Sigma 12-24 EX DG and 2nd version

[dmjunkie]

Hi,

Anyone upgraded from the 1st generation to the recent version 2?

I read somewhere that the first version would have to stop down to as much as F8~11 to achieve their desired shaprness. I had only tried once on a very bright day at F12 in which the shot is great. Now thinking to get one myself but the version 1 and 2 is a whooping difference of almost 500!

What's your feel? Any chance to show couple of shot that you might have taken between the two? Thank you.

[Snoweagle]

Hi,

Anyone upgraded from the 1st generation to the recent version 2?

I read somewhere that the first version would have to stop down to as much as F8~11 to achieve their desired shaprness. I had only tried once on a very bright day at F12 in which the shot is great. Now thinking to get one myself but the version 1 and 2 is a whooping difference of almost 500!

What's your feel? Any chance to show couple of shot that you might have taken between the two? Thank you.

I haven't tried the II but for the first version I can get sharp pics at f/5.6 already.

f/12?? Don't need to go until that far, unless it's a lemon copy.

[addroger]

Did not try out but was told by a friend of mine that he's got to stop down by quite alot to see some difference.

[raydio]

Hi,

Anyone upgraded from the 1st generation to the recent version 2?

I read somewhere that the first version would have to stop down to as much as F8~11 to achieve their desired shaprness. I had only tried once on a very bright day at F12 in which the shot is great. Now thinking to get one myself but the version 1 and 2 is a whooping difference of almost 500!

What's your feel? Any chance to show couple of shot that you might have taken between the two? Thank you.

$500 is a huge difference in price! Amazon has them only US$50 apart. B&H in New York is similar. When I was in Hong Kong last summer, the best price I saw for the Type II model was about HK$5900.

I have been contemplating getting the Sigma 12-24 for quite a while now. I rented the Type 1 model in Singapore last summer and was quite pleased with it.

Then I was quite shocked to see the review on Juza Nature Photography which compared the new Sigma 8-16 (on crop) to the Sigma 12-24 Type I. The Sigma 8-16 came out on top by a fairly large margin. So I am confused whether I should get the 12-24 for my 5D or the 8-16 (which is cheaper) for my 7D. Here's the review for anyone who's interested:

Juza Nature Photography - Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC (vs Sigma 12-24 on FF)

Juza Nature still hasn't done its Sigma 12-24 Type II review as yet... it is listed as "coming soon".

My preference is to get the full frame lens (12-24) rather than the crop version (8-16). I really liked the one I rented last summer and was quite pleased with the results. I can only assume that the Type II model is better and improved.

For those who have purchased the Type II model, please share your opinions and findings about this lens. Some sample photos would also be greatly appreciated.

[Snoweagle]

I've tried the II over a week back and testing it side-by-side my current I, the II does seems a bit sharper on both wide and tele end (f/5.6), but difference is negligible unless cropped or zoomed in. Colour wise still the same as version I.

Externally, the II's barrel size is smaller than I's and is also longer too (similar to 8-16 DC) but honestly, i prefer the one i have in terms of built and size. Price wise, surprisingly the version I is still a bit more expensive than II. ($1200+ compared to $1300+). That's something i don't understand since II is supposed to be better and of obviously, newer.

[raydio]

I've tried the II over a week back and testing it side-by-side my current I, the II does seems a bit sharper on both wide and tele end (f/5.6), but difference is negligible unless cropped or zoomed in. Colour wise still the same as version I.

Externally, the II's barrel size is smaller than I's and is also longer too (similar to 8-16 DC) but honestly, i prefer the one i have in terms of built and size. Price wise, surprisingly the version I is still a bit more expensive than II. ($1200+ compared to $1300+). That's something i don't understand since II is supposed to be better and of obviously, newer.

Thanks for the information Snoweagle. Yes that is surprising... the older version being more expensive than the newer. I've only heard of that happening in the antique world!

[Snoweagle]

Thanks for the information Snoweagle. Yes that is surprising... the older version being more expensive than the newer. I've only heard of that happening in the antique world!

In fact, i was also surprised that over 3 years since i've bought my 12-24 ($1312), the price still maintained and some still sold at slightly higher prices!

[raydio]

In fact, i was also surprised that over 3 years since i've bought my 12-24 ($1312), the price still maintained and some still sold at slightly higher prices!

I've also noticed that the Sigma 12-24 is not often seen on the used market. I can only infer from this that 2nd hand prices are fairly high too. Another inference is that users are quite happy with their lens and are willing to keep them long term.

When I rented one last summer, I can remember that I had trouble keeping my feet out of the photo! I've never had that problem before!

[Snoweagle]

I've also noticed that the Sigma 12-24 is not often seen on the used market. I can only infer from this that 2nd hand prices are fairly high too. Another inference is that users are quite happy with their lens and are willing to keep them long term.

When I rented one last summer, I can remember that I had trouble keeping my feet out of the photo! I've never had that problem before!

It's honestly the best UWA for FF and hence seldom current owners will sell them. Even so, 2nd hand price fetch about $900+ still. I doubt i will sell mine for the II cos it still works wonders and has never failed me.

Yet again, these UWAs aren't everyone's cup of tea.

[raydio]

It's honestly the best UWA for FF and hence seldom current owners will sell them. Even so, 2nd hand price fetch about $900+ still. I doubt i will sell mine for the II cos it still works wonders and has never failed me.

Yet again, these UWAs aren't everyone's cup of tea.

Yes, people don't like the protruding front element due to the inability of using filters, which is not a deal breaker for me.

When I rented one, I did not test it with Cokin filters... is it possible to use Cokin filters on this lens?

[Snoweagle]

Yes, people don't like the protruding front element due to the inability of using filters, which is not a deal breaker for me.

When I rented one, I did not test it with Cokin filters... is it possible to use Cokin filters on this lens?

I'm fine with the protruding front element as it's made hardy and easy to clean, hence its purpose as it's fully exposed to the elements.

You can only use rear gelatin filters with this lens.

[raydio]

I'd like to post an open invitation for owners of the Sigma 12-24 lens of either type I or II to post photos so that we can compare colour, contrast and corner sharpness between the old and newer models. Please post, your photos are welcome...

[Snoweagle]

I'd like to post an open invitation for owners of the Sigma 12-24 lens of either type I or II to post photos so that we can compare colour, contrast and corner sharpness between the old and newer models. Please post, your photos are welcome...

Here's a previous one i took some time back.



With this:

[raydio]

Nice photo Snoweagle. I assume that it was taken with the 1st version of the Sigma 12-24 since the Marina Bay Sands is still under construction and the 2nd model didn't exist at that time. It would be great to see a corresponding Type II photo for comparison.

[Snoweagle]

Nice photo Snoweagle. I assume that it was taken with the 1st version of the Sigma 12-24 since the Marina Bay Sands is still under construction and the 2nd model didn't exist at that time. It would be great to see a corresponding Type II photo for comparison.

Of cos it's the first version of the 12-24 as i only own that piece and is also pictured above.

[raydio]

Is that your shadow in the bottom middle of the photo?

[Snoweagle]

Is that your shadow in the bottom middle of the photo?

Huh? Where got?

[raydio]

Huh? Where got?

At the bottom of the photo, there is a shadow of the bridge with two lamp posts to the left and one to the right. There is also the shadow of a person standing between the two lamp posts and the person is located at the bottom middle of the photo...

[Snoweagle]

At the bottom of the photo, there is a shadow of the bridge with two lamp posts to the left and one to the right. There is also the shadow of a person standing between the two lamp posts and the person is located at the bottom middle of the photo...

Oh yes...that's me haha...

[raydio]

Here is a photo I took last September when I rented the 12-24 type I:



It would be great to see some photos from owners of the 12-24 Type II so that comparisons can be made....