about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: jrscls  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jrscls to your Buddy List
Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM "A"

Screen_Shot_2013-11-15_at_11_05_27_AM
Review Date: Jul 23, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $899.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very nice design and build quality, excellent image quality, silent AF and OS, great range with 24-105
Cons:
Weight is a little heavy, but not really a con when you consider the excellent build and IQ.

I have had a few Canon 24-105 L lenses and while they got the job done, they were just OK. I even purchased a 24-70 II, but despite the excellent IQ, I missed the extra 70-105, especially for studio portraits.

Enter the Sigma 24-105 OS Art, which just oozes quality, the image quality is excellent with very nice rendering and colors, sharp wide open throughout the range, silent AF and OS, and the AF was absolutely perfect right out of the box on my Canon 6D.

If you are on the fence on this lens, give it a shot; it is a much nicer lens than Canon's 24-105. Unless you need the weather sealing and less weight, the Sigma is better in every way. I also have the excellent Sigma 35 Art, and I'm beginning to think that Art is the new L.


 
Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS

18-200OS
Review Date: Aug 2, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $549.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: One of a kind lens for Canon users at this time, Excellent range and OS works well.
Cons:
No ring HSM/USM

I sold a 17-85 IS and got the Sigma for my wife for her XT. The Canon 17-85 IS was (as is the Sigma) a compromise given the zoom range, although the USM focusing and IS were very nice. At the wide end, the Sigma seems sharper, less CA, etc. than the Canon. In the mid range, I don't notice much difference in practical use. Of course the Sigma wins from 86-200 where it seems to be surprisingly sharp (much better than the Sigma 70-300 APO for example and on par with Canon's 70-300 IS).

Wide open at 35mm this lens gives soft corners, but for our use as a general purpose and travel lens it isn't a problem. The good news is that the center is sharp at all FLs, the OS works great (good 3 stops), and AF is accurate, all in a 11X zoom at an affordable price.

My 17-55 IS and 70-200 f4 L IS costs around $2K and the Sigma costs 1/4 this amount so we really can't expect it to compare and be flawless. But, this lens is a one of a kind for Canon bodies until Canon sells a 18-200 IS that includes USM, better IQ, and likely a higher price tag, although I'm not sure I would want to pay any more for this type of lens.

IMO, the Sigma is a good alternative for the 17-85 IS and 70-300 IS combo at about 1/2 the price and all in one convenient travel package. In fact, we also tried the 70-300 IS and we weren't that impressed (build quality was poor and our copy wasn't that sharp above 200mm, but it could have been a poor copy. Couple the Sigma with a decent prime (50mm f1.8 for example) and you have a decent walkaround/travel lens setup.


 
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

ef50mmf_18_1_
Review Date: Dec 16, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $67.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Inexpensive, sharp wide open, light weight
Cons:
build quality is a lot of plastic but for the price, I'm not complaining at all

Bought this lens for my wife's Rebel XT and the results were outstanding considering the cost of this lens. It is sharp wide open and outstanding at f2. Light as a feather and price is a gift. Everyone should have this one.