Does anyone in the forum have any experience using the Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC OS HSM lens?
I'm after a decent all-round lens, partly for photographing aircraft, but also for general use. I had thought the Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS would fit the bill perfectly, but after reading Karl's thread below and other reviews, it seems there are some autofocus issues with this lens:
Alternative To The 24-105L? (by JakTrax Feb 2 2011 in Aviation Photography)
The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 is an option, but ideally wanted a bit more range, so I am considering the Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS or Sigma 18-125 f/3.5-5.6 DC OS HSM. What sort of quality can I expect from the Sigma? Will it be comparable (or perhaps even better) to the Canon 28-135?
Any comments are much appreaciated.
Thanks,
Dave.
[Edited 2011-02-19 02:59:12]
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Anyone Using The Sigma 18-125mm?
Dave,
My third copy of the 24-105 is much better, and although still prone to producing the odd soft image occasionally I have been generally confident in its ability to produce sharp results. I think the issue is with the quality control rather than the lens itself, and I doubt the mainly plastic construction helps. Some good ones out there but also some real stinkers I guess!
I'm happy with the current example, however I'm reluctant to agree that it's worth the asking price. Sharper than my old 28-105 for sure and the IS is great (no panning mode though) but I really can't say it's up to the build quality of other Ls. I too looked at the 24-70 but I have no real use for the 2.8, and besides, 70mm at the long end just isn't enough for my 'small' lens. The 18-135 sparked some interest until I saw the build quality; as did the 28-135, which admittedly still captivates me.
Unfortunately in my thread (which you refer to above) no-one seemed to have experience with the 28-135 - or if they did they were keeping it a secret! It'd still be interesting to know what peoples' opinions of this lens are.
Cheers,
Karl
My third copy of the 24-105 is much better, and although still prone to producing the odd soft image occasionally I have been generally confident in its ability to produce sharp results. I think the issue is with the quality control rather than the lens itself, and I doubt the mainly plastic construction helps. Some good ones out there but also some real stinkers I guess!
I'm happy with the current example, however I'm reluctant to agree that it's worth the asking price. Sharper than my old 28-105 for sure and the IS is great (no panning mode though) but I really can't say it's up to the build quality of other Ls. I too looked at the 24-70 but I have no real use for the 2.8, and besides, 70mm at the long end just isn't enough for my 'small' lens. The 18-135 sparked some interest until I saw the build quality; as did the 28-135, which admittedly still captivates me.
Unfortunately in my thread (which you refer to above) no-one seemed to have experience with the 28-135 - or if they did they were keeping it a secret! It'd still be interesting to know what peoples' opinions of this lens are.
Cheers,
Karl
RE: Anyone Using The Sigma 18-125mm?
| Quoting dave1 (Thread starter): I had thought the Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS would fit the bill perfectly, but after reading Karl's thread below and other reviews, it seems there are some autofocus issues with this lens |
I'm sure you've read my coments on the other topic, but the 24-105 f/4 L is a cracking lens. I know Karl had a few issues with the first couple of examples, but as long as you get a good copy (I've only had one), the results more than speak for themselves. The only problems with the 24-105 as an everyday lens, if you're using it on a crop body, 24mm isn't all that wide. I carry a 10-20mm with me as well and find I use that nearly as much as the 24-105 on my travels. Depending on what you are wanting, the 18-125 might suit you bettter, I have no experience with it though. I also looked at the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 but like Karl says, 70mm isn't really long enough and unless you need f/2.8, there are other options.
Darren
RE: Anyone Using The Sigma 18-125mm?
Sorry Dave but the 24-105 doesn't have any autofocus issues, I have one, it's a super lens, each shoot is a winner, something not possible with my previous 28-135.
Luis
Luis
RE: Anyone Using The Sigma 18-125mm?
| Quoting mirage (Reply 3): Sorry Dave but the 24-105 doesn't have any autofocus issues |
I really wouldn't go that far - I'm on my third one and the two before it had AF issues like you've never seen! I'm glad that some of you out there got a good copy from the outset but I can tell you now that bad copies do exist! The one I have now is pretty good, but of the three L series lenses I own it is the poorest in terms of value and build quality. Image quality is very good though (only a pinch behind my amazing 70-200 f/4), but I do think that the AF system isn't quite as accurate as those in the 70-200s and 100-400. Then again wide-angles are never going to be as sharp as tele-photos so no surprise there.
If the price was £500-£600 I think it would be fair to describe the 24-105 as a cracker, but at £800+ I feel it isn't the best value - especially when taking into account the fact that the superb 70-200 f/4 can be had for £500.
If the price doesn't bother you it's about the best lens in its category (there are few true alternatives), but if purchasing one I'd strongly recommend you do as I did and make arrangements with the shop about returning any duff copies. If I'd have had to settle for the first example I got I'd be screaming blue murder!!!
Park Cameras aren't the cheapest but they are competitive and I have found the service to be first-class. I've bought all my L lenses from them and they have been very amicable with regard to numerous returns if I haven't been satisfied.
Karl
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests