Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,905   Posts: 1,555,846   Online: 848
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81

    Comments on Sigma lenses.

    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.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  2. #2
    kaiyen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    bay area, california
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    331
    Images
    4
    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. #3
    Gustavo_Castilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bryan Texas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    890
    Images
    143

    28mm

    Hi I own a 28 and a 35 70 and they work fine the 28 mm is much better of the two
    Gustavo Castilla
    We are not moved by things ,
    but by the views we take of them.
    Epictitus.
    My site
    My flicker page
    Facebook
    Contact

  4. #4
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,344
    Images
    20
    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.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  5. #5
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    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!


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  6. #6
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,327
    Images
    148
    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. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    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. #8
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    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. #9
    BruceN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wyoming
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    585
    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. #10
    bjorke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    SF & Surrounding Planet
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,032
    Images
    20
    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?

    "What Would Zeus Do?"
    KBPhotoRantPhotoPermitAPUG flickr Robot

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin