sonny_jet Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Hi, I am after a wide angle lens for my 5D and possibly for a future aditional 1d2N purchase. I was initially thinking of going down the Canon route with either a second hand 17-35L or s/h or brand new 17- 40L. However, I realised I have the 24-105L + 35L and so there wasn't any point in spending lots of money for 17-24mm of the 17-40L/17-35L lenses. I have now turned my attention to 3rd party lenses. The lens will be used for landscapes + indoor/novelty uses. The Sigma 12-24 4.5-5.6 DG looks interesting and I was hoping to get feedback from users. Thre are also other companies who make a similar lens, I think Tokina or Tamron. Is one significantly better than the other? I have heard that the Sigma has to be stopped down to f8/11 - that isn't a problem for me. I have also been told that it has a rear gelatin filter system. I am not sure what this is but some users have reported it to be a little bothersome. On the plus side, the Sigma is cheaper than canons and it's also 12mm! - that sounds very cool. Do you recommend the Sigma 12-24? Are there any similar/better alternatives? Does anyone know when the February PMA show is ? As Canon may release some news on a new WA lens... Thank you very much. You're help is appreciated :) Sonny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonglass Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 <<However, I realised I have the 24-105L + 35L and so there wasn't any point in spending lots of money for 17-24mm of the 17-40L/17-35L lenses.>> From my perspective that overlap is a Good Thing. This can keep you from having to change lenses more often, and on a dSLR, this is a good thing. Don't think of that overlap as wasteful, but a convenience, so you don't have to remove the lens to get just a little bit extra length. If you look at it that way, your are losing nothing. I guess I started seriously thinking this way when I got a 19-35, which overlaps my longer lens in the range of 28-35. It's no big deal, but having that little bit extra is a blessing, not a loss, in the end. That's my perspective. Also, from some things I've read here and on other sites, optical quality should be a top consideration for the 5D, so it's likely that the extra Canon quality is something else you should consider. -Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_chappell Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 <I> The Sigma 12-24 4.5-5.6 DG looks interesting and I was hoping to get feedback from users. Thre are also other companies who make a similar lens, I think Tokina or Tamron. Is one significantly better than the other? I have heard that the Sigma has to be stopped down to f8/11 - that isn't a problem for me. I have also been told that it has a rear gelatin filter system. I am not sure what this is but some users have reported it to be a little bothersome. On the plus side, the Sigma is cheaper than canons and it's also 12mm! - that sounds very cool.</i><P> You have a 5D, a FF camera. The Sigma 12-24 is the <B>only</b> 12-ish mm lens that covers the full frame. <B><I>NONE </B></I> of the others, by Tamron, Sigma, Canon, Tokina, etc. have full frame coverage, except possibly at the longer focal lengths, and even then are likely to have pretty poor image quality in the corners.<P> If you search you will find quite a few threads covering the Sigma 12-24. I have one. It's a very good lens -- but I use it mainly on a 1DII, which is not full-frame, so I can't comment on corner performance for a 5D. I also don't use it wide open much, but when I have, the results are good. It has very little barrel distortion at any focal length, but can flare if the sun is anywhere near the field of view. Some users report excellent results, others are not as happy, implying sample variation. Yes, you have to use gelatine filters rear-mounted. The big bulging front element precludes front-mounted filters for all practical purposes, especially on FF. Therefore you can forget using polarizers or ND grads (which are the only filters I ever employ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henrik.ploug Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 If you want a 12mm zoom for your 5D, the Sigma is your only option. The other ultra-wide lenses is for cropped cameras only. According to this review the Sigma 12-24mm should be "a very decent performer for an ultra-wide zoom lens": http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1224_4556/index.htm But the verdict is based on a test with a 1,6 crop camera. And according to the review the lens has problems with chromatic aberrations and vignetting. At f4,5 you can expect more than 1 stop of vignetting on a cropped camera. On a full frame camera like the 5D you will probably need to stop the lens down to to avoid vignetting - or remove it afterwards with software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonny_jet Posted January 21, 2006 Author Share Posted January 21, 2006 A big thank you to everyone. Cheers! It looks as though this is a great lens. Does anyone know how the gelatin filter holder system works? I.e. is it like the Cokin Filter holder system but at the BACK of the lens? As I would appreciate using a Polariser if anything else. Mark, it must be a good lens if you have one as I know you only buy top quality! Sonny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyleong Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 i have a love-hate relationship with this lens 1) Love it for the wide and sharp pics with the Canon 10D VERY little distortion ( if you know how to use it ) 2) Hate it for the AF problems with Flash AF beams Known problem, even at Sigma technical centre the SIGMA FLASH couldnt get it to work ( focus ring goes past infinity ) 3)On EOS50 film camera, i dont see much vignetting. But i am not looking for them, i just love good pictures :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elsen Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Another thread about Sigma 12-24 with examples http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Eoek Besides, distortion control of this lense is great on an APS-C camera, moderate on an film/full-frame camera. However, with a focal lengh close to fisheye lenses, this lense indeed requires some experience and practice to get a photo with well-controlled distortion on full-frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_chappell Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 <I>However, with a focal lengh close to fisheye lenses, this lense indeed requires some experience and practice to get a photo with well-controlled distortion on full-frame.</i><P> I think you're talking about the odd perspective effects. "Distortion" usually means that straight lines are rendered as curved in the image (barrel distortion, pincushion distortion, etc.), and the 12-24 is veru well controlled for that. At least, my sample is. Yes, buildings and trees and so forth appear to lean in a 12-24 image if you point the camera up or down, but that's the undistorted perspective of the wide field of view. Even though they appear to 'lean', straight objects are rendered with straight lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elsen Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Thanks, Mark. I appreciate your correction and I guess this pic illustrate the well-controlled distortion http://www.photo.net/photo/3997248 all straight lines keeps straight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now