Sigma 2.8 Zoom Experience

[gad-westy]

I've asked this question on a couple of other forums but here should be where I can get the most feedback. Apologies to those suffering deja vu.

I have a Nikon D5000 and my current lens kit consists of:

Tamron 70-300
Sigma 180mm Macro
Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro
Nikon 18-55 Af-s VR
Nikon 18-135 AF-s

I'm going to replace the 50mm Sigma with a 35mm 1.8 Nikon lens. I bought the sigma principally for Macros but then the 180 came up at the right price and I couldn't resist. The 50mm is a super lens in terms of sharpness etc but it won't auto focus on my camera so it rarely gets used now.

Anyway I'm going off topic already. What I'm thinking of doing is selling both Nikon zooms and purchasing a Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Macro HSM.

The nikon 18-55 is a fairly good lens in terms of IQ but I don't like its toy like construction, its focusing ring and the fact that the front element rotates. VR is nice but I rarely use it at this range. The 18-135, I bought on a whim as I fancied having a little more range from my 'walkabout' lens without forking out for an 18-200. In that respect, it's great but at its widest end, barrel distortion is very significant. I can see that this seems to be a common trade off with the so called 'super zooms'.

So I'm wondering if that Sigma would neatly replace the the Nikon 18-55 but offer a faster aperture, better IQ, better build and allow me to use a polariser. I can live without the range of the 18-135. Theoretically I could pick up a used Sigma for less than the sale price of the other two lenses. One went on ebay this week for about £125.

I'd be interested to hear as much feedback as possible about this lens. My only niggling doubts so far are: is the Tamron equivalent (non VC) a better lens? And should I be saving the extra for the Sigma 17-50 OS. I think Nikon's own 2.8 zooms in this range are out of the question budget wise.

 

[neil_g]

i used to have an 18-50mm f2.8 "macro" before i changed to the 1D (being a sigma DC lens it wont work on FF or 1.3x sensors).

it was an excellent lens and was my main walkabout, was lovely and sharp and the colour reproduction was superb. wasnt the fastest of focusers especially in low light but never had a single problem otherwise. but on the nikon mount it does have HSM.

i always wheel out this when offering an example shot:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/neilgates/2781537486/in/set-72157606850787818/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/neilgates/2781537670/in/set-72157606850787818/

not sure what else ive got online, hang on..

edit - nope it appears a lot suffered at my last flickr clean out.. i might be able to sort some tonight though.

 

[gad-westy]

Thanks for that. Nearly everything I have read about this lens suggests that I should get one. I just don't want to buy one and find out that I should have waited and got the 17-50 OS instead. That said, if I buy used, it's unlikely to lose me any money.

 

[Lindsay D]

I use the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS a lot - it's a fabulous bit of kit, never misses focus, it doesn't hunt, razor sharp too. It's expensive, but worth it (I have a bag full of Canon 'L' lenses, but the Sigma is the one I reach for more and more these days). I had a very challenging shoot yesterday in dark (literally) interiors and the lens was great. You can see some example shots here: http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/?p=2371

The Tamron (non-VC) version is really good too, and is half the price. If you don't need VC/OS then that would be the one to get.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

My experience

18-50 DC EX / 400D - OK, a bit soft and yellow, much improved after major service
24-70 non HSM / 40D - disaster - run away
24-70 HSM / 40D severe focus issue
70-200 EX DG HSM Macro II / 40D - soft at > 135mm
50 1.4 / 40D focus issues, soft wide open

18-50 was the closest to being good, a service may help there

 

[gad-westy]

Cheers all. I think I'm convinced. Need to sell some other gear and then I think it's time to go shopping.

 

[Frobius]

The more I read about the 17-50 OS, the more I want one! Sadly it seems that the eBay market for them is a bit weak at the moment (only 2 on there from the same seller the other day) so might have to buy new. The dilemma is that if the sig is £450 new, I could get a Nikon 17-55 for about £130 more - minus the OS/VR of course... Hmmmm.

 

[DaveKing]

I have the Sigma 18-50mm EX DC Macro on Canon and I find it a great lens. But, and there usually is a but with Sigma, it is a little bit soft at F2.8. By the time I am at F4 it is fantastically sharp, and being that 75% of my photos are landscape and I have a 50mm for portraits I don't find it a problem. If you are buying second hand watch out for dust in the lens as this is a known fault.

The colours that come out of the Sigma are great and for the price of the lens I think it is well worth it. At the end of the day you have to accept it is not a Nikon / Canon lens and that it is 95% of the quality at 50% the price. Below are some shots I have taken:

 

[gad-westy]

The more I read about the 17-50 OS, the more I want one! Sadly it seems that the eBay market for them is a bit weak at the moment (only 2 on there from the same seller the other day) so might have to buy new. The dilemma is that if the sig is £450 new, I could get a Nikon 17-55 for about £130 more - minus the OS/VR of course... Hmmmm.

This is the trouble with lenses. There is always something that costs a little bit more. It's so hard to decide what to actually buy as every time I settle on something and save my pennies, I then think 'if I saved for another few weeks, I could buy that one instead'. That's how I ended up with a £500 Sigma Macro lens when I'd decided to spend £200 on a Tamron.

FWIW, those 17-50's on Ebay cause me a lot suspicion. If you read the seller's feedback, despite claiming these are UK stock, it seems they're actually being shipped direct from Hong Kong and some people are being stung for VAT. Cheapest UK sellers seem to be just shy of £600. I presume they're fairly new to the market as I'm yet to find a used example to gauge prices.

 

[gad-westy]

I have the Sigma 18-50mm EX DC Macro on Canon and I find it a great lens. But, and there usually is a but with Sigma, it is a little bit soft at F2.8. By the time I am at F4 it is fantastically sharp, and being that 75% of my photos are landscape and I have a 50mm for portraits I don't find it a problem. If you are buying second hand watch out for dust in the lens as this is a known fault.

The colours that come out of the Sigma are great and for the price of the lens I think it is well worth it. At the end of the day you have to accept it is not a Nikon / Canon lens and that it is 95% of the quality at 50% the price. Below are some shots I have taken:

Stunners!

Thanks for the advice. I'm having an internal battle with myself at the moment. The 18-50 looks great. Every review suggests it's great and yet I'm still hankering for the vastly more expensive 17-50 OS. I'm starting to think I may just keep saving for a while. It's ridiculous as I thought I would buy an 18-50 if plenty of people confirmed that they're a great lens. That's exactly what's happened and yet now I'm having doubts. Go figure!

 

[gad-westy]

I've also just noticed that at 8.23 this morning I had decided I would go for the 18-50. It's now only one and a half hours later and I seem to be in the midst of U-turn. God, I'm fickle!

 

[Frobius]

FWIW, those 17-50's on Ebay cause me a lot suspicion. If you read the seller's feedback, despite claiming these are UK stock, it seems they're actually being shipped direct from Hong Kong and some people are being stung for VAT. Cheapest UK sellers seem to be just shy of £600. I presume they're fairly new to the market as I'm yet to find a used example to gauge prices.

Yeah, fair point. By the time you add 20%, you're pretty close if not over uk prices!

At £600+, I could get a mint Nikon 17-55. Albeit with no VR. I like VR!! Aaarrrgghh! Decisions!!

 

[clicktor]

Hi Gad_Westy. I own the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro for Canon fit. It's a fantastic lens. The Canon version does not have HSM, so if I owned Nikon I would find it even easier to recommend the lens! Despite lack of HSM it still focuses fine even in low light but not as fast as pro canon lenses obviously. The colours are great. Sharpness for me is not an issue at all even wide open, i..e it's very good.

I personally had a bad copy with de-centering issue but then got a second copy which was bang on, although I am finding that I do get some front focus with it when doing photography of very close subjects. I am not sure currently if this is just my bad technique though, I need to test more.

I tried a Tamron 17-50 non VC before and my copy was awful. The worst lens I have ever used. I know they are meant to be fantastic, and they probably are but that was my experience. Additiionally, the focus motor noise was very loud to the point where I could see it being embarrasing to use at certain events. It went straight back to seller.

Something else to consider though, is that the Sigma lenses I believe turn the "Canon way" of rotation. The correct way! Where as the Tamron zooms are turned the Nikon way. You may find if you switch to Sigma you might take a while to get used to zooming the correct way, i.e. you might naturally turn it to zoom in but find you zoom back out.
Please someone correct me if I am wrong on this but I think that's right.

Despite the above faviourable comments for the Sigma 18-50mm, my current recommendation for you is this.... buy the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS EX DC HSM!
I have been waiting myself until I can afford this lens. I think despite that it does seem to be a lottery with 3rd party lenses these days sometimes, Canon/Nikon can and do have defective copies too. I would happily "gamble" once more on a purchase of the Sigma 17-50mm. Based on some of the reviews I have seen, it's well worth going for and I have been considering it @ £440 ish via onestopdigital importers. I cannot afford to spend £580 on it in the UK but if you can, do, since you would have a 3 year warranry since it would be a Sigma EX lens.

The abilities of this lens is for a whole othe rthread really, but there is one discussing it over on potn forums. It seems to be a massive "under the radar" type lens. i.e. It's been out a good half year now I beliebe, yet people seem not to discuss it much. Either many people own it and are happy, or people aren't buying it. I think a lot of people are in denial that the Canon 17-55mm is always the better choice as this is suuuch a highly praised lens. The truth is, Sigma is sharper throughout the entire focal range in center frame, is better built, slightly lighter and much cheaper also coming with a hood. The Canon does better it in the corners though especially with contrast clarity. I gather the IS vs Sigma OS is a non argument in that they perform the same. The OS is a massive benefit in a walkabout zoom imo. I know others think not so much on a lower focal length lens, but I find it opens up more opportunities since you can hand hold in much lower light.

I cannot comment on Sigma 17-50mm vs the Nikon equivalent, but last time I looked the price difference was even greater than the Canon vs Sigma.


I hope this helps. Let me know how you get on with the 17-50mm when (not if) you buy it!

 

[gad-westy]

Clciktor. Thank you very much for taking the time to write all that. Fantastically informative. You may have cost me some money though in mentioning the One stop digital price. At that price, I'm very tempted. Is this a good company to deal with? I see they offer a 7 year warranty for an extra £10. That seems ludicrously cheap and hence immediately raises my suspicions.

 

[clicktor]

Clciktor. Thank you very much for taking the time to write all that. Fantastically informative. You may have cost me some money though in mentioning the One stop digital price. At that price, I'm very tempted. Is this a good company to deal with? I see they offer a 7 year warranty for an extra £10. That seems ludicrously cheap and hence immediately raises my suspicions.

7 years for a tenner!? Never heard of or seen that. However, generally they are a good company. Plenty of people tend to use them and digitalrev. Check the digitalrev thread on here, they have it for £439 I believe. If it has an issue and is a poor copy or whatever, then you would need to send it back to them in Hong Kong and the warranty would not be effective in the UK because you don't pay the VAT. They promise to refund any import or vat costs to you so you definitely pay the price advertised and it's normally quick delivery. It really only becomes less cost effective if you encoutner an issue with the lens I guess. It's a gamble.
I saw it for £520 a few months ago in the UK at one store, now one of them has it for £534 but always says "wait for delivery". I think a few online places specializing in Camera gear genuinely have it in stock for £550, but then you may as well pay the Jessops price of £580 for the convenience of having a point of sale and being able to take it back with any issues. But then, it's £140 you are paying for that priviledge and a 3 year proper UK warranty. Depends really. Tough one. I just want one! I have been checking ebay and forums for second hand ones and I've seen one i US go second hand, otherwise nothing. Like I say, either there are very little of them bought and in use, or pepople are very happy with them and keep them!

 

[gad-westy]

7 years for a tenner!? Never heard of or seen that. However, generally they are a good company. Plenty of people tend to use them and digitalrev. Check the digitalrev thread on here, they have it for £439 I believe. If it has an issue and is a poor copy or whatever, then you would need to send it back to them in Hong Kong and the warranty would not be effective in the UK because you don't pay the VAT. They promise to refund any import or vat costs to you so you definitely pay the price advertised and it's normally quick delivery. It really only becomes less cost effective if you encoutner an issue with the lens I guess. It's a gamble.
I saw it for £520 a few months ago in the UK at one store, now one of them has it for £534 but always says "wait for delivery". I think a few online places specializing in Camera gear genuinely have it in stock for £550, but then you may as well pay the Jessops price of £580 for the convenience of having a point of sale and being able to take it back with any issues. But then, it's £140 you are paying for that priviledge and a 3 year proper UK warranty. Depends really. Tough one. I just want one! I have been checking ebay and forums for second hand ones and I've seen one i US go second hand, otherwise nothing. Like I say, either there are very little of them bought and in use, or pepople are very happy with them and keep them!

7 year warranty appears as an option in the drop down box when you click on an individual item. 7 years for £10 seems incredible.

It's good to hear that they have good reviews. I'm a little hesitant as Sigma lenses seem to have a reputation for inconsistency. I wouldn't fancy the hassle of sending one back to HK but then there is the small matter of a £100+ saving...

 

[Lindsay D]

I wouldn't consider buying anything like this from overseas, for all sorts of reasons including warranty, repairs, returns, VAT and import duty, etc.

Incidentally, in terms of 'bad copies' the worst offenders in my experience have been Canon lenses - I had two diabolical 24-70 f2.8 L lenses, thankfully I now have a 'good' one. The Sigma pro lenses are very well made and I wouldn't expect any issues, but I'd still advise that you buy in the UK just for your own peace of mind.