Comments on Sigma lenses.

[Andy K]

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.

[kaiyen]

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

[Gustavo_Castilla]

Hi I own a 28 and a 35 70 and they work fine the 28 mm is much better of the two

[David A. Goldfarb]

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.

[Andy K]

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!

[Ian Grant]

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.

[Tom Stanworth]

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

[Dave Parker]

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

[BruceN]

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.

[bjorke]

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?