about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Deorum  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Deorum to your Buddy List
Sigma 100-300mm f4 EX IF HSM APO

100-300if_1_
Review Date: Mar 22, 2010 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Nice focus, Pro build, Sharp from 100~230, Nice Colours, Sharp when stopped down.
Cons:
Trully bad at 250-300mm, if wide open, unuseable images. Needs stopping down to f8~f9 to clear the images.

I had this lens back in 2005, during an airshow.
It was big, it was pretty fast to focus, and sharp from 100 to 200mm. However at least in my copy at 300mm wide open everything fell apart. Not even usuable.

Stoping everything down to f8~or f9 gave me nice images... but if I wanted an f8 lens (or an f5.6 lens) I wouldn't need to carry this little monster around.



You can see some photos here. These are not good photos, but it is also my bad techninque responsible (shutter 1/400 for jets??)

http://www.georgespyros.com/Airplanes/Jets/10874145_WcCrE#762477731_fLYvZ


 
Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM

111_small
Review Date: Feb 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Well what else, UWA for APS-C sensors
Cons:
None that I can think of, perhaps somewhat faster aperture would be nice...

Bought this lens brand new for 470 Euros, whereas the Canon 10-22 costs nearby 700euros. Price is great but the most important thing, is that there is no sacrifice in IQ. Some people have complained about Quality Control issues, but my sample is very sharp even wide open, a rarely find the need to stop it down. In addition my lens constantly overexposes about 1/3 to 2/3 stops, dont know if its the uwa that "fools" the meter, or the actuall F-stops of the lens are quite on the conservative side.

Sometimes I wish it was a bit longer, so it could serve as an all around, but it hardly fits this role. Drawbacks also include decreased border sharpness, which shows up in large prints (20cm*30cm) as a slight softness. No big deal though. I am talking about real life shots, not test shots. I have yet to take some proper photos, with the lens stopped down/tripod/MLU to share my opinions.

Bear in mind that shooting with such an UWA, brings a lot of new thing into play, that by some people are judged as lens cons, but they are not. For example, strong perspective distortions, edge positioned things look distorted, but thats something that is inherent to all uwa lenses. Using the lens at 14 mm (instead of 10) considerably reduces the uwa effects.

George,
Athens, Greece.


 
Sigma 18-125mm F3.5-5.6 DC

4882618_125dc_1_
Review Date: Mar 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Sharpness, Range, Price
Cons:
Focusing


I have this lens about 3months now. It has given me some great shoots, even wide open. The range for this price is exceptional. The lens is very sharp indeed, contrary to my belief for a consumer zoom of this price. However this is only when it has dead-on focus.


My main concerns (that's why I'm thinking of switching to 18-50/2.8) is its inconsistant focusing. I think I have some frontfocusing issues. Whenever I dont see tacksharp photos it is the frontfocusing, not the optics of the lens.

Would I buy this lens again? Maybe. I'm on the verge of taking photography more seriously this period. So I would most propably build my lens set, more quality orientated. But for an all-around lens I couldn't say that it needs second thinking. The price is very low.