Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 10, 2005, 2:46 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 39
Default

KM_krazy wrote:
Quote:
I am looking at getting the XT, and I was looking at getting both the Sigma AF 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC, and the

I was just wondering if anyone out there has any experience with either of these lenses,
Nobody has yet replied with user experience of the Sigma 18-125. Others have replied with theory rather than their own practice.

I used this lens on my DRebel and now on the 10D. Believe it or not I am pretty well satisfied with it. But it depends what your needs are. I am not an enthusiastic competitive amateur. I am a chap who takes pictures of the garden, family, holidays, hobbies, and the odd attempt at something artistic. I do not share my pictures on a web site. I hate the thought of going back to my film days of lugging a sackful of lenses around, and this lens stays put on the 10D other than when I need a long tele, and then the cheapo Sigma 70-300 goes on. If you rarely print more than A4, and if you dont spend a lot of time pixel peeping on the computer looking full size and more, then you will find this a very nice lens. If you like the swank of expensive lenses, or if you want to join the "mine is bigger/better/sharper/longer.... than yours" you had better save up and buy Canon L, because that will be your only route to heaven.
cheers

ken from the uk.
ken from the uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2005, 5:27 AM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 39
Default

I have posted some ordinary pictures taken with my Sigma 18-125 on both the Drebel and 10D bodies. These are not "art" they are just what I do! Holidays, hobbies and stuff. But they are available full size if needed. Some will have been sharpened, but why worry, it is the finished picture thatI look at, not the electronics that come out of the camera.

See them at http://www.pbase.com/mortain/sigma_18125_examples

I hope this helps

ken from the uk


ken from the uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2005, 11:59 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 28
Default

Ken,

Those are some fine examples depicting the quality of the Sigma 18-125. To see the fine strands of hair on the lady and her complexion that clearly is enough to convince me that this lens would be a pretty good buy at $269 USD. Shame on you, Canon!

Another plus, for my needs, is capturing an object in motion, such as the Texaco free flight model. This is the area that I am interested in. Show me all the still photography you want,but the test, for me, is "can the lens communicate with the camera fast enough to focus on a moving object with minimal "out of focus" problems?

I have been contemplating buying the lens, and at times, I wonder about the Tamron 18-200 for the longer reach. Of course, the price will approach $400 USD which isn't too far beyond what my budget allows.

Note - "SA Flyer" stands for San Antonio flyer of RC models in the Alamo City.

SA Flyer
SA Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2005, 3:48 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 39
Default

I am an active radio and free flight aeromodeller and a lot of my photography is of moving model aircraft. I am also an engine builder and although not a macro lens, it performs well on small objects like engines. I don't just this lens by comparing with others. I simply ask if it does the job I want it do do, and are the finished pictures what I want them to be. I am happy with it.

cheers

ken from the uk [and member of Motor Boys International]
ken from the uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2005, 5:54 AM   #15
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

There are many good examples posted previously on this Sigma 18-125 as well:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/143791

Indeed it's an excellent lens, in fact it's better than the EF-S 17-85mm @ 18mm:

vs



... and still quite sharp at 125:

vs (@ 85mm only)

As compared to the EF-S 17-85mm which is excellent at the telephoto but stop short of 85mm. The difference is wether IS is worth 2-3 times the price



SA Flyer wrote:
Quote:
Shame on you, Canon!
Right on -> check out the MTF for the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L vs the equivalent Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 as well and see if this lens also is worth 3 times the prices of the Sigma and this time with no IS :?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 11:54 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 65
Default

I just bought one of the Sigma 18-125 lenses and I am QUITE surprised by how well it does. Maybe I got a sharp copy but it works great with my 350D (XT Rebel). Quick to focus, not noise and the photos I've take so far are quite good. The range is impressive and it will probably be on my camera a lot.

I took quite a few shots with it today at work to document projects I was working on and I was literally amazed how well it did. No noisy motor as some have complained about and the focus was very quick. I would highly suggest people not overlook this lens especially at it's price point. I paid $224 + shipping.

I like having the WA and decent zoom and not too slow to be useful. Also it will work on the larger format sensors so if Canon decides to eliminate that in the future it will work on other cameras. That was one big reason I stayed away from the 17-85.

What I would do and plan on at this point is to pair my 18-125 up with a Sigma 70-200 2.8 and either a 1.4 or 2.0 TC and give me a pretty good range of lenses. Then with 2 lenses I can get pretty good coverage and the 2.8 absolutely is a great lens for the money. I figured it all up and I can get the 18-125 I've already bought PLUS the 70-200 2.8 Sigma and the 1.4TC for just a touch over $1,000 US. This should cover about 98% of the shooting I want to do except for a really long tele.
Wavshrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 3:22 AM   #17
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

NTL

I'm not convinced that the Sigma looks better at 18mm from those charts. That's pretty serious dropoff at the edges compared to the 17-85. Though it looks a bit better in the centre.

peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 3:26 AM   #18
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Wavshrdr wrote:
Quote:
Also it will work on the larger format sensors so if Canon decides to eliminate that in the future it will work on other cameras. That was one big reason I stayed away from the 17-85.
Are you sure? The only Sigma 18-125 I can find is one that is the DC model and therefore will only work on reduced frame sensors.

http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lens...s/18-125mm.htm

DC (DC Lens)

These are special lenses designed so that the image circle matches the smaller size of the image sensor of most digital SLR cameras. Their specialized design gives these lenses the ideal properties for digital cameras, the compact and lightweight construction is an added bonus ! including compact and lightweight construction.

Don't let that worry you too much though. It's a very nice lens and at a good price to boot! Time now to concentrate on getting some great photos. Post some when you get a chance. :-)
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2005, 6:57 AM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 6
Default

Any fair reading shows the Sigma 18mmcharts are better than Canon. The Canon thin lines are wide open and the Sigma lines are all wide open. Therefore a comparison is Canon thin lines vs. Sigma lines, and don't look at the thick f8 Canon lines.The Sigma is a lot higher out to 11mm, and then comparable. On an APS-C sensor 11mm is the far corner.

Canon at 85mm has the edge over Sigma at 125mm, but, after all that is comparing 85mm to 125mm, and the difference is less than Sigma's advantage at 18mm.

IS is super nice, but IS aside the Sigma is a better lens. On DPReview someone took the trouble to carefully take photos with both lenses and publish crops. The Sigma beat the Canon in most views.

If they were the same price I'd buy Canon for IS, but the Canon is more than twice as much. Sigma for me.
tomwittmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2005, 7:43 AM   #20
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

tomwittmann wrote:
Quote:
Any fair reading shows the Sigma 18mm charts are better than Canon. The Canon thin lines are wide open and the Sigma lines are all wide open.
No that's not correct. The Canon Black lines are wide open and the Blue lines are at f8. The Canon thick black line compares to the Sigma red line and the thin black line compares to the green line.

Quote:
On an APS-C sensor 11mm is the far corner.
No that's not right either. If you consider the diagonals from the centre to the corners you really need to measure out to 12.5 mm or so. So once again the sigma suffers by comparison, from this chart you would expect to see a significantly worse performance of the sigma in the corners and probably noticable vignetting under some circumstances.

Quote:
Canon at 85mm has the edge over Sigma at 125mm, but, after all that is comparing 85mm to 125mm, and the difference is less than Sigma's advantage at 18mm.
Not if you look at the correct lines. Besides, the longer the telephoto the greater the advantage so the comparison isn't fair to the Canon! Nevertheless it's significantly better at the telephoto end too.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:04 PM.