Ian Rance Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 <p>I have been using the Sigma 12-24mm full-frame lens for a few months now. I am a little surprised that it has not become more talked about now that Nikon has full-frame cameras in its digital lineup. I have been very happy with mine (on film) and it is great for doing internal photos as the invisible distortion and good quality stopped down make for some arresting images. It is still very usefully wide used on my crop body (Pronea) and I find myself using it more and more.</p> <p>Are there any other owners of this lens on the Nikon forum? What do you think of your lens?</p> <p>Ian</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolaresLarrave Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I have used mine with my film bodies and my D700. The only small drawback: sometimes the digital camera gets confused, and gives me a file that makes the photograph look like it was taken through a pipe. It only happened once, and I cannot recall what is it I did to fix it in the computer. However, the lens itself is a keeper to me, precisely for the very reasons you stated: distortion is easy to control and the quality is good even if it's not stopped down. In short, I too like this lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolaresLarrave Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I think I used this lens for this photograph. <p><center><a href=" title="Big Sur Sunset by franciscosl, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3563/3465460536_a4047c918e.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Big Sur Sunset" /></a><p><i>View from the Nepenthe Restaurant in Big Sur CA, with my D700 and this lens</i></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 <p>I am using one on my D3 and am very pleased with it. At about 1/3 the cost of Nikon's 14-24mm, it is a reall bargain! I currently own two Sigma lenses and am pleased with both of them.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakob_norstedt_moberg Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 <p>I use it for special purposes, architecture and interiors when distortion free rectilinear images are important. But I feel it is a bit too slow for genereal usage.<br> Fransisco, excuse me if I am wrong but the construction of the front cover can cause a "tunnel image". This happends if you only remove the frontmost part and not the whole cover. But you probably already have found this out.<br> Jakob</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
em_user Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 <p>I've been thinking about getting this lens to use on a D200 dslr and F100 film camera. My research, however, has yielded mixed reviews at best. I hear a lot about sample variation. Users seem to have to get two or three copies before they get a good lens. Also, I've heard complaints that it's just not very sharp. I do love the fact that it's 12mm on full frame (for my current film and future full frame dslr) and relatively distortion free. I'm wondering if I should go for it or just stick with the DX offerings (Tokina 12-24mm, Sigma 10-20) for the D200 and keep using my 20mm AIS for the F100. I'd also be very interested in other's hands-on experience with this lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mvtol Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 <p>Im thinking of buying this lens for my D80. I have two DX lenses but I'm a bit uncertain buying other DX lenses, because we don't know what Nikon comes up with and if it will be FX or DX. This lens seems to give wide angle on DX and will be a good investment for a possible FX camera later on. Anyone experience with DX camera and this FX lens?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolaresLarrave Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Jakob, you are correct on both accounts: the lens hood and cap combination that can be tricky, and the fact that I quickly found it out. In fact, when I only take out the front lens cap, the rest of it can be easily visible through the viewfinder. However, that's not what happened to me. When I shot a series of photographs, the digital image (the file in my computer) in the first two showed the tunnel vision problem. I wish I could recall how I fixed it... I must have used NX Capture to do it. The rest of the photos turned out fine. It's a good lens, BTW, but physically ugly. But then, who cares about it? The pics taken with it speak for themselves. Take care! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sampson Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 <p>Got it, use it with film and digital.<br> The single most used lens in my quiver. Certainly some major cons to the lens (filters, max aperture, flare prone, and a tad of CA) - but given its cost, I agree its a huge bargain.<br> Aside from the phenomenal Nikon 14-24mm, there aren't any other lenses in the mix, so playing second fiddle to that one ain't so bad.</p> 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