December 22, 2014, 07:54:21 AM

Author Topic: Is it time to consider Sigma lenses seriously?? competitive to Canon?  (Read 37919 times)

cellomaster27

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 182
  • Capture the moment!
    • View Profile
Hey guys.  I am an amateur/hobbyist photographer that loves to keep up on the forums and on cr.    I was wondering what you guys take on the new lenses that Sigma has been putting out on the market.  The price ranges are very competitive even to the Canon brand.  I am a Canon fanboy (to put it best) but the recent 35mm f1.4, 120-300mm f2.8, and now the 18-35mm f1.8is making me think much more of a third party brand.  A friend of mine had a sigma 50mm f1.4 that pulled some impressive pictures!  I have bought and returned a sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 lens before... horrid lens (possibly the copy). 

Anyways, I want to hear from y'all before buying a few lenses. (10-22, 50 1.4, and 15-85 or 24-105)  Thanks!
100D, EOS M, EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6, EF-M 22mm f2, EF-S 18-55mm IS STM f3.5-5.6, EF 28mm f1.8 USM, EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, EF-S 60mm f2.8 macro USM, EF 40mm f2.8 STM, EF 85mm f.18 USM, EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS, 430 EX II, kata 3n-1 22, triggers, lighting, stands, remotes, etc...

canon rumors FORUM


jhanken

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
In a word, yes.  At least the primes.  I have shot with the 50mm for a couple years with my 5D Classic, love it wide open in low light, or stopped down with full light.  Bokeh is fantastic, often resort to manual focus because I like to use it in such low light. Color, contrast and sharpness are excellent, out of focus areas are beautiful, construction great. Got the 35mm f/1.4 recently, even better construction, and image quality is fantastic. It feels like a million dollar piece of equipment.  Still getting a feel for the output, but so far, it's excellent.  It will allow me to create images that my 24-105L never will. I sincerely doubt that the most discerning photographer would be disappointed.
5DIII, 60D, 24-105mm f/4 L, 85mm f/1.8, 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 35mm f/1.4A, Jupiter-9 85mm f/2

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 3326
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
If budget is an issue Sigma lenses are definitely worth considering seriously. There hasn't been much info about the USB dock that can be used to fine tune the Sigma ART lenses ... if that USB dock works as well as they say it will, I think Sigma ART lenses are a great bargain. 
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

wysiwtf

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile

Forceflow

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
    • My Gallery
If budget is an issue Sigma lenses are definitely worth considering seriously. There hasn't been much info about the USB dock that can be used to fine tune the Sigma ART lenses ... if that USB dock works as well as they say it will, I think Sigma ART lenses are a great bargain.

Well, lens rentals seems to think it does:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/06/sigma-optimization-pro-and-usb-dock
Makes me really hopeful about it. Although I have to admit I've been a Sigma 'fan' for quite a while already. I had (and still have) several Sigma lenses and with the exception of the old 24-70 I really do like all of them. (The 85 1.4 is my favorite lens)
Canon 7D - Canon 50mm 1.8 - Canon 24-70mm 2.8 L - Canon 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L IS - SIGMA 85mm 1.4 - SIGMA 150mm 2.8 OS Macro - SIGMA 10-20mm 3,5

hamada

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
one year ago my response would be: stay away from sigma.
to much luck involved to get a good copy.

today with the new lens line they seem to produce very good and constant quality.
i tried the 35mm f1.4 and i loved it. i only have not much use for it.

aj1575

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
Yes, I definitly think so. Beside the IQ of the lens, they also improved quality control and costumer service.

The 35mm F1.4 is really superb (check out the test images over at "the-digital-picture"). I'm not that much impressed with the new 30mm f1.4, we have to wait and see what the 18-35 f1.8 has to offer, but only the fact they offer such a thing is impressive. The 17-70 f2.8-4 is also a nice lens on APS-C, it is optically better than the EF-S 15-85, with a little bit less range but in a smaller, cheaper package.

I'm looking forward to new Sigma lenses in the future. We as costumers can only profit from some competition in the lens market, especially in the APS-C segment.

canon rumors FORUM


Nishi Drew

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • View Profile
Well the 120-300 is nothing new, just a cosmetic update from before but it is good, their 85mm F/1.4 is still fantastic, and I used to have a 10-20mm F/3.5 and that was almost perfect except for the field curvature on the wide end. Now I've got the 35mm F/1.4 and man of man I am complete with it~
Just recently I dropped it on some concrete though... and the thing still works, perfect AF accuracy and no optical problems, just won't mount of the camera as smoothly. So yes, why not consider Sigma? Well, the only reason to still not consider Sigma is if you really need weather sealing, if you're camera's sealed and you want equally sealed lenses then Canon has them, and Tamron has started to offer dust/moisture resistant models but I don't know how well they're sealed.

And being a fanboi of anything is amateurish, what's good is good whoever makes it, Canon themselves have made and proudly sold poor lenses themselves (and still do, or at least "ok" lenses at extreme prices), so really, if you don't want Sigma just because they're not Canon, or are afraid that other people will judge you with your gear then get over it, go make art and have fun knowing that the brand doesn't matter so long as it gets the job done and achieves the results you like~

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Sigma have always been fairly canny at plugging holes in other manufacturers ranges, lenses like the 12-24 (full frame) and the 50-500 bigma were at the time of their launch pretty unique to Sigma.

I've owned a fair few sigmas over the years, the DC 10-20 f4-5.6, the DG 12-24 mk1, the DC 18-50 f2.8 EX, the 24mm f2.8 MD II, the 28mm f1.8 MD (one of my most favourite lenses ever) DG EX 70mm f2.8, the DG EX 50-500 and the 600mm CAT (on Minolta MD and Canon EOS) and I would vouch for all of these, I still own and use the 18-50mm and the 70mm, both of which were best in category at time of purchase.

I've owned 2 sigma lenses that I wasn't happy with, the 17-35 f2.8-4.  I kept it one day and returned it and got a 17-40 f4L instead.  It was a horrid horrid lens, and I had the 30mm f1.4 DC, which I loved for video (in MF mode) but was terrible at focusing, +18AFMA on my 7D and unusable on my 600D.  Also returned.

I've not had any hands on with their new, well reviewed art series lenses, they seem to be getting very good, but also getting less of a value proposition.  Other manufacturers also seem to be plugging interesting holes, like Tokina with my 11-16 f2.8 UWA.  Nobody else makes anything like it. 

I am tempted to get the Sigma 8-16mm, but theres a few more practical things on the list ahead of it.

bchernicoff

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
    • View Profile
    • My Photos
I LOVED the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS when I had a 7D.

And I love the 1.4 primes that I use now.
6D, Fuji X-T1, X-E1
Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 400mm f/2.8L II, 100mm L IS Macro, Sigma 85mm, & 35mm f/1.4's, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8,
Fuji 23mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4, 56mm 1.2, 14mm 2.8, 18-55, 55-200

John

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
all of my lenses now are Canon, but i have owned sigma lenses in the past and liked each and every one of them. i could easily recommend that someone buy a sigma lens. i've owned a few tamron lenses that i liked as well. so why do i only own canons? i love my canon lenses. they provide sharp detail and fast focus and they are designed to work exclusively with canon cameras. the quality is very good and very consistent. i trust them and i am quite happy with them. plus, i have the money to afford the L series lenses.

if the amount of money that i had to spend on a lens was a limiting factor for me, then i would own some sigma lenses. u can great sigma lenses for less than a comparable canon. personally, if u can afford canon lenses, then i would recommend getting canon lenses.


fugu82

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
    • View Profile
I am about to pick up the Sigma 15mm diagonal fisheye. I will use it on my 5D3, but primarily I chose it for my IR converted 40D; it is supposedly fairly free of hotspots for IR. Anyone have any experience with this lens?

Malte_P

  • Guest
Well the 120-300 is nothing new, just a cosmetic update from before but it is good,

it´s a revised version.
a bit more then a cosmetic update.

nobody would pay nearly twice as much just for a cosmetic update.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 11:40:16 AM by Malte_P »

canon rumors FORUM


cayenne

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1226
    • View Profile
I was looking up the Sigma 120-300...when I look on Amazon, I see about 3x of them...from $2499 - $3500+....

How do I differentiate between the latest version of this and the older ones when shopping online?

Thanks in advance,

cayenne

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
I am about to pick up the Sigma 15mm diagonal fisheye. I will use it on my 5D3, but primarily I chose it for my IR converted 40D; it is supposedly fairly free of hotspots for IR. Anyone have any experience with this lens?

I returned it. Soft corners (not a problem with your 40D, of course), 1 stop overexposure, so-so colors.

canon rumors FORUM