 |
|
|
thewu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2004
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Good value for money, Sharp lens, Wide
|
|
Cons:
|
Flare, Flare, Flare, Flare.
Size of the lens, Range of zoom
|
|
Bought this lens a while ago, and though the 15mm is great, I find that the range of the zoom is not great enough to warrant it being a zoom lens - You'd be better off getting a 15mm lens, and a 28mm f/1.8 or something.
The Image quality of this lens is good, and produces sharp results. However, flare is a HUGE problem for this lens. You get flare if you shoot into sun, if there are bright lights anywhere in the frame, if there's bright lights anywhere near you etc. The lens flares are blue, splotchy, very intense, and completely ruins any photo where they are present.
Given the flare problems, though the lens is fantastic for it's price and performance, it's hard to recommend.
My gallery has some examples of the flare problem
http://www.the-wu.org/cgi-bin/album.pl?album=camera/sigma1530
|
|
 Jun 18, 2004
|
|
jclark58
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 6, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 135
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $410.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, Wide (15mm film, 24mm digital), Great build and finish.
|
|
Cons:
|
FLARE, Non-HSM focusing, FLARE, built in hood useless, FLARE, 82mm or gel filters, FLARE.
|
|
|
Flare is a HUGE issue and must be carefully watched anytime the sun or any bright light source is in or anywhere near the frame. The built in hood does very little to actually shade the lens (particularly when turned to the portrait orientation). The Dual Focus feature takes a bit to get used to but functions well.
A great lens with fantastic wide angle coverage at an inexpensive price.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2004
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: United States
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, Range, Build, Sharp for the price
|
|
Cons:
|
FLARE!!
|
|
|
Always on my camera (digital rebel...300D), Great lens.
I try the canon 17mm-40mm L.
This lens is just a little bit under the quality of image of the canon 17-40.
At F8.0 the difference begin to be hard to see.
For the price is a not brainer....
This lens is the best ratio price/quality of image
ONLY one problem......outdoor with the sun, the flare is often present on your picture.
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2004
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: United States
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2004
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
15 mm on a Canon 10 D is 24mm, color rendition,sharpness
|
|
Cons:
|
Flare, flare, flare. whoever says this is a great lens, is probably only using it in a studio, because outside 1 out of every 3 pictures is ruined by flare, or it takes you lots of patience to shield the sun with your hand if possible. flare consists of blue spots or and severe loss of contrast. O yes had to return first two copies because of terrible edge fuzzieness.
|
|
|
For digital buy canon 17-40 or for nikon18-35, or cheap and good for nikon is the 17mm Tokina, for canon this lens focuses slow, but on the good side is very flair resistent, and who needs Autofocus on 17mm.
|
|
|
May 25, 2004
|
|
L. Smits
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 4, 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: May 4, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $579.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp and great zoom for Sigma SD10. Superb construction.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nope.
|
|
|
15mm is fantastic. Not heavy. Love this lens. The quality and features are there and the price is right. Very big value for money.
|
|
|
May 4, 2004
|
|
adarmosaputro
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 14, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: May 1, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp corner to corner, solid built, good contrast and color rendition
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy, large diameter, AF sometimes hunts a little
|
|
|
I am very satisfied with this lens. Used with my 10D, it produces sharp images without post-processing.
|
|
|
May 1, 2004
|
|
sunlite
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 15, 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 8
|
|
|
Mar 5, 2004
|
|
vince
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Location: China
Posts: 306
|
|
Review Date: Feb 2, 2004
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Superb construction and solid feel.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not so hot optics, weird AF/MF switching mechanism, massive flare.
|
|
|
The first thing that impressed me about this lens was the construction. It's really solid and feels good to hold. I wanted to get a real wide angle zoom and retire my 24/2.8. I bought this used for around US$300 which was a pretty good deal.
The first thing I observed about the optics was the color saturation. It was excellent, probably as good as my primes. However when I did a comparison between this lens, my 24/2.8 and a borrowed 15/2.8 fisheye, the optical quality was obvious. The images were OK in the center but had a sort of "smeared out" look towards the edges. (These were 24x36 slides, not digital). The sharpness was not close to the 15/2.8 and 24/2.8 at any aperture. I finally decided that I couldn't use this lens with my film cameras, and sold it. I'm trying out a 17-40/4L now and will probably buy it soon.
|
|
|
Feb 2, 2004
|
|
missionphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 10, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 265
|
|
Review Date: Jan 11, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Impressive sharpness corner to corner at 15mm, EX build quality, fast AF, dual focus ring floats in AF mode for easy camera rotation, fixed pedal hood, 82mm threaded pedal cover plus rear gel filter option, separate IR focus index line, never changes length, 8 blades, price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some flare. f3.5 is a bit slower than the less expensive Sigma 17-35 EX, but with 15mm you don't need a lot of shutter speed to hand hold.
|
|
|
Performance:
This lens couldn't be much sharper at 15mm, it is pristine. Softer at 30mm, though still better than average corner to corner. I like that it seems optimized for 15mm. Very impressive, Sigma. Some flare, but any 15mm zoom is really prone to that. f3.5 is a little slow, but at 15mm 1/15 sec works for handholding, so it isn't a problem. Incredibly deep DOF at 15mm, makes for spectacular foregrounds, sharp from your feet to the horizon (at least with a cropping DSLR). 8 blades is very respectable for a lens of this price and not much is usually OOF.
Build:
Superior. Suprisingly light for it's size. Fast AF. The 82mm front thread is accomplished using a felt lined cap that slides firmly over the permanent pedal hood. A little awkward but it works a lot better than it sounds. No vignetting with an 82mm front filter using a cropping DSLR at 15mm, I doubt the same would be true with full frame where the angle of view is really uncanny.
Overall:
Arguably the best in its class, great price makes it even better. Everytime I see the images I thank myself for buying this lens.
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2004
|
|
spartan123
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Nov 9, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 3683
|
|
Review Date: Dec 1, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price and quality. This lens is great on the 10D. Lens hood is kind of unique two piece unit.
|
|
Cons:
|
none that I can think of.
|
|
|
This is one of my favorite WA zooms. If your carefully of not putting the lens in a situation were it might flare, you will get amazing photo's. Even though most wide angle lenses have a tendency to "flare" I never thought this lens was that bad when it does.
Great sharpness, color and contrast.
|
|
|
Dec 1, 2003
|
|
mfoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 2249
|
|
Review Date: Oct 21, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $650.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good price in comparison to 16-35 which was the only real alternative when I puchased. Very sharp to my eye.
|
|
Cons:
|
Sometimes hunts for the correct focus. The very front element (not the glas) is slightly loose... had to kind of screw it back in.
|
|
If I could add USM to this lens it would be great. I use this lens all time and it hasn't disappointed me yet. From bright snowy shots to interiors. Shows great color and it very sharp in my opinion.
I do like the heavy built. It feels like good quality. For me the extra 2 mm compared to the new 17-40 is worth it when using my D60.
All wide angle shots at www.pbase.com/mfoto are taken with this lens.
mfoto 
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2003
|
|
scorpio_39
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 8, 2003
Location: Dominican Republic
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Oct 3, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $485.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp and outstanding zoom range,
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit large but somewhat light for this size lens.
|
|
|
This lens has been great for my Fujis and the photography I do, mostly lanscapes, texture, and nature.
It was on one of my camera bodies 100 % of the time untill I bought the 12~24mm DX Nikkor.
Have found my lens to be very sharp at all apertures and focal lenghts, color is a bit (but beautifully) warm, just a tinge yellow.
Link to the exposure system of the camera is great and auto exposures are right on, considering variation due to the super wide features when at the widest focal lenght.
Polarizers CAN be used on the lens cover/hood that goes over the non-removable petal shaped lens shade.
With a normal thickness polarizer filter (or any other filter) installed, be carefull as it will vignette at the 15mm. lenght.
I always have a Kasemann circular polarizer installed there and it works just perfect.
The image it forms are very linear and not distorted abnormaly for the 15mm to 30mm that it covers.
|
|
|
Oct 3, 2003
|
|
Antje
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 6156
|
|
Review Date: Sep 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, wide, sturdy, not expensive, picks up colours nicely
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy (the downside of being built like a tank), double AF/MF switch can be cumbersome (I don't care), huge and expensive filters needed (82mm), not exactly a low light lens (3.5 - 4.5)
|
|
|
In my opinion, this lens is excellent. It's built very well and the overall feel is that of a trusty tool. It's sharp and picks up colours very well. You may not even need a polarizer with that lens (though I plan to buy one eventually). If you don't want to use the drop-in filter drawer, filters like polarizers for that lens are very expensive because they're so huge, and you have to attach polarizers to the detachable hood that comes with the lens. That is a minor point for me though: I think the hood is essential because that lens is quite prone to lens flare. I keep a hood on every lens, and because I own a 10D, I don't have to worry about vignetting.
I took this lens on a vacation and used it mainly on landscapes. It did really shine, produced lovely images and was a joy to use. I got used to the Sigma oddities like ring direction and MF/AF switch very soon and don't even notice that anymore when shooting. I carried it in a Lowepro TrimTrekker backpack on long hikes and didn't notice the weight. I wouldn't recommend it as a walkaround lens though, it's too heavy to have it dangle from your neck.
Overall I'd say it's a sturdy, sharp and rather cheap WA. I haven't regretted buying it.
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2003
|
|
stevez32
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 25, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 2590
|
|
Review Date: Jul 16, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Ulta-wide angle, sharp on 1.6 crop cameras, EX build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Filters are either expensive or cumbersome to use, no HSM
|
|
|
Great bang for the buck to go as wide as 15mm and still be sharp. Most of the other reviews capture the gist of the lens, so I'll just add my recommendation for anyone with a DSLR that wants a wide angle that is a great performer without breaking the bank.
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2003
|
|
Jacques G
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 19, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 40
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredible range.
Low price.
Low distortion.
Close focus.
Sharp at 15mm and F11.
|
|
Cons:
|
Difficult to focus because of max aperture.
Manual focus sliding barrel a pain.
Soft at 20-30mm (my sample).
|
|
|
No such great need for a zoom in this range. A step or two will give me the same range with the 17-35mm Nikon I traded it in for.
Plus I'll get a constant 2.8, same color rendition as my other Nikons, greater resale value.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2003
|
|
gavin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 468
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2003
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
good usefull wide zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft (very) wide open
|
|
|
I may have got a bad one. The reviews are stellar for this lense but mine is crap! I'll wait for the nikor 12-24mm and replace it. It is acceptible at f5.6 to 16 but I don't shoot in there much. At 3.5 it's nearly unussable. Put it this way I'm very reluctant to pull it out of the bag unless there is a lot of light. I use the 28-70 f2.8 all the time (great lense) and try to deal with the lack of width.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
88
|
185580
|
Oct 23, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
90% of reviewers
|
$1,370.66
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.84
|
9.32
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
