|
|
dealaddict
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 11, 2009
Location: Cambodia
Posts: 0
|
|
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
|
|
400TMY
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: May 31, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 103
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
LUHAMER
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 2, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 10
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
Scott Clark
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1054
|
|
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
|
|
Ansel
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 12, 2003
Location: Japan
Posts: 50
|
|
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
|
|
thelund
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 25, 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 29, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $310.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good wide-angle even on a 1,6x crop camera. Exceptional on film! Sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
Very sensitive to flares, looses contrast to the extreme when sun is in the picture or bordering! No filters. Dual focus.
|
|
I bought this lens used of a 5D photographer who however wasn't too happy about it's performance after upgrading to fullframe, so he invested in a Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L instead.
However I am very happy with the sharpness of this lens on my EOS 350D, and I like the zoom-range of the lens, especially on my EOS 33 (film camera).
I usually stop it down a bit, but even at f/5.6 it does it's job very well.
BUT, the lens is VERY sensitive to incomming light, eg. the sun in the picture or just outside it! Contrast drops dramatically if this happens and renders the pictures unusable, so you have to be very carefull when shooting against the sun.
The lens hood is build into the lens and not detachable, so you can not use filters straight away. However the lens cover has a filter thread built in, so with the metal ring part of the filter cover you can mount a filter, but it will darken the cornes at anything less than about 20-24mm focal length! Filters will darken the corners at any focal length on fullframe!
So when using filters i usually use my Sigma 20mm f/1.8 instead, that lens also handles flares a lot better!
The 15-30 is pretty heavy and large too, and as usual it has the Sigma dual focus system, annoying to change to from AF/MF!
Short version: Be very carefull with shots againt the sun, filters rarely useable and not recommended.
|
|
|
Sep 29, 2007
|
|
kool100vr4
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 24, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 19, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $285.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Wish it was F2.8
|
|
I finally bought this lens, im so thrilled with it, i use it with my Fuji S3 pro, images are very sharp at all ranges,i shot about 350 shots on Vegas trip, mostly at night on tripod, all came out amzingly sharp. No vergnettes, some distortion, but that can be expected on this 15mm wide. I strongly suggested.
My copy is very sharp, now!, if your copy is not, then you should buy Fuji S3 pro.
|
|
|
Aug 19, 2007
|
|
William Austin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 30, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp as a tac across the frame
|
|
Cons:
|
QC at sigma, 4th copy of this lens
|
|
This was my 4th copy of this lens, I had to return 3 before I got a good copy
The copy I have is so sharp, it's sharper than both the Canon 16-35mm and 17-40m that I used to have
used on a 5D FF
|
|
|
Aug 14, 2007
|
|
gustabod
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 5, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
well built, sharp and useful wide angle on FF camera, better corrected than Canon 17-40 L
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy AF with some hesitation (not a major issue)
|
|
For the price I paid an excellent lens, used on a Canon FF digital. Compares well with Canon's 17-40 L in most aspects except quietness in the AF, but AF is very accurate nonetheless. Well built although not weather proof, but I limit my use in dusty or wet conditions as the camera is not WP either! You can't put a filter on the front, and as others have commented there is a risk of damage to the front element, but I've not found this limiting. If anything a bit too wide at 15mm on FF, but correction is excellent.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2007
|
|
|
