Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC for Canon AF

[ziggy53]

Does anyone have this lens? The reviews look pretty promising. The application would be Wedding and Event photography, with some landscape and scenic as well. The lens would be used with a dRebel XT and basically replace the "kit" lens.

Thanks,

ziggy53

[hollynla]

I'm eyeing the same lens as you for my 20D. The reviews looks excellent and the price is great too. I'd also like to hear of anyone who uses this lens.

[ziggy53]

Reviews:
http://www.shuttertalk.com/articles/sigma1850ex/index.php
http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/tests/testdetail.cfm?test_id=342
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=232&sort=7&cat=37&page=2

Samples:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/18-50_28_ex_dc
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/sigma_1850__28
http://www.pbase.com/miljenko/image/37156215
http://www.pbase.com/kazfujieda/lenstest&page=3
http://www.pbase.com/miljenko/ccrm_bokeh_tests

[ScottMcLeod]

This lens quirked my interest when I saw it in the Amplis Photo (sigma supplier) book the other day.

Perhaps I should get this instead of the Tamron 28-75 XR Di...

Maybe later though, i'm short on cash, and found a deal on FredMiranda for one.

[ziggy53]

I ordered the lens today. I'll post some results of tests when I get it.


ziggy53

[ziggy53]

I received the lens. Tests and samples are forthcoming.


First impressions: This is a well made, great feeling lens. Actions are smooth and focus lock is quick. There is some sound while focussing, but not objectionable to me. The f 2.8 through the zoom range is great and seems accurate.

This lens replaces both the "kit" lens and a fixed 28mm, so my back is happy, but this is a substantial lens by itself.

I will comment on image-related issues after testing.

ziggy53

[Patrick]

I would be interested in your results of the new Sigma too. I am the proud new owner of a used 20D (only used for 10 shots!!) and it of course came with the EFS 18-55mm kit lens. I am more than a little disapointed with this lens and it kind of takes away the excitement of the new camera.

Sigma also make an 18-85mm zoom, can't recall speed. I like this range
more. Any comments on advantages or disadvantages to this lens over
the Sigma you have choosen?

How "bad" is the 20D kit lens anyway?

Patrick

[ziggy53]

Procedure and equipment:

Canon dRebel XT, 100 ISO, Aperture Priority, tripod for most of the "brick wall" shots. Parameter 2, Contrast, Sharpness, Saturation and Color Tone zeroed.
Sigma 18-50mm, f2.8 DC EX lens

Original shots scaled to 640 x 480, crops are 100%, no software manipulation beyond scaling or cropping.

--------------------------------------
First shot: File:IMG_0715.JPG
Scaled for WEB
18mm
ExposureTime - 1/250 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ExposureProgram - Aperture priority
ISOSpeedRatings - 100

[ziggy53]

Center crop, 100%

[ziggy53]

Crop Lower Left

[ziggy53]

18mm, f4, scaled for WEB

[ziggy53]

18mm, f4, center crop 100%

[ziggy53]

18mm, f4, Crop Lower Left

[ziggy53]

18mm, f8, scaled for WEB

[ziggy53]

18mm, f8, center crop

[ziggy53]

18mm, f8, crop Lower Left

[ziggy53]

50mm, f2.8, scaled for WEB

[ziggy53]

50mm, f2.8, center

[ziggy53]

50mm, f2.8, crop Lower Left

[ziggy53]

This test checks focus accuracy. I used a single center spot for focus and focussed on the slightly taller post central in the image. 50mm, f2.8

[ziggy53]

Center crop of above focus test. 50mm

[ziggy53]

focus accuracy test, 18mm, f2.8

[ziggy53]

18mm, f2.8, center crop

[ziggy53]

Those tests were from July 21, 2005, and the clouds kept moving in and out, varying the exposure. I realized later that I had a UV filter on the lens during the tests. I tested again just at 18mm and just wide open to determine the effects of the filter.


This is with the filter attached:

[ziggy53]

100% Crop Lower Left, filter attached:

[ziggy53]

This time without the filter:

[ziggy53]

100% Crop Lower Left, without filter:

[ziggy53]

All of the following are very much IMHO and only represent my brief tests with this single lens. YMMV

This is a great lens! At f2.8 and 18mm it is a little soft, especially in the corners. I do think USM or better sharpening would be effective and convincing. At f4 everything sharpens nicely and I would be proud of the results right out of the camera.

At 50mm, it seems to do better in the center and the edges, even wide open.

F8 seems to be the sweet spot for this lens and it is sweet indeed! Very sharp edge to edge.

Focus accuracy appears very good with slight hunting some of the time. Very slight. Not a concern. Time will tell what happens under difficult conditions of low contrast or low light.

The filter had some impact wide open and wide-angle, but not enough to make me take it off, ever. The protection benefits are just too great and the image degradation is too small and mostly limited to the corners.

I love this lens and I think this copy is a keeper.

ziggy53

[ExposeTheMoment]

All of the following are very much IMHO and only represent my brief tests with this single lens. YMMV

This is a great lens! At f2.8 and 18mm it is a little soft, especially in the corners. I do think USM or better sharpening would be effective and convincing. At f4 everything sharpens nicely and I would be proud of the results right out of the camera.

At 50mm, it seems to do better in the center and the edges, even wide open.

F8 seems to be the sweet spot for this lens and it is sweet indeed! Very sharp edge to edge.

Focus accuracy appears very good with slight hunting some of the time. Very slight. Not a concern. Time will tell what happens under difficult conditions of low contrast or low light.

The filter had some impact wide open and wide-angle, but not enough to make me take it off, ever. The protection benefits are just too great and the image degradation is too small and mostly limited to the corners.

I love this lens and I think this copy is a keeper.

ziggy53
I prefer to use my Canon 16-35 F2.8 L Lens for weddings, only the best if making a profit on someones special day.

http://photos.htps.net/photos/23886082-L.jpg

[ziggy53]

Thanks Gary,


I noticed at the Corbally Wedding it looks like you teamed that lens (Canon 16-35 F2.8 L) with the Canon 20D. It also looks like you prefer f4 and you shoot often at the 35mm length.
Do you find the lens much sharper at f4 or do you prefer the little extra DOF, or both?
Do you ever wish you had a little longer zoom?

Thanks,

ziggy53

[ExposeTheMoment]

Thanks Gary,


I noticed at the Corbally Wedding it looks like you teamed that lens (Canon 16-35 F2.8 L) with the Canon 20D. It also looks like you prefer f4 and you shoot often at the 35mm length.
Do you find the lens much sharper at f4 or do you prefer the little extra DOF, or both?
Do you ever wish you had a little longer zoom?

Thanks,

ziggy53

Well first off, my normal setup is the following.

Canon 20D
Canon 16-35 2.8 L
Canon 550ex Flash
Gary Fongs LSII

I like having DOF, but I do have and use a Sigma 70-200 2.8

From this point forward, I will be using a two camera setup at my weddings.

So I'll end up with.

Camera One

Canon 20D
Canon 17-35 2.8 L
Canon 550ex Flash
Gary Fongs LSII

Camera Two

Canon 10
Sigma 70-200 2.8D
Canon 550ex Flash
Gary Fongs LSII

My list of gear is pretty large.
Canon 20D & BG-E2 Grip, Canon 10D & BG-ED3 Grip, Canon 16-35 2.8 L
Sigma 20mm 1.8, 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0, Canon 17-55 (20D) Sigma 70-200 2.8
Canon 580EX Flash, Canon 550EX Flash, (2) LightSphere II
Lumiquest Pocket Bounce, Vosonic 2160 (20GB) Hand-Held Photo Storage
(1) 4GB Sandisk Flash Card (1) 1GB Compact Flash Card
(3) 1GB Sandisk Ultra II (2) 512mb Compact Flash Cards
(1) 256mb Compact Flash Card
(9) Sets of 4 MAHA PowerEx 2500 AA NiMH Rechargeable Batteries
and PowerEx MH-C777 PLUS-II Charger

[ziggy53]

This is not my conclusion, of the lens or of the article, but the Sigma is a good lens and it's interesting to see comparisons.

"At half the cost, the Sigma 18-50 does better than the 17-40 /4 L
in different areas...

It has less barrell distortion, kills it regarding vignetting...
and even has better resolution... and f/2.8 on top of that.... ", Ove Sentlig

Full comments, and links, here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=14628053

[ziggy53]

Some pracrical examples from this lens.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=16922

ziggy53

[ian408]

Ziggy,

Thanks for throwing up shots from the lens.

I'm a big fan of the 16-35. The Sigma compares reasonably well.

Love to see some more when you've got the time.

Ian

[ziggy53]

Ian,


Thanks for your comments. Understand that I am also a fan of the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM and I believe it's in a class above this lens. It is the definitive interior and landscape zoom lens for EOS cameras. Eventually the 16-35 will be part of my collection and kit.

The Sigma 18-50mm f 2.8 is designed to compete more directly with the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM and I think they are very comparable. They both provide similar characteristics and each has its advantages and problems. I suspect that quality control may be a problem for both lens lines because of the different experiences people are having. I do like the extra zoom range of the Sigma and I don't think the CA/PF issues will be a problem for how I intend to use the lens, and the problem is largely correctable in software when it occurs. The extra f stop on the Sigma might also be handy in available light. All in all, this is the right lens for me.

Since I have the dRebel XT, I will also desire an even wider zoom or prime lens but, ... that's another discussion thread.

Thanks,

ziggy53

[Andy]

nice job, ziggy - thanks for the hard work.

[SpeshulEd]

Ok, I'm bumping this old thread because I've recently been looking at this lens. However, I'm also interested in the Sigma 17-70mm. I did some searches for the 17-70mm but didn't see any real reviews. Does anyone have experience with these two lenses?

[DJ-S1]

Here's one for the 17-70. (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1770_2845/index.htm)

Interesting lens...

[SpeshulEd]

yep, I've read that review. I was originally looking at the 18-50 until I read this...

Even better than that it delivers a performance which matches and sometimes even exceeds more expensive lenses. This includes the in-house competition (AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX) as well as genuine brand lenses (such as the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS).

...thats what got me really looking at this lens. I've also read some peoples opinions of it being better than the canon 17-40L. Still I thought I'd ask on here, cuz I'm familiar with the people on here a bit and trust everyone a bit more than other random people on the internet.

[ziggy53]

yep, I've read that review. I was originally looking at the 18-50 until I read this...



...thats what got me really looking at this lens. I've also read some peoples opinions of it being better than the canon 17-40L. Still I thought I'd ask on here, cuz I'm familiar with the people on here a bit and trust everyone a bit more than other random people on the internet.

Note that the Sigma 17-70mm is not a constant aperture lens. By 40mm you are at f4, and then f4.5 at 70mm. That said, this lens appears to do very well with resolution across the range, better than the 18-50mm beyond 40mm wide open, although they are both great at f5.6.

Samples at PBase look good:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/17_70_28_45_dc_macro

with a full size sample (click on the "Original"):
http://www.pbase.com/image/58359540

This comment from "Klopus"

"I still think my very good copy of 18-50 EX f2.8 (after 2 bad ones) is sharper, contrastier and crispier than 17-70 at any focal length at wide apretures. When you look at 18-50 EX image (or print) there's almost a prime-type "wow" factor which 17-70 somehow lacks though it's very hard to pinpoint it. Though color tone of 17-70 is definetly more neutral than slightly warmish 18-50. Optically both lens is way better, imo, than 17-85 IS which I also tried fro a week.

Where 17-70 wins over 18-50 EX is price and, yes, versatility - awesome and fun macro capability and extra 20mm on tele. All this while maintaining pretty decent IQ for the price and even having f2.8 at 17-19mm (after which it quickly jumps to f3.5 and up)."

The price at Sigma4Less.com is $350, so it would seem to be a great value.

What-the-heck, if you don't need the constant aperture, and you do need the extra focal length, I say "go for it".

Just keep us posted.

ziggy53