Sigma 12-24 indepth review..

hackie · 27th January 2004

Reviewed by a canon user on both digital n slides!!
SWEET~~

Click here!!!

ransoma22 · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by hackie

Reviewed by a canon user on both digital n slides!!
SWEET~~

Click here!!!

The link is dead,
Try this
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/R..._f4.5-5.6.html

P24 · 27th January 2004

any price and availibility in SIN ?
Sven

oeyvind · 27th January 2004

Looks good.

rncw · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by oeyvind

Looks good.

then buy

AReality · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by P24

any price and availibility in SIN ?
Sven

Last month I was quoted $1250 at a shop.

oeyvind · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by rncw

then buy

very funny... no $$$ leh. Can print some for me?

hackie · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by ransoma22

The link is dead,
Try this
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/R..._f4.5-5.6.html

oops~~ thanks~~~~

enjoying ur new toy? :P

hackie · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by P24

any price and availibility in SIN ?
Sven

john 316 qouted me abt $1150.. but no stock for nikon mount yet~~~

think konota also has.. abt tat price too! BUY BUY BUY!!!!

Kit · 27th January 2004

I went to AP a few weeks before CNY, they have the Nikon mount ones. Quoted $1200+. Couldn't find any Canon mount ones though.

ransoma22 · 27th January 2004

Originally Posted by hackie

oops~~ thanks~~~~
enjoying ur new toy? :P

You welcome.
Yeah. My precious...

StreetShooter · 27th January 2004

Hmmm. And I thought I had completed my lens collection.

HelmetBox · 27th January 2004

woooooooo looks goooooooooooood

finkster · 28th January 2004

Tested this lens with a Nikon 18-35mm F3.5-4.5 and the Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4.

The Sigma fared the worst in terms of sharpness and color. Soft wide open, and not really sharp at F8 too. Perhaps the set I tested was a lemon, but it was the case then. Cosmetics and styling looks quite ugly too. Heavy and chunky like most Sigma's.

Being a G lens too, it certainly restricts the user to the newer bodies only.

Good point is that the distortion at 12mm is quite well controlled. Similar to the other two lenses tested.

HelmetBox · 28th January 2004

Originally Posted by finkster

Tested this lens with a Nikon 18-35mm F3.5-4.5 and the Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4.

The Sigma fared the worst in terms of sharpness and color. Soft wide open, and not really sharp at F8 too. Perhaps the set I tested was a lemon, but it was the case then. Cosmetics and styling looks quite ugly too. Heavy and chunky like most Sigma's.

Being a G lens too, it certainly restricts the user to the newer bodies only.

Good point is that the distortion at 12mm is quite well controlled. Similar to the other two lenses tested.

have you checked out the link? the guy who tested the lens appears to be some pro....... You should check out his tutorialz.......

Anyway he mentioned a few times that its in his opinion.

Zerstorer · 28th January 2004

From the samples on the net, the distortion seems very well controlled for a 12mm. How does it perform(barrel distortion) compared to the Nikon and Tamron at 20mm?

finkster · 28th January 2004

Nope, didn't read it yet becos I didn't want it to influence what I felt. Will be going to check it out now.

I tested all three lenses at their widest focal length at both wide-open apertures and at F8, and their narrowest focal length, again wide-open and at F8.

Didn't check ranges in-between or at other apertures as it would have taken more time. Just did a quick 10min test to see how they performed against each other.

Zerstorer · 28th January 2004

I see, coz I like everything about the Tamron except for the noticeable barrel distortion at 17-20mm.

If the sigma has such good distortion characteristics, then it might be worth checking out, even if I have to stick to f11 all the time.

finkster · 28th January 2004

Yup. The Sigma does have very low barrel distortion. The Tamron and Nikon does have BD, but in most situations, should still be acceptable to most users, unless there's a demand for absolutely straight edges.

The Sigma is not a low-light lens though. Indoor wedding shoots and dark ballrooms would be pushing it a fair bit.

Zerstorer · 29th January 2004

Agree, but I've been spoiled by my 20mm prime and I can't stand seeing distortion when I look in the viewfinder. I would have bought the tamron at PIA if not for that niggling point. Now I feel like waiting for Sigma's new 17-35 or before I decide on it or the Sigma/Nikon 12-24mm instead.

27th January 2004	#1
hackie Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 851	Sigma 12-24 indepth review.. Reviewed by a canon user on both digital n slides!! SWEET~~ Click here!!!

27th January 2004	#4
oeyvind Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 3,552	Looks good. __________________ flickr

27th January 2004	#10
Kit Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Bukit Timah / Melbourne CBD Posts: 6,001	I went to AP a few weeks before CNY, they have the Nikon mount ones. Quoted $1200+. Couldn't find any Canon mount ones though. __________________ arkitectural photography http://arkitecturalphoto.1x.com/

27th January 2004	#3
P24 Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Singapore Posts: 83	any price and availibility in SIN ? Sven

27th January 2004	#12
StreetShooter Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Katong Posts: 4,702	Hmmm. And I thought I had completed my lens collection.

27th January 2004	#13
HelmetBox Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,312	woooooooo looks goooooooooooood

28th January 2004	#14
finkster Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: LAS Posts: 648	Tested this lens with a Nikon 18-35mm F3.5-4.5 and the Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4. The Sigma fared the worst in terms of sharpness and color. Soft wide open, and not really sharp at F8 too. Perhaps the set I tested was a lemon, but it was the case then. Cosmetics and styling looks quite ugly too. Heavy and chunky like most Sigma's. Being a G lens too, it certainly restricts the user to the newer bodies only. Good point is that the distortion at 12mm is quite well controlled. Similar to the other two lenses tested.

28th January 2004	#16
Zerstorer Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,610	From the samples on the net, the distortion seems very well controlled for a 12mm. How does it perform(barrel distortion) compared to the Nikon and Tamron at 20mm?

29th January 2004	#20
Zerstorer Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,610	Agree, but I've been spoiled by my 20mm prime and I can't stand seeing distortion when I look in the viewfinder. I would have bought the tamron at PIA if not for that niggling point. Now I feel like waiting for Sigma's new 17-35 or before I decide on it or the Sigma/Nikon 12-24mm instead.