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 4091
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
Quote:
I should have mentioned the Sigma 400mm f5.6. It is still my only lens of this length and works as well on my D200 as it did on my F100. It would have been a good buy if I had more use for it.
I have one of these and it works as well on my digital body as it it did on my film bodies.
240 pounds well spent back in 1990 I think.
--------------------
She (Avro Vulcan XH558)Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
|
HelenEdith
Reged: 05/04/2000
Posts: 126
Loc: S.E.London
|
|
I've got two Sigma lenses which I use regularly on my Pentax DSLRs.
I purchased the Sigma 10-20 during 2006 as I wanted a super wide angle zoom and the Sigma was the only option available in a PK fit. It does a good job for me.
16mm
10mm
It can be wise to check the histogram when using it, though, as sometimes the metering is a bit strange. (Most often under-exposure if it doesn't get it right.)
My other Sigma lens was purchased on eBay for £51 including postage and came off a film camera, so it's a full-frame lens. It's a 28-300 and it practically lives on my K10D.
I am more than pleased with the results this lens delivers when hand held, but sometimes find that it's disappointing when tripod mounted. A lens covering 28-300 has to have some compromises in its design, and sometimes tripod mounting does not deliver hoped-for extra sharpness. Also, in long exposures, it may be suffering from the zoom creeping, as I know that the zoom mechanism is a bit loose.
K10D, 300mm, f8, 1/350, ISO400 handheld and very pleasing
*istDS, 300mm, f8, 1/350, ISO400 tripod and very pleasing
*istDS, 300mm, f11, 1/2, ISO200 tripod and rather disappointing
*istDS, 34mm, f22, 20 seconds, ISO200 tripod and reasonably pleasing. Note that the lens has 8 petals on the diaphragm, resulting in 8-pointed starbursts when used for long exposures at small apertures.
*istDS, zoomburst starting at 108mm and going to 300mm, f38, 3 seconds, ISO200 tripod and an image I'm proud of
Helen
--------------------
HelenEdith
|
FujiSigmaNolta
I can pan!
Reged: 21/06/2005
Posts: 1473
|
|
Hi Helen,
Do you leave SR on when you mount it on a tripod. If you do that may be the reason. If you leave stabilisation on while on tripod you actually get pictures blurrier than what they should as SR will try to compensate to even the tinyest vibration when not really needed. I think and correct me if I am wrong folks, it takes a microscopic amount of time for the sensor to settle and this is more noticeable at slower shutter speeds and when you use a shutter speed which is less than what is necessary to keep a sharp image for a telephoto lens........or something of the sort... 
Some here are able to explain it more coherently, just had a couple of double JDs...
--------------------
Regards,
FujiSigmaNolta
My Flickr mess
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
