about | support
home
 

Search Used

Sigma 15-30mm f3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
86 197164 Oct 23, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,398.92
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.86
9.32
8.6
15_30f35_45_1_

Specifications:
Focal length: 15-30mm
Maximum aperture: F3.5-4.5
Lens construction: 17 elements in 13 groups
Focusing system: Internal Focusing
Angle of view: 110.5-71.6
Number of diaphragm blades: 8
Minimum aperture: F22-32
Minimum focusing distance: 12 in. (30cm)
Maximum magnification: 1:6
Filter size: Rear (gelatin filter insert type)
External finish: EX finish
Lens hood: Petal shape hood (non-removable)
Dimensions: 3.42 in. (dia) x 5.12 in. (length)
87mm (dia) x 130mm (length)
Weight: 21.8 oz. (615g)
Mount: Sigma SA, Minolta (D), Nikon (D), Pentax, Canon


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6  next
      
bonjerdo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 14, 2011
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 23, 2012 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $180.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Great for landscape photos and interior photos especially on a full frame body.
Cons:
The lens outer shell picks up dust and hand perspiration easily so after a while the product can look a bit "old"

I bought this lens for next to nothing second hand recently. I paid about $180 US.
But I noticed that they generally go for about $300 where i live.

I was pleasantly surprised at what I got from my old 5d and this lens. The 1st thing is to realize that this a very wide angle lens that can be used for just about anything but works very well for landscape type photos.

The build isn't as amazing as a canon product and I would love to get my hands on a 17-40 in the future but for now this lens is more than sufficient. Dont be fooled by the noisy little motor for focusing and the clutch style manual to auto focus switch... these things are easy to get around and what you should be looking for is image quality.
I would give it quite a good score for image quality even if it vignettes a bit in the corners. If you take your photo wisely and with some post editing you can get rid of this easily.

As the saying goes... "the proof is in the pudding"
Here is a photo I took last night with my 5d classic.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bonjerdo/8118378282/in/photostream.

I would recommend the lens unless you intend on becoming a pro who might need that extra edge in the business.
Hope this helps.


Oct 23, 2012
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add bonjerdo to your Buddy List  
gregoryallen
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 5, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 174
Review Date: Oct 17, 2011 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $265.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, accurate focus, nice color, well built.
Cons:
Some vigeneting on full frame, but easily corrected. Need to watch for flare.

I am really quite impressed with this lens on my 5d. It is sharper than I expected with no decentering at all. Sharp to the edges with the exception of the extreme corners, but overall an excellent performer fo an UWA. It is large, but not too heavy. I find the focus plenty fast and accurate enough. There is some viginetting, but this is common in similar lenses as well and very easy to correct. The len's biggest drawback is lens flare in certain conditions, but this can also be worked around. Overall a great performer for the price paid!

Oct 17, 2011
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add gregoryallen to your Buddy List  
flowatrack2002
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 12, 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 12, 2011 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, good quality lens
Cons:
heavy lens, loud AF

if you don't need wider than 15mm than this lens is a bargain. I used this lens for youears without any problems, only the AF was loud. Lens is much sharper than the Sigma 10-20DC lens, very good from f7.1 and the corners are sharp from f9-f11. Lens has flare if you shoot into the sun because of the big front element but if you leave the metal lens hood on the lens then it's better. A bargain for your money!

Feb 12, 2011
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add flowatrack2002 to your Buddy List  
asamimasa
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 28, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 200
Review Date: Feb 6, 2011 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Decently sharp, build quality, large yet light
Cons:
Vignettes a LOT on FF, loud AF, strange two-touch mf system, bit on the slow side.

Optically, it performs better than I expected (I expected a lot less for the price). Not the absolute sharpest, but it's satisfying.

On full-frame, it produces some really heavy vignetting.

The bulbous element may cause some users panic, much like the Nikon 14-24 2.8, although on this lens you can somewhat work against this by zooming in all the way, which retracts the front element.

For the price I paid, I couldn't be happier.


Feb 6, 2011
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add asamimasa to your Buddy List  
dompap
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 5, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Review Date: Dec 8, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Color, Sharpness, Build Quality
Cons:
Loud Autofocus, Easily Flares

The images taken with this lens are very good and on par with Canon L zooms I own. Versatile focal range - terrific on a crop body. You need to watch for purple flare, but overall, a very good lens at any price level. Highly recommended.

Dec 8, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dompap to your Buddy List  
dbehrens
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 12, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 1909
Review Date: Aug 11, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Wide. Sharper than my Canon 17-35L - especially in the corners.
Cons:
Difficult to use with filters. Flares horribly - even in the slightest direct light.

The positive of this lens is that it is sharp. I would say almost as sharp as the 16-35 Mk II. However, its Achilles heel is that it is intolerant of direct light. Even the slightest direct light creates purple flares. Having said that - I still have the lens and will keep it until I find something that's on par with the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8. I currently use this with the 1Ds Mk2, 5D and 1D Mk4.

Aug 11, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add dbehrens to your Buddy List  
Marc de Wit
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 3, 2010
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 23, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: A LOT
Cons:
ONLY A FEW

Performs perfectly on my 1Dmk2n.
as well as on 7D and 70D and 1d3
Sharp , fast , great colours , well constructed


Jul 23, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Marc de Wit to your Buddy List  
KIT1971
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 11, 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 11, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Built like brick, very solid, sharp, did I mention it was sharp?
Cons:
Built like a brick, poor auto focus, badly implemented AF/MF switching, CA, high barrel distortion at 15mm.

I just got this today used from ebay, what a real gem of a lens. I think I paid about the right price, maybe a bit high but the quality of it more than makes up for it. Its really sharp on my 50 and 5d, have yet to see how it performs on my EOS 3. I mainly do architecture so the barrel distortion at 15mm is a bit of a let down but I have only shot at 20 and 24mm before so might not use the ultra wide on my full frame cameras. The distortion is easily fixed in PT lens and is not bad at the longer end. I have tried to coax some flare out of it as some reviews say this is a problem but I really only got some in very bright sun, I will see how it goes.

Quite poor focus systems on this lens but then I usually use MF on a tripod and live view when on my 50d.

It is built like a tank, no movement whatsoever and has a metal hood. MF ring has nice movement no scratching at all. I was looking at the 12-24 but when this came up I went for it, no regrets so far, even if it has only been a day! I have heard that the 12-24 is not as good as this one. I have got three Sigma lenses, 10-20mm, 17-70mm and now this one. I must say I have had no problems at all with them, the 17-70 is excellent. I did have to send a Canon 70-200 f4 L back because of decentering, bad luck I suppose, most of my lenses have been just fine straight out of the box.

I will post an update when I have had chance to evaluate its performance with some hard use.

If you have a chance to buy this lens, I recommend you do straight away.


Jun 11, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add KIT1971 to your Buddy List  
dealaddict
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 11, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 31
Review Date: Jan 22, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $266.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp, very wide and work on FF
Cons:
if I am picky that is can't use a filter, don't have HSM

this lens is a hidden gem in my opinion. I am trying to find a wide angle on my 5D just for fun, so, I don't want to invest too much. I found this lens used on eBay selling less than USD $300. Since I want to get this lens for landscape where I will likely shoot at F11/F16, it is less prone to AF issue, so, decided to take the risk and get it from eBay without testing. To my surprise, it is a very good lens. It focus accurately, and image is sharp even at 15mm in the center. I think for less than $300, this is a steal. Even I don't use it that much, I don't mind to keep it around.

Jan 22, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dealaddict to your Buddy List  
400TMY
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 31, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 111
Review Date: Jun 9, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $570.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: IQ, price and good range. Build quality is nice for what it is. Spectacular with film, and even with 1.6 crop it is useful.
Cons:
flare from the slightest thing, "dual focus" is strange, unnecessary huge. No front filters!, protruding front element, noisy af

I bought this seven years ago with my eos 3 and with 20d and 5d it is so useful. My longest lasting lens and looks brand new. The build quality is great for what it is, and I am still not tempted to buy any newer uw zooms.

The lens is sharp and colors don't disappoint. I mostly use stopped to 7.1 and the distortion control and sharpness is consistent through the focal range. I can barely notice some CA but just barely. Flare is pretty nuts on a good day, and shooting this indoors with lights on is not fun. I am fairly satisfied with this lens even today and am not crazy about the canon 17-40L compared with this. I have yet to compare the 16-35L.

Focus ring is well damped, zoom is smooth, no creep, nothing rattles when shaken.

Nice integrated hood that is tough (bumped many times no paint scrapes or marks)

The dual-focus seems strange, to go from af to manual you have to push the giant focus run forward in addition to the af/mf switch, and vice versa. Basically with the zoom ring on the AF position, it does nothing- it turns undamped and free floats.

This is what happens if you run it in each config:
AF Switch / Focus Ring / Effect

AF / AF / Autofocus fast, floating focus ring (you can hold it and rotate it and it does nothing) < right way to AF

AF / MF / Autofocus, slower like struggling, focus ring rotates < don't leave it like this because this lens isn't FTM

MF / MF / Manual focus < right way to MF

MF / AF / Manual focus, floating ring (basically turns focus "off" at the present focus position) < this could be useful to keep focus at a manual set distance and then hold the lens by the big focus ring and it wont mf and when you press shutter it wont af either.


Jun 9, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add 400TMY to your Buddy List  
emaphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 6, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 23, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $350.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Focal length range, build, sharpness
Cons:
Filtering (only on FF or 1.5 crop). lens flair

I owned this lens for my Maxxum 7D (1.5 crop) and now have it for my Sigma SD14. On the Maxxum it was super sharp, sharper than the Minolta 17-35 f/2.8. My only quarrel with it was when I used a circular polarizing filter it vignetted a very noticeable amount. With the SD14 (1.7 crop) no vignetting is recorded.

On my sd14 the focal range is great. The lens performs well at all focal lengths. The lenses sharpest f-stop on mine seems to be f/5.6 to f/8 @ 30mm. At 15mm f/11 is best. I usually manual focus the lens to the hyperfocal when shooting landscapes at 15mm, this seems to produce the best sharpness.

Lens flair is controlled, but watch the sun! At certain angles to the sun it's very prone to flair even with the lens hood adapter on.

CA is well controlled too.

Too bad it's discontinued. This lens IMO is optically better than Sigmas 10-22 or 17-50.



Nov 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add emaphoto to your Buddy List  
Fusion08
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 15
Review Date: Sep 12, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Excellent new cost and even better used. Sharp, well built and can be used on FF and Film cameras.
Cons:
No filter thread and hood adapter unusable on FF. A little soft wide open.

I have 2 of these fantastic lenses, one for Nikon crop camera I use and one foe FF Canon 1Ds. The both are super sharp and don't far behind Canon and Nikon zoom lenses. If your on a tight budget or just like great value for your $$ then I would recommend this lens. I see very little differance in quality, if I don't pixel peep.

Sep 12, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Fusion08 to your Buddy List  
LUHAMER
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 2, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 43
Review Date: Jul 30, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Solid built, good quality, picture is sharp.
Cons:
No real filter thread.

Want to have a wide angle lens, the original Canon is too pricey. And the 12-24mm is not compatible with full frame, although I only got a APC digital, but plan to upgrade in the future, also I like to use film cameras as well. So this is the perfect choice for me. And the picture comes out sharp. only one thing to critizise - no real thread for filter. Of course, you can adapt the lens hood which can mount a 72mm filter. However, when I use it will my EOS-3, I still got vignet while I use it with hood. In spite this, I still give a ten to this lens for the money I paid and the outcome I get.

Jul 30, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add LUHAMER to your Buddy List  
John Falkensti
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 14, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 14, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Excellent build quality.
Cons:
Stray light drives it wild, front element needs to be protected at all times. ITS BIG!!

Going to my local Camera shop, I was desperately looking for a replacement of the 18-135mm kit lens which came with my Nikon D80. The plastic mount on this lens can build up a static charge and acts as a dirt magnet, requiring constant attention and wiping. Inside the shop, its display case filled with older manual focus lenses, sat the Sigma 15-30mm. A brief bargaining session and it was mine. It was put to work immediately, generating some nice shots which you can see here http://www.flickr.com/photos/18171509@N00/sets/72157602309201023/
For the price (around $300) I not complaining. The lens works great, but its extremely sensitive to stray light and the often powerful brilliant blue of Arizona Skies are NOT its strong points. As you use this lens you have to keep the sun at your back or shoulder. Otherwise it just won't work right. Bad lens for beginners, it takes some skill before it does the job. I like it, one of my favorite lenses now and I could care less that its a 3rd party manufacturer.


Nov 14, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add John Falkensti to your Buddy List  
Scott Clark
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1574
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Light, decent build quality, cheap. Crazy wide on FF.
Cons:
None so far.

For the money, this is a pretty decent lens. It's big (roughly the same as my 28-70L), but very light. Build quality seems pretty decent for the money. AF motor is a little loud, but the sound isn't as annoying as a Canon non-USM motor. I don't actually mind it at all. Focus is fast enough...I'm not shooting a basketball game with it. IQ seems decent, although I haven't had a chance to really run it yet. For the money, I think it's a bargain. No, it's not an L lens but you're not paying for one either :0. The only gripe I have so far is the goofy hood/cap/ring deal...I couldn't care less if the hood is built in (I always use one anyway), but having it vignet with "adapter ring thing" on is a little annoying. Oh well...that's what you get at 15mm on a full frame camera I guess. And did I mention that 15mm is insanely wide on FF? Distortion seems like it's about what I would expect on a rectilinear lens this wide.

If you're looking for an ultra wide, this is a good choice for the money.


Nov 1, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Scott Clark to your Buddy List  
Ansel
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 12, 2003
Location: Japan
Posts: 53
Review Date: Oct 16, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Well made. A joy.
Cons:
People tend to underestimate how good it is.

The Sigma 15-30 is a fine lens and it is so much more fun than the EF-S17-55. I'm happy to own both of course but really I often take the Canon because it's reported to be such a crack lens. When in reality the

Sigma takes much more interesting photos.

Street shots or Moonlight landscapes, portraits... can all be straight or playfully distorted with the Sigma when required or if you just need to frame everything you can.

The Canon has the quickness but it's 2 weak points are it only goes down to 17mm and night shots with moon ghost terribly.


Oct 16, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ansel to your Buddy List  




Sigma 15-30mm f3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
86 197164 Oct 23, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,398.92
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.86
9.32
8.6
15_30f35_45_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6  next