 |
|
|
snapman2
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 9, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Sigma 12.24 DG good at 24mm edge to edge
|
|
Cons:
|
12mm it resorts to a tube like looking through a drainpipe
|
|
|
I purchased this lens rather fast so did not give it a test. as a landscape photographer i needed a wide corner to corner view, at 24mm its good . can anyone tell me why at 12 mm it becomes a porthole that I cannot use even with photoshop .
I would have at least expected it to go wide and with a slight distortion.
|
|
 Mar 9, 2008
|
|
Santoso
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 23, 2007
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Color, contrast, price friendly and full frame!!
|
|
Cons:
|
No Filter
|
|
|
My 2 cents: no matter what others said, for cannon full frame user this lens is in a league of its own. The widest lens I can get for my 5D is 16-35 not to mention the price you have to pay. The difference of 16 vs 12 does matter. For my full frame when price vs value in question, this lens is a definate 10. stop down to 8 and above, you cant find much difference with those expensive ones. A must for cannon full frame; landscaper, cityscaper, and indoor shooter.
|
|
|
Mar 2, 2008
|
|
Pell
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 26, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1594
|
|
Review Date: Feb 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Nearly as sharp as a Canon 16-35 stopped down at the same F stop (sharper in the corners in certain situations). Great colour and contrast,works perfectly on a fullframe and I was honestly very impressed.
|
|
Cons:
|
As many others stated, no real mountable filters however not a huge deal unless you are worried about dust.
|
|
|
Best wide angle lens for the dollar I have purchased. Great build quality, fast focus, quiet, WIIIIIIDDDDEEEEEE on a fullframe, relatively small, relatively fast aperture. I am really pleased.
I was worried at first because I have heard Sigma has sketchy quality assurance but we got a great copy. I compared it against the 16-35 mk1 stopped down with the same settings and it only marginally was sharper with better colour and contrast, very tough to tell the difference.
If you can find one cheap and have a fullframe, this is absolutely worth the money. If you need it for indoors or low light use, I would shy away from it as it is a bit slow for that.
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2008
|
|
veroman
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4457
|
|
Review Date: Feb 8, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $599.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
• Sharp
• Extremely low distortion, usually none at all!
• Excellent color
• Super wide angle
• Moderately priced
|
|
Cons:
|
• Unable to mount front filters
• Must be stopped down to at least f/8 for very best results
|
|
|
I purchased a Canon 16-35 Mark II some time back for shooting very tight spaces during interior work, but I found I wasn't using it as much as had anticipated (I generally use primes), so I sold it. Also, the very noticeable barrel distortion at the wide end was hindering its usability on occasion.
I later purchased Sigma's 12-24 for those same tight-space situations, crossing my fingers when I clicked the "Submit Purchase" button in the hope of receiving a first-rate copy of this lens.
Well, it appears I did.
The 12-24 is actually serving me better than the Canon 16-35 II did, and I use it much more often than I did the Canon. It's ever-so-lightly less sharp and less detailed than the Canon, but you'd really have to be pixel-peeping to see the difference. Once in print in magazines I would venture there's no discernible difference whatsoever in sharpness, contrast and color.
Color and contrast with the 12-24 are truly excellent ... top-notch, in fact. And the vanishingly low distortion puts this lens in a class by itself. You really have to use it to believe it. There's absolutely NO barrel distortion with this lens, even at 12mm!
I shoot 100% tripod-mounted with this lens and almost always stopped down to f/11 to f/13 max. At those settings, it's always tack sharp. Shooting larger apertures tends to introduce some loss of detail and sharpness. Images from the 12-24 also have an unexplainable "brightness" to them, and I don't mean it overexposes at a given setting compared other lenses. They simply look, well, brighter than the Canon and other wide angles I've used ... more alive, perhaps?
This lens is an exceptional value, provided you purchase it from a dealer who will let you exchange copies until you find one that matches the best descriptions and reviews of this lens. I lucked out and nailed one on the first try. Others have not not been so fortunate. There are many, many stories of photographers who went through 4, 5, 6 and 7 and 8 copies before finding one up to spec. On the other hand, you can always send your first copy to Sigma for adjusting, if need be. They're very good at it and very accommodating.
I paid $599 for mine. An amazing price for this level of optical quality.
|
|
|
Feb 8, 2008
|
|
Kevin Sherman
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1045
|
|
Review Date: Jan 31, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $540.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
WIDE! Great build quality, feels sold. Very well priced.
|
|
Cons:
|
Colors and contrast a bit weak when compared to some Canon glass (specifically the 50mm f1.4 and the 24-105 f4L).
|
|
So far this is a great lens! I purchased primarily for the 12mm end and it certainly doesn't disappoint! Not as sharp as my Canon glass, but Canon doesn't have a 12mm full frame lens!
If you have a need for an ULTRA-wide angle lens, look no further!
Little informal review, http://weblog.xanga.com/ksherman_86/640315088/sigma-goodness.html where I show a comparison of just how wide the lens is, compared to the 50 f1.4 and the 24mm end of the 24-105 f4L. In addition, I have a comparison shot of the difference in color/contrast that I mentioned in the Negative box above.
-KS-
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2008
|
|
Generalair
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Mar 27, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I love this lens! Originally I bought it to get the wide angle to compliment the other lenses I have. But shooting landscapes and old buildings I found myself carrying around a lot of heavy glass and not using them. The colors a great sharpness awesome on top you get dramatic effect of perspective. I didn't even break out the macro as this lens's minimum distance is very close and sharp. There is no dark corners on the my 5D. Can't wait to take it out on my next trip its seems to be replacing my 17-40L.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2007
|
|
littlome
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 17, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 66
|
|
Review Date: Nov 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, great field of view on full frame
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow aperature, soft
|
|
|
Went through three of these (two of which were calibrated by Sigma) looking for a razor-sharp copy that a few lucky others claim to own. All three copies after calibration were about the same sharpness.
With post-processing, provides wonderfully wide and saturated prints. Although images seem soft on the screen while pixel-peeping, the lens is more than sharp enough to produce prints with very good detail. Corners at the widest settings on full frame tend to be on the soft side.
All in all, I am very happy with this lens. I'm able to get incredibly wide shots and position the camera in ways to get creative shots not possible with my other longer wide-angle lenses. I've gotten quite attached to this lens, it's a lot of fun to use.
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2007
|
|
Rodney_Gold
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2004
Location: South Africa
Posts: 218
|
|
Review Date: Nov 13, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
WIDE!!!!!!! , not too pricey, pin sharp , amazing on FF, excellent AF
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing so far
|
|
|
I was hesitant to buy this lens based on these reviews , I must have got a really good one , cos even 200% crops with it at wide open are seriously good. I have a 28-300L on FF and this lens is an ideal compliment. I find IQ BETTER than my 17-40L (which I had stupidly sold)
Flare when the sun is in the frame is a small issue, but understandable. First time I have EVER liked "vignetting" or some light drop off when wide open as it gives a sort of polarising effect with skys. The light drop off on my 17-40 was far worse and used to bug me. I use it for interior and exterior architectural stuff , auto photography (interiors), landscapes etc. I have got some really interesting shots with this lens. I was never really an ultra wide angle fan or indeed WA , but I'm now converted.
Dont really see the use of it on a cropped cam tho in terms of UWA , but have used it to great effect on my 30d
Filter issue is a non issue for me , I dont use polarisers.
I tried the new 14L II , but at it's price it was a no-no
The IQ was no better than the sigma and pop contrast etc was neither , the 12-24 is more flexible. I dont shoot with the sigma wide open 99% of the time , so the 2.8 of the 14L II was academic.
I had bought a Tamron 15-30 real cheap prior to this lens and wasnt all that happy , the 12-24 is soooo much better.
When first mounting the lens , my camera went moggy and I thought "uh uh - some problem" , but it wasnt the lens , it was the fact my battery grip was not tightend properly on my 5d. I just wish I had bought this lens long ago.
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2007
|
|
John Mills
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 23, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 380
|
|
Review Date: Oct 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Low barrel distortion for such a wide lens, good construction.
|
|
Cons:
|
Bulbous front element, cannot put filters on the front.
|
|
|
I was using this lens on my 20 and 30D's and was continually getting really soft images on the right hand side of the image. I now use it on my 5D and I am getting completely sharp images from corner to corner. I think it has an issue with crop sensor cameras! The lens is fantastic for tight architectural uses at 12mm.
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2007
|
|
ritz05
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 6, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
THE widest lens you can get for fullframe , sharp, good IQ and contrast, desent build, and it is wide
|
|
Cons:
|
Front bulging, no filters, usually have to stop down 1/1 when using outside, prone to flares in sunligt.
|
|
This popeye is my second 12-24 , the first one was a bad copy, but I think this one is okay. I find it great at my 1D3.
Samples at : http://www.pbase.com/ritzlau/sigma_12-24
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2007
|
|
Per Zangenberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 11
|
|
|
Aug 9, 2007
|
|
picnic
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 25, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 1428
|
|
Review Date: Jul 17, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
little to no flare, little distortion, quiet accurate focus, excellent IQ for wide zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
Can't use filters, bulbous lens with hood that won't protect a lot
|
|
|
I have hesitated for over a year about buying this lens due to reviews citing QC problems. I bought it this week--and wish I had earlier. I did a head to head real life test, on tripod, with my very good Sigma 15-30 and was surprised to see the 12-24 do better--at all FL (did not expect much at longer end).
Its quite sharp, softer in corners but totaly expected with this ultra wide lens. Focus was quick, accurate and quiet. CA is controlled nicely and you have to push really hard to get it to flare. Lack of distortion is pretty amazing in this wide lens. Color is less warm than my 15-30, contrast is better. Overall, I'm really pleased with the lens. My copy had a stiff zoom but its loosened up quickly and now is just about right. Just a terrific lens on a 5D.
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2007
|
|
ray_lam5
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 18, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 71
|
|
Review Date: Mar 17, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $540.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
super wide, great build, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
slow for interior shots, quite heavy, some flare
|
|
|
Picked up a 2nd hand copy and was slightly concerned about recieving a soft copy after reading so many forums and views. Afer shooting a few shots in good light i am mightily impressed. The wide angle on my 1d equates to around 15mm and at last provides the length o am looking for. The built in lens hood offers the bulbous glass a good level of protection, so i dont really agree with the negative vibes that this lens has recieved.
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2007
|
|
GOVA
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 1527
|
|
Review Date: Dec 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Built quality/materials used - exceptional
12mm wide is well corrected and very usable
|
|
Cons:
|
None for what it is.
|
|
|
I use this lens with 5D. I use it @ 12mm most of the time, that is why I'd purchased it in the first place.
This lens is something else... Images at 12mm are very good.
Do not expect its corner performance to be similar with 24-70L or something alike. This is a super ultra wide zoom, and for its purpose it performs very good.
I like its built quality and materials used very much. It feels very solid in all respects. F/4.5-5.6 might be a limiting factor for some, especially for indoor shooting. I just shoot at ISO 1600-3200.
I love using it outdoors since usually I can stop it down a little and not worry about available light.
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2006
|
|
Hans im Glueck
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 6, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Dec 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp ,almost no distortion,even @12mm at full frame.
Exellent build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Corners a little soft wide open.There is some Vignetting. Issues with qualitycontrol:Test your copy before You buy it !
|
|
|
If You`re looking for a ultra wide angle at full frame, this is the right choice. Its impressing, how the lens masters that angle with almost no distortion even at 12 mm. Sharpness is very good in the center, and, if stopped down, also in the corners.
Beware of bad centered copies . Try it before You buy it.
|
|
|
Dec 8, 2006
|
|
gretar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2005
Location: Iceland
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Nov 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
almost everything
|
|
Cons:
|
not able to use front protective filter
|
|
|
My first Sigma. Tried a few last year for my Rebel XT, but all suffered from a front focus problem. Now, tried the 12-24 with my 5D and was blown away. Sharp across the range, good contrast, colours and everything. A real gem. Was expecting to try a few copies (read other posts on quality control or lack of it), but the first one was the one. The serila number is 2005xxx. Maybe Sigma has gotten their stuff together. Very happy with this lens. My other lenses consist of none L lenses (being not a professional and supporting a family), being Canon 50 mm/1.8, Canon 24/2.8, Canon 70-300 IS, Tamron 24-135 and Tamron 2X. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
Nov 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
103
|
322618
|
Apr 27, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
94% of reviewers
|
$626.70
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.85
|
8.78
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
;)
