Sigma HSM Lenses

[cichlid]

Hi

Anyone using Sigma HSM lenses? (any types also can, be it macro or zoom or normal lens)

Can give a short review on the lens like sharpness, image/build quality and price also.

I am asking for the benefits of Nikon D40 users like myself coz Sigma HSM is the only lens that can auto focus with D40.

Thank You!!!

 

[Yatlapball]

For price list, you can look under Equipment Discussions -> Others

Well... what can I say, 3rd party optics will be 3rd party optics. But new Sigma EX series with HSM are of a relatively decent build and produces better than average results (provided you test thoroughly for QC oversights)

Also I think you meant Sigma is the only 3rd party manufacturer that has lenses that can AF on the D40 body. Rather than Sigma is the ONLY manufacturer.

Bite the bullet with good Nikkor AF-S lenses. You won't regret it when you eventually upgrade your body.

 

[cichlid]

For price list, you can look under Equipment Discussions -> Others

Well... what can I say, 3rd party optics will be 3rd party optics. But new Sigma EX series with HSM are of a relatively decent build and produces better than average results (provided you test thoroughly for QC oversights)

Also I think you meant Sigma is the only 3rd party manufacturer that has lenses that can AF on the D40 body. Rather than Sigma is the ONLY manufacturer.

Bite the bullet with good Nikkor AF-S lenses. You won't regret it when you eventually upgrade your body.

thanks for the reply....erm... AFS lens 18-200mm VR cost at least $1250 leh, very X to me. tats y looking at Sigma ma,hehe

 

[poh6702]

thanks for the reply....erm... AFS lens 18-200mm VR cost at least $1250 leh, very X to me. tats y looking at Sigma ma,hehe

There is the D70/D70S kit lense AFS 18-70mm, D80 Kit lense AFS 18-135mm, they are not so expensive and if you are patient enough, look out in the B&S you should be able to get 18-135 for $400-$500. Sigma HSM lenses are not cheap also as compare to the 2 Nikon lenses.

 

[ExplorerZ]

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM... highly recommanded. :thumbsup:
but it cost slightly more than AFS 18-200. :sweat:

 

[cichlid]

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM... highly recommanded. :thumbsup:
but it cost slightly more than AFS 18-200. :sweat:

ok....there is a 30mm F/1.4...any idea izit sharp? i think it sells for $700+

 

[Denosha]

Erm.. If you want quality you've got to go for their EX series rather than just HSM alone. Anyway, here's my experience:

20mm F1.8 EX (no HSM) *Sold* - Soft wide open. Sharp at about F2.8, tack sharp at F4. Slow, noisy AF. Hunts ALOT and is especially useless in low light. No peeling experienced.
70-200mm F2.8 EX HSM *Sold* - Soft wide open. Tack sharp at F4. Quick, silent AF. Experienced peeling with the finish but good build quality overall.
180mm F3.5 EX HSM DG Macro - Sharp wide open. Silent AF but hunts a lot. No peeling yet. Solid build quality.
50-500 F4-6.3 EX HSM - Sharp wide open (serious). Relatively silent AF (can still hear some stuff going on inside), relatively fast for the zoom range. Not that much hunting except in poor light. Peeling like crazy. Pretty solid build for an extending barrel design. Heavy as hell.

 

[ioriroger]

i own 70-200 EX HSM...(2nd hand)

soft at wide open(especially max focal lenght 200mm).stop down f5.6-sharp, f8above-very sharp.

smooth quiet fast focusing but still...hunt at very low light.:nono:

build quality is:thumbsup:

the downside is..heavy as a tank & drag attention..:bsmilie: i very pai seh to attach this lens sometime at crowded area coz ppl will look at me & i scared later they think that i'm pro. coz i'm not:bsmilie: ..i not even can control my dslr very well. hope that 1 day there will be a small version of 70-200 f2.8..hahaha! just dreaming!

 

[Yatlapball]

No offence, but I think comparing performance wide-open should be the way to go rather than after stopping down (especially if you're talking about all the way to f/8)

Even a mediocre lens will be reasonably sharp after stopping down by so much.

I still recommend going with the Nikkors though. Since you would already be having the 18-55 , maybe a longer telephoto would be good for you. 55-200 or sometihng like that. Since cost is a major factor for you.

Good lenses come with a price. And... well, only you would know if you would need a 30/1.4 prime. I certainly don't see a need for my purposes.

The D40 really limits one's choices of lens.

 

[ioriroger]

No offence, but I think comparing performance wide-open should be the way to go rather than after stopping down (especially if you're talking about all the way to f/8)

Even a mediocre lens will be reasonably sharp after stopping down by so much.

I still recommend going with the Nikkors though. Since you would already be having the 18-55 , maybe a longer telephoto would be good for you. 55-200 or sometihng like that. Since cost is a major factor for you.

Good lenses come with a price. And... well, only you would know if you would need a 30/1.4 prime. I certainly don't see a need for my purposes.

The D40 really limits one's choices of lens.

YUP! i agree!

 

[NE clicks clicks]

For me , I only buy Sigma EX lenses if they have something that other manufacturer doesn't produce or if the price difference is immense.

A good example would be 8mm circular fisheye ( Don't think Canon has any)
or 15mm Linear fisheye ( big difference in price as compared to Canon 's EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye)
and lastly Sigma 12-24mm EXDG because it the widest in FF DSLR/SLR and can also be used on APS-C size DSLR.

I am in no way saying that Sigma lens isn't good, all I am trying to bring across is, if there is a choice ,I would rather get from original maker. In my case Canon lenses.

 

[smallaperture]

For me , I only buy Sigma EX lenses if they have something that other manufacturer doesn't produce or if the price difference is immense.

I am in no way saying that Sigma lens isn't good, all I am trying to bring across is, if there is a choice ,I would rather get from original maker. In my case Canon lenses.

Yeah, same here. I bought the Sg100-300F4 becos Nikon hasn't got a lens in this range. Or rather Nikon doesn't have a lens with AF-S until lately with the arrival of the AF-S70-300VR. This lens is very silent, hardly hear any noise during AF, hardly feel anything either during AF. It is very sharp even at F4. To ensure no-cam shake, I use F4 so very often. This is my favourite lens.

 

[cichlid]

Erm.. If you want quality you've got to go for their EX series rather than just HSM alone. Anyway, here's my experience:

20mm F1.8 EX (no HSM) *Sold* - Soft wide open. Sharp at about F2.8, tack sharp at F4. Slow, noisy AF. Hunts ALOT and is especially useless in low light. No peeling experienced.
70-200mm F2.8 EX HSM *Sold* - Soft wide open. Tack sharp at F4. Quick, silent AF. Experienced peeling with the finish but good build quality overall.
180mm F3.5 EX HSM DG Macro - Sharp wide open. Silent AF but hunts a lot. No peeling yet. Solid build quality.
50-500 F4-6.3 EX HSM - Sharp wide open (serious). Relatively silent AF (can still hear some stuff going on inside), relatively fast for the zoom range. Not that much hunting except in poor light. Peeling like crazy. Pretty solid build for an extending barrel design. Heavy as hell.

Wow! You are an experienced Sigma lens user :thumbsup: thanks for your input.

 

[cichlid]

No offence, but I think comparing performance wide-open should be the way to go rather than after stopping down (especially if you're talking about all the way to f/8)

Even a mediocre lens will be reasonably sharp after stopping down by so much.

I still recommend going with the Nikkors though. Since you would already be having the 18-55 , maybe a longer telephoto would be good for you. 55-200 or sometihng like that. Since cost is a major factor for you.

Good lenses come with a price. And... well, only you would know if you would need a 30/1.4 prime. I certainly don't see a need for my purposes.

The D40 really limits one's choices of lens.

Yup, I already have the AFS 55-200mm bought from a fellow CSer...