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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 29, 2005, 3:53 PM   #11
Member
 
Randy G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Default

I did find some posted images from the 24-70 and they were indeed impressive- certainly making that lens the first choice, generally speaking.

Since you are the resident Sigma junkie ..or pusher? :?

If we discount the 2.8 vs. 3.5 aperture, how would you compare the Sig 18-125 to the Sig 28-70?
-build
-feel
-focus speed
-image quality
-anything else you can think of...?
-do you know of any quality images posted from the 18-125, and in particular, any comparing the two?

The 18-125 certainly in the range I am looking for, and am willing to look at all arguments.

The samples I have seen from the Sig 28-70 2.8 are very nice indeed and it's at the top of the short list at the moment. Its huge size makes it more expensive than it seems when you factor in a filter or two though- something seldom discussed from what I have seen.

But, oh, the case. A major selling point indeed! :lol
Randy G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2005, 4:15 PM   #12
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Randy G. wrote:
Quote:
Since you are the resident Sigma junkie ..or pusher? :?
Just a 'neutral' camera collector
... kind of gotten sick of theses 'Sigma' bashing


In my former life I was the resident Minolta pusher: :G :-) :lol:http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...297933#p297933

-> but I've just began to start my Nikon collection


BTW the Sigma 28-70 is an older lens - stick with the 24-70 EX, this is a newer design and is a full-frame hence you're only using the best part of that lens on a 20D/XT!
Also they've just revamped their entire line: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...sigma10dgs.asp
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2005, 4:40 PM   #13
Member
 
Randy G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
BTW the Sigma 28-70 is an older lens - stick with the 24-70, this is a newer design!
Ya... I keep doing that. My brain's ASA is set too slow. :roll: I did indeed mean the 24-70.. Wishing it was an 18-70, but there we go again! If it was it would probably be about the size of a salad plate, and I can't afford a 200mm CP filter. :?

I still would like to find a comparison of the 24-70 to a good sample of the 18-125 (by the same camera/place/time/etc.). From what I have seen, the 18-125 is not bad, but the images from the 24-70 seems sharper with better color. It would also be nice to have some real control over DOF again, and the 2.8 will give me that.

Currently my brain screams, "Get the Sig 24-70 2.8 and fill in the other extremes at a later time."

Randy G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2005, 4:47 PM   #14
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Don't forget the Tokina 24-200! Excellent design http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...72&forum_id=65

This one will get you by - and delay the BIG decisions so you can procrastinate again later :lol: :G :-)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2005, 7:57 PM   #15
Member
 
Randy G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Default

FWIW- for others' reference:

At http://tinyurl.com/86wu4
Date Junichi has a created a webpage (originally in Japanese) comparing:

Sigma 18-125mm F3.5-5.6DC
Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3DC
Tamron AF18-200mmF3.5-6.3XR DiII

The above link is to a Babelfish translation. Because of that, "Tamron" translates to "????" but the rest is marginally understandable. There are LOTS of comparative images there makign it worth a visit for anyone thonking about these lenses. At 18mm there is some visible vignetting on at least two of th lenses, and I wonder if it is from using too thick of a filter or just from low-quality lenses...?

This link may have been posted in other threads, but I thought that in this discussion I would list it again.
Randy G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2005, 11:03 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 52
Default

Randy, I have a 20D and have been thru exactly what you are going thru. I tried the Sigma 18-125 thinking it would be the perfect solution. It's not! It's very soft. I sold the 18-125 and bought a 70-200L f/4. Couldn't believe the difference! so I bought a 17-40L for the wide end. It was good but lacked the versatility I needed for a walk-around lens. I was shopping for something in between like a 24-70L or perhaps a Tamron 28-75 so as not to look like an L snob. I tried a 17-85 IS and am very happy. This lens compares very favorably to the 17-40L (actually it's consistently better when shooting handheld, which is how I use a walk-around lens). It may seem expensive but I think it's a bargain considering it will replace my 17-40L and something else. For artistic work, there are many inexpensive primes that do a fantastic job like an 85mm f/1.8 or 50mm 1.8/1.4. Good luck!
Humrme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2005, 12:14 AM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Randy G. wrote:
Quote:
I still would like to find a comparison of the 24-70 to a good sample of the 18-125 (by the same camera/place/time/etc.). From what I have seen, the 18-125 is not bad, but the images from the 24-70 seems sharper with better color. It would also be nice to have some real control over DOF again, and the 2.8 will give me that.
You have to remember that the 24-70 is an EX their 'professional' line (ie the Sigma 'L' equivalent)
-> You can't compare an 'EX' series (with a gold ring) to lesser budget Sigma (without the ring):
1. They are built better (all metal) vs plastic - Yes even on the EF-S
2. Most have HSM (USM equivalent - fast, quiet with full-time manual overide)
3. Fixed and not variable aperture (very large front elements)
4. Ever think about upgrading to a full-frame? (You won't be able to go down this path with an EF-S selection)
5. Sigma EX zooms also hold focus while zooming - unlike the Canon's (try it - or check the manual for this warning!)



BTW modern zooms are much better than their older primes - Make sure to check their MTF's:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...57&forum_id=65
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2005, 12:21 PM   #18
Member
 
Randy G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
You have to remember that the 24-70 is an EX their 'professional' line (ie the Sigma 'L' equivalent)
-> You can't compare an 'EX' series (with a gold ring) to lesser budget Sigma (without the ring)
SURE I can! I've done it before! Come on over and watch if you like!

Quote:
2. Most have HSM (USM equivalent - fast, quiet with full-time manual overide)
They didn't list the motor on the 24-70 so I had assumed that it does not have the HSM motor.

Quote:
3. Fixed and not variable aperture (very large front elements)
I assume you are referring to the f2.8 full-range aperture available on the 24-70 et.al...?

Quote:
5. Sigma EX zooms also hold focus while zooming - unlike the Canon's (try it - or check the manual for this warning!)
I am aware of those limitations on the Canon, but I haven't read that about the Sigma EX zooms...
Quote:
BTW modern zooms are much better than their older primes - Make sure to check their MTF's:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...57&forum_id=65
I took some of the Sigma EX MTF charts and cropped them to match the 20D sensor's size and superimposed them over other lenses (Canon and Sigma dedicated digital lenses), just for fun. it is interesting.

Here's another question- are there any tele-extenders that woth with the Sigma 24-70? The Sigma list of compatible lenses does not list that lens and I now that it isn't like in the "old days" when if the lens fit the camera it worked with the doubler. That might be cool for me becasue with my two lenses it would give me an effective range of:
(18-55)
28-88
56-176
(24-70)
38-112
76-224 (that would be cool)
...but the way this search has been going, I doubt it would work.. :sad: And I am aware of the f multiplier, and that's part of why I ask, I suppose...




Randy G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2005, 10:00 PM   #19
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Randy G. wrote:
Quote:
NHL wrote:
Quote:
You have to remember that the 24-70 is an EX their 'professional' line (ie the Sigma 'L' equivalent)
-> You can't compare an 'EX' series (with a gold ring) to lesser budget Sigma (without the ring)
SURE I can! I've done it before! Come on over and watch if you like!
You can but they are totally different animals - The metal EX is as large as the EF 24-70 f/2.8L:





The plastic build non-EX lenses are smaller in size similar to the Tamron, with no semi-transparent window for the distance/DOF scale:




When you turn the zoom/focus rings they feel also smoother and much more 'substantial' :blah:





Quote:
They didn't list the motor on the 24-70 so I had assumed that it does not have the HSM motor.
Correct - However look carefully for that AF mark right below the focusing ring -> You can still do full-time manual overide of the AF without flipping the AF/M switch first, just like the HSM a feature on the Ultrasonic lenses, you just have to live with the gearing 'noise' - but that's a compromise that comes with the $$$... :G





Quote:
... are there any tele-extenders that woth with the Sigma 24-70? The Sigma list of compatible lenses does not list that lens and I now that it isn't like in the "old days" when if the lens fit the camera it worked with the doubler.
A generic teleconverter will work, but they are not matched to a lens range so their quality will suffer - Theses generic TC have less internal elements and will fit between any lenses because they don't protrude outside the lens mount...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...u=53109&is=REG
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...u=53247&is=REG
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2005, 3:44 PM   #20
Member
 
Randy G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 73
Default

Thanks for all the info as well as the images. You need to start a website for lens comparisons only! SHowing a ruler next to such images would also be helpful.

One things folks need to do before dropping the cash is add in the cost of a 1A filter- a high-quality 82mm filter is not cheap!

I have been downloading sample images from the Sig 24-70 and they are all quite nice. The DOF control with a 2.8 lens is wroth the price of admission, and relatively speaking, a low price it is! 1/3 the cost of the "L" equivalent, and certainly, the "L" is not anywhere near three times better, if it can be considered better at all!

In your pics, I assume that the lenses were zoomed/focused to their shortest length?

I am just trying to get my head around the size of the Sig 24-70 f2.8 and dealing with carrying it around all day... Probably gonna' need a bigger camera bag!

re: the Sig 24-70, how does the focusing noise compare to the Canon EF-S 18-55, DC-motor stock lens?

Is the Sig a "push-pull" to switch focus for AF/MF?

And, BTW- It looks like you should have bought a Porsche instead of all those lenses!

Randy G. 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 8:05 PM.