Comments on Sigma lenses.

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by Andy K, Jan 6, 2005.

  1. Andy K

    Andy K Member

    Messages:
    9,422
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Sunny Southe
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I recently acquired, at a knockdown price, a Sigma Mini-Wide 28mm f/2.8 lens for my OM10 on ebay. Whilst I wait for it to arrive I was wondering if anyone has experience with Sigma lenses and what your thoughts on them are. Any examples of shots made using Sigma lenses would be welcome.

    Thanks in advance.

    A.
     
  2. kaiyen

    kaiyen Member

    Messages:
    331
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Location:
    bay area, ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    first, there are some examples on pbase of images taken with at least one variant of this lens athttp://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/28mm28 (be aware that several are with the sigma sd9/10 dslr's).

    however, as with any lens maker, you can't judge the entire company's quality by a single lens. all makers have dog lenses along with great ones. similarly, I can't show you shots from my sigma 105 macro and give you any real evidence as to the quality of the sigma you have.

    anyway.
    allan
     
  3. Gustavo_Castilla

    Gustavo_Castilla Member

    Messages:
    890
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Location:
    Bryan Texas
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    28mm

    Hi I own a 28 and a 35 70 and they work fine the 28 mm is much better of the two
     
  4. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,940
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I used to have a Sigma 24/2.8, long ago, for Canon FD. It was one of their better lenses optically, but the build quality was nothing to write home about. They had some trouble in the early days with their larger zooms on the build quality issue--big front elements falling out and such--but the wides have always been pretty good. I've never tried the 28/2.8.
     
  5. Andy K

    Andy K Member

    Messages:
    9,422
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Sunny Southe
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks folks.

    Allan thanks for the link, it seems they are all SD images, which makes it hard to judge the lens' performance because there's no knowing how much they have been manipulated in Photoshop.

    Ah well, I'll find out soon enough once it arrives! :smile:
     
  6. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,032
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I had a 24mm Sigma about 25 years ago, it was a dog of a lens, flare was bad, pin-cushion distortion, so I got rid of it.

    I hadn't learnt my lesson when a few years before I bought a Sigma 80-200 zoom, after two weeks it kept zooming and came apart, the replacement had a faulty aperture mechanism, and the third didn't focus at infinity. I refused the fourth and bought a Mamiya C33 instead.

    The build quality was awful, never had a problem with Vivitar or Tamron, but always bought the S1 or SP lenses.
     
  7. Tom Stanworth

    Tom Stanworth Member

    Messages:
    2,027
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2003
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I had a 70-300 dl for a pentax mz5. It was cheap, a decent performer. You have a good chance of a good lens, but as always, you cannot tell till you get the negs under a loupe/printed
     
  8. Dave Parker

    Dave Parker Inactive

    Messages:
    4,049
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have shot some sigmas that were great, and there has been dogs as well, so, but I have had that with Tamron as well, the first 300 f/2.8 I had the front lens fell out and shattered on the ground when I was in Yellowstone shooting, made for a real bad trip.

    Dave
     
  9. BruceN

    BruceN Member

    Messages:
    585
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2004
    Location:
    Wyoming
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have a Sigma 35-70mm that I've used on my OM-2n for twenty years, now, and it's been fine. I wouldn't say it's mechanically the most rugged, or optically the sharpest, but then again it's not a high dollar lens. For it's price class I think it's done an excellent job - it'll probably last me another 20 years.
     
  10. bjorke

    bjorke Member

    Messages:
    2,032
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Location:
    SF & Surroun
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I have the new 12-24mm and like it a lot but it's an unusual lens (mostly used for digi anyway). Good Sigmas are very good. Did you check photodo etc?
     
  11. Dave Parker

    Dave Parker Inactive

    Messages:
    4,049
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I was thinking about getting this lens, does it really cover full frame on a 35mm? and have you noticed how the sharpness is into the corners?

    Thanks for any info.

    Dave
     
  12. bjorke

    bjorke Member

    Messages:
    2,032
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Location:
    SF & Surroun
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  13. rogueish

    rogueish Member

    Messages:
    877
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    3rd Rock
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have a newer (2 years?) 28-135mm macro zoom that I find is quite sharp with no (that I can see) distortion. It does have a tendency to zoom when pointing down. Almost extreme vinigetting (sp?) when in the 28-35mm range on my Nikon F-401x.
     
  14. modafoto

    modafoto Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,102
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Location:
    Århus, Denma
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I have two Sigmas:


    The 28-105 is ok and a great normal zoom for your first SLR or as a spare lens. But it is not a suberb performer, but I have taken some great photos with it (see my gallery).
    I am about to trade it in for a Sigma 28 mm f/1.8 and a Canon 85 mm f/1.8 (I have Canon 50 mm already som these three will do for me in these focal lenghts).

    The 70-300 is a very great tele zoom lens, and the APO makes the quality high with superb sharpness.

    Morten
     
  15. roteague

    roteague Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Kaneohe, Haw
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    What about the 17-35? It is quite sharp.
     
  16. glbeas

    glbeas Member

    Messages:
    3,307
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2002
    Location:
    Roswell, Ga.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have a 17-35 and I'm quite happy with it. Seems to be quite sharp corner to corner but I haven't really tested it with a loupe and fine grained film.
     
  17. eagleowl

    eagleowl Member

    Messages:
    127
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Both my "extreme" lenses(widest angle and longest telephoto) are Sigmas:17-35 mm and 175-500mm
    Both are excellent-however,Sigma have made some very average lenses too.
     
  18. Andy K

    Andy K Member

    Messages:
    9,422
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Sunny Southe
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It seems to me the concensus is that Sigma had a reputation for poor build but may have rectified that in recent years and that many prefer their wider lenses to their longer lenses...

    Bjorke, I did have a look at photodo but there wasn't much information I could make head or tail of! (well, nothing much in plain english anyway!)