Sigma 18-35 f1.8 for APS-C

L

LazyDemoni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
Sigma has announced the 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art lens for APS-C DSLRs - the world's first constant F1.8 zoom. The lens covers a 27-52.5mm equivalent range, and will be available in Canon, Nikon and Sigma mounts. As yet there is no announcement of a recommended price. The lens will offer the light-gathering and depth-of-field equivalent of a constant F2.7 on full-frame, which may under-cut the need for some photographers to change formats.
Click to expand...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/0...worlds-first-F1-8-constant-aperture-zoom-lens

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_18_35_18/index.html

Wow, this lens sounds insane! Obviously it's easy to get too excited by just looking at the specs but if this lens delivers and is reasonably priced, I'd love to have it. It would mean sticking with crop for a while though, not that I've ever felt limited by it.
 
Damn, they really waited until I sold my APS-C body and got a full frame body. This lens is exactly what I've always wanted!
 
koffiejunkie said:
Damn, they really waited until I sold my APS-C body and got a full frame body. This lens is exactly what I've always wanted!
Click to expand...
I clearly don't get it… so, why?
 
bwana said:
I clearly don't get it… so, why?
Click to expand...

The one place where I always struggled was when taking pics at friends weddings (as a guest), where the other guests are often very close up, too close for even the 30mm f/1.4 to get a shot of, say, a couple. The one wedding where I had the 17-55 f/2.8, I loved the range on it - most pics were on the wider end. But the wedding was in the morning and the reception over lunch, and it was still light when it was all over. It was a very bright day, the venue let lots of light in, so the 17-55 was more than fast enough. That's usually not the case.

This 18-35mm f/1.8 covers about the right range and is fast.
 
koffiejunkie said:
This 18-35mm f/1.8 covers about the right range and is fast.
Click to expand...

Your new full-frame body probably has better ISO performance than your crop, yeah?

So push your ISO by a stop (or two), et voila, you're in the light-capture-capability range of an f/1.8 lens when using something like the 24-70mm f/2.8L (or 24-105mm f/4L IS USM) lenses! ;p
 
nanonyous said:
So push your ISO by a stop (or two), et voila, you're in the light-capture-capability range of an f/1.8 lens when using something like the 24-70mm f/2.8L (or 24-105mm f/4L IS USM) lenses! ;p
Click to expand...

Which makes them kinda the same, doesn't it? I don't own the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens, btw, and I don't think I'll buy one at least until they stick IS on it. So I'm guessing another decade or so Until Canon replaces the current one.
 
Aye, which makes them kinda the same :p
As it stands, many people are saying that the 18-35 f/1.8 is intended to fill the role of the 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses on crops, in part because of the aforementioned ISO bumping not being necessary, the resulting DoF being similar and the resulting focal length range being kinda-sorta similar, too.

I was kind of excited for a lens like this till I realised that it technically doesn't benefit someone like me, seeing as I could get that new Sigma 30mm f/1.4 instead if what I wanted was a fast lens that falls anywhere in this 18-35's range, and that I don't personally use anything below 24mm on crop that much these days.

Stepping into the realm of full-frame, even a 5D Classic can outperform my 500D for ISO performance by around a stop, so for someone like me it would be a wholly pointless exercise since I could trade in my 500D and 17-85mm for something like a 5D Classic and 24-105mm, making up the difference in cost with this new Sigma lens' likely pricetag, and have something that performs roughly how the 500D+18-35 would've.

Just with one stop less derp of feeled.

Hell, depending on how much that thing is going to cost, I could possibly even step it up to a 5D Mk II. Who knows.

tl;dr this Sigma lens is a good proposition for those that don't yet have a DSLR or need to replace their existing (limited) kit anyway, will be doing so with crop equipment and want something that offers them what a ff body with a 24-70 f/2.8 would.
Size dependent, that thing ought to actually be nice on a 100D, mind you.
 
nanonyous said:
As it stands, many people are saying that the 18-35 f/1.8 is intended to fill the role of the 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses on crops
Click to expand...

Many people can't do basic arithmatic. 35mm on crop does not equate to 70mm field of view. 15-44mm at 1.7 would have equalled a 24-70mm.

nanonyous said:
Stepping into the realm of full-frame, even a 5D Classic can outperform my 500D for ISO performance by around a stop, so for someone like me it would be a wholly pointless exercise since I could trade in my 500D and 17-85mm for something like a 5D Classic and 24-105mm, making up the difference in cost with this new Sigma lens' likely pricetag, and have something that performs roughly how the 500D+18-35 would've.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure. It depends on how you want to use it. The 5D was a killer compared to everything that came before it, but the sensor in the 500D does 3200 ISO quite well, while on the 5D it was boost mode and looked pretty bad. I don't know about you, but I used 3200 ISO a lot.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Many people can't do basic arithmatic. 35mm on crop does not equate to 70mm field of view. 15-44mm at 1.7 would have equalled a 24-70mm.
Click to expand...
I, and those people, weren't implying that it covers the entire range, just that it fills (partially) the role the 24-70mm f/2.8 has on full-frame.

I wouldn't be so sure. It depends on how you want to use it. The 5D was a killer compared to everything that came before it, but the sensor in the 500D does 3200 ISO quite well, while on the 5D it was boost mode and looked pretty bad. I don't know about you, but I used 3200 ISO a lot.
Click to expand...

I use ISOs above 3200 with relative frequency on my 500D, though I forgot that the 5D Classic is limited in its max ISO, and doesn't have available a 25,600 setting as I do on the 500D by way of Magic Lantern.
In other words, for the comparative example, one would ideally need to be looking at a 5D Mk II or the Nikon equivalent with a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens, which would of course require that this new Sigma lens falls into a price bracket that makes it a worthwhile comparison.
 
Another review up on Lenstip.

Quick summary: Lenstip thinks the lens is extremely sharp. Unfortunately, the lens does tend to flare badly with the sun in the frame.

I'd love to see a detailed study of the lens' bokeh, but the images on Lenstip show a blur disk characterised by many fine concentric rings, which is somewhat unfortunate ....

Still, it looks like a really good lens.
 
Hi everyone

Reviving a old thread :)

I am seriously considering buying this lens for my Nikon. On dpreview there is a lot of negative talk about the AF not performing very well, but this was when the lens was just released. See comments sections below the webpage in the link.https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-18-35-1-8/6

Do any of you guys have experience with this lens and what is your feeling about it pros and cons?

Hope you guys can help me out.

Chow
 
This is a personal comment, but I have found that zoom lenses with a very limited range like this one seem a bit pointless. A prime within that range will be cheaper, smaller, lighter and better.

Alternatively the same money could buy you something more useful if you want a zoom.
 
garyc said:
This is a personal comment, but I have found that zoom lenses with a very limited range like this one seem a bit pointless. A prime within that range will be cheaper, smaller, lighter and better.

Alternatively the same money could buy you something more useful if you want a zoom.
Click to expand...
I also wanted to post that. Nikon has some great primes in that range, with better bokeh than Sigma. Only reason that would make some sense for the sigma is for video.
 
garyc said:
This is a personal comment, but I have found that zoom lenses with a very limited range like this one seem a bit pointless. A prime within that range will be cheaper, smaller, lighter and better.

Alternatively the same money could buy you something more useful if you want a zoom.
Click to expand...

I'm just not a fan of primes, that said my 16-35 f/2.8 doesn't see all that much use these days.
 
klipdrifter said:
Hi everyone

Reviving a old thread :)

I am seriously considering buying this lens for my Nikon. On dpreview there is a lot of negative talk about the AF not performing very well, but this was when the lens was just released. See comments sections below the webpage in the link.https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-18-35-1-8/6

Do any of you guys have experience with this lens and what is your feeling about it pros and cons?

Hope you guys can help me out.

Chow
Click to expand...

You should find some pretty informative user reviews, comments and samples regarding that lens here:
Regarding the autofocus, it seems it may be a tad slow for some folks, but that is all.

http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/sigma-18-35mm-f1-8-dc-hsm-art.html#reviewlist
 
klipdrifter said:
Hi everyone

Reviving a old thread :)

I am seriously considering buying this lens for my Nikon. On dpreview there is a lot of negative talk about the AF not performing very well, but this was when the lens was just released. See comments sections below the webpage in the link.https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-18-35-1-8/6

Do any of you guys have experience with this lens and what is your feeling about it pros and cons?

Hope you guys can help me out.

Chow
Click to expand...

I've had this lens from about the time it was available locally and love it to bits.
Everyone says it's short, but for wide to portrait shots on DX (think family dinners, candid shots, vacations, etc.) it's perfect.

I have it on a D7100 which has a slightly better autofocusing system than the D5/3000 range, so I haven't really had any AF issues when shooting.
For full disclosure, the AF system died a few weeks ago (after about 2.5 years), but a quick trip to Kameraz and they sorted it out within a week under warranty. I have my suspicions that this was actually my fault as I was messing around with the Sigma dock and this lens.

Speaking of the Sigma dock, there's a lot of complaints online about front/back focusing so I got the dock to see if I was missing out. My particular lens was back-focusing quite badly at it minimum distance (~30cm), but near perfect at everything else. I'd suggest getting the dock to check out your version, but I guess I was one of the lucky ones to get a good one.

I tested this lens against my Nikon 35mm F1.8 lens and found the Sigma to be sharper wide open.
Primes do have some drama/romance to them (I love my 50mm F1.2), but for me, the Sigma is the balances the versatility and IQ perfectly.
 
Hey everyone

Well I didn't expect so much feedback in one day lol. Thanks everyone. Think I will be going for the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8 G DX Lens as it is way cheaper and doesn't have auto-focus issues.

Cya
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X