Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX DC Macro HSM Opinions

[DGremlin]

Hey Guys

I been looking around for a working lense, something to handle events, portraits and similar. Pretty much new good general workhorse lense.

I was looking at lenses like to the Nikon 24-70 2.8, Nikon 17-55 2.8, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4, Sigma 17-50 2.8 and others of a similar range.
Now I saw this lense and checked up on it is not a bad lense with the biggest thing being that it sells for around R3000, while all the others range from R6000 to R20000.
The price definately got my attention since that will leave a some cash for lighting equipment I have on my to get list.

The lower price may due to it being discontinued, although that's probably not a big problem.

Does anyone have experience with this lense ?

 

[bwana]

Are you sure that's the lens? Sigma made a 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro but it wasnt HSM and was discontinued.
They also have a 18-50mm F2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM which is a variable aperture lens as well as 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM.

EDIT - sorry - I do see they also made a 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro HSM but that's also been discontinued.

 

[DGremlin]

Yep bwana thats the one.

http://www.sacamera.co.za/product/1012052/Sigma_1850mm_F2.8_EX_DC_Macro_HSM_for_Nikon/

I know its discontinued and thats the only downside, that said it will still be under warranty and genarlly picture quality is acceptable from what I see in reviews and on DXOmark. The general opinion is where is falls down is around the 18mm 2.8 range it gets pretty "soft" as the reviewers put it

DXOmark comparing it with he above lenses, using the D300 as the comparison base it looks OK ...


http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/315-sigma-af-18-50mm-f28-dc-ex-macro-review--lab-test-report?start=1

Generally the Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC macro delivered a solid performance but without being any better than the competition. The resolution results are generally very fine except at 18mm where the extreme border performance leaves something to be desired below f/5.6. Distortions as well as CAs are about in line with the rest of the gang. Typical for most dedicated APS-C lenses the vignetting could be a little better at wide-open aperture. The build quality and handling of the Sigma is fine.

Only things really holding me back is the fact its discontinued and Sigma lenses are a bit of a mixed breed with varied opinions depending on who you speak to. The pricetag does tempt me, at 1/2 the price of the nearest comparative lense.

 

[hilton]

Doesn't seem that popular - perhaps an indication of the price?

Do you really need a constant aperture?

 

[DGremlin]

Doesn't seem that popular - perhaps an indication of the price?

Do you really need a constant aperture?

The constant low aperture is a big plus, the obvious is low light situations, where with 2.8 I don't have to push ISO or drop shutter speed. The low constant 2.8 also allows me to only have to adjust when lighting changes and not when I zoom, and that can mean the difference between getting a shot and missing.

Looks like if I did go for it I would have to import the sucker, pfft !

 

[africanperfection]

Haha.. SA camera has 10 weeks waiting period for the Sigma 18-50 2.8. Good lense.. Long wait.. I've tried, but couldn't wait 10 weeks

 

[floydthebarber71]

I'm looking for a Tamron 17-50 2.8 in that range which is supposedly awesome. I've seen some go for less than R2k on ebay. The non-VC version is apparently sharper but I doubt one would tell the difference. VC is Tamron's VR, and that version is slightly more expensive. Depends what you want to do with it...

Portrait lengths usually fall longer than 50mm though, so a versatile one would actually be the 70-200 VR. If that's too pricey, I've seen the Tokina 50-135 f2.8 get manic rave reviews.

Happy hunting

 

[GTi]

I got me the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] Autofocus Lens (Nikon)
which is an awesome lens for the bucks from Camcorner. http://www.camcorner.co.za/index.ph...ii-ld-aspherical-if-autofocus-lens-nikon.html Pretty decent lens and Photozone did mention it a better lens than the Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC macro. Its's exstremely sharp and only R4000 whereas it cost over R5000 everywhere else.

 

[GTi]

I'm looking for a Tamron 17-50 2.8 in that range which is supposedly awesome. I've seen some go for less than R2k on ebay. The non-VC version is apparently sharper but I doubt one would tell the difference. VC is Tamron's VR, and that version is slightly more expensive. Depends what you want to do with it...

Portrait lengths usually fall longer than 50mm though, so a versatile one would actually be the 70-200 VR. If that's too pricey, I've seen the Tokina 50-135 f2.8 get manic rave reviews.


Happy hunting

The Tamron 17-50mm ƒ/2.8 non VC is alot sharper than the VC version I tried them both.

 

[GTi]

Yep bwana thats the one.

http://www.sacamera.co.za/product/1012052/Sigma_1850mm_F2.8_EX_DC_Macro_HSM_for_Nikon/

I know its discontinued and thats the only downside, that said it will still be under warranty and genarlly picture quality is acceptable from what I see in reviews and on DXOmark. The general opinion is where is falls down is around the 18mm 2.8 range it gets pretty "soft" as the reviewers put it

DXOmark comparing it with he above lenses, using the D300 as the comparison base it looks OK ...


http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/315-sigma-af-18-50mm-f28-dc-ex-macro-review--lab-test-report?start=1



Only things really holding me back is the fact its discontinued and Sigma lenses are a bit of a mixed breed with varied opinions depending on who you speak to. The pricetag does tempt me, at 1/2 the price of the nearest comparative lense.

Just found this on the web: http://www.buycamerasa.co.za/sigma-1850mm-f2845-dc-os-hsm-p-192.html
Give them a call in the morning great price, only thing you have to check stock availability.

 

[DGremlin]

Hey GTi

Thanks, the Tamron 17-50 gets excellent reviews and camcorner has it a very price.
I have been wondering though about the Tamron 28-75 2.8, although it gets moderate reviews.
I was not considering it and only really added it to my list of possible lenses today.

DXOmark stats of 28-75 are average at best ... hmmm
so
Sigma 18-50mm 2.8
Sigma 17-50mm 2.8
Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 ( non-VC )
Tamron 28-75mm 2.8
Nikon ones right now are just not in the budget, and the Sigma 24-70 and 28-70 get pretty weak reviews.

PS : how noisy are the Tamrons and how well they to work with ?

 

[GTi]

Hey GTi

Thanks, the Tamron 17-50 gets excellent reviews and camcorner has it a very price.
I have been wondering though about the Tamron 28-75 2.8, although it gets moderate reviews.
I was not considering it and only really added it to my list of possible lenses today.

DXOmark stats of 28-75 are average at best ... hmmm
so
Sigma 18-50mm 2.8
Sigma 17-50mm 2.8
Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 ( non-VC )
Tamron 28-75mm 2.8
Nikon ones right now are just not in the budget, and the Sigma 24-70 and 28-70 get pretty weak reviews.

PS : how noisy are the Tamrons and how well they to work with ?

Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 ( non-VC ) surprising very quiet and very lightweight.
The Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 does shine on a DX as per http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikk...ical-if-nikon-lab-test-report--review?start=1 but they over R5000, http://www.studio22.co.za/tamron.htm

To tell the truth I find the 17-50mm 2.8 too short for portrait work. but it's an gem for everything else.

 

[hilton]

PS : how noisy are the Tamrons and how well they to work with ?

Not as silent as the Canon USM but not that loud really. I think the shutter is louder to be honest.

Interesting enough, the ISO crop charts from the-digital-planet show the Tamron (non VC) to be sharper @ f/2.8 than the legendary Canon 17-55 f/2.8 at all focal lengths bar 50/55mm. When you stop down the Tamron to f/4 it's then sharper than the Canon again.

Who would have thought?

One downside, no image stability.

 

[hilton]

I'm looking for a Tamron 17-50 2.8 in that range which is supposedly awesome.

I'm selling mine if you're interested. Just four months old.

Tokina 50-135 f2.8 get manic rave reviews.

Pity is now discontinued and the Sigma 50-150 is not out yet.

 

[DGremlin]

Hilton : thanks I keep seeing people complain about how noisy the lenses are, so long its not a chain saw on my camera.
PS: Hilton I dropped you a PM.

GTi : due to portraits I am interested in the 28-75 although I have a feeling I am going to look for a nice 70-200mm lense ( or one in that ballpark ). I just like the way the zoom lenses works in a portrait.
I am looking to perhaps bringing a 28-75 in from US via adorama or BnH, would work out about R1000-R1500 cheaper and that includes 5 day delivery.

 

[GTi]

Hilton : thanks I keep seeing people complain about how noisy the lenses are, so long its not a chain saw on my camera.
PS: Hilton I dropped you a PM.

GTi : due to portraits I am interested in the 28-75 although I have a feeling I am going to look for a nice 70-200mm lense ( or one in that ballpark ). I just like the way the zoom lenses works in a portrait.
I am looking to perhaps bringing a 28-75 in from US via adorama or BnH, would work out about R1000-R1500 cheaper and that includes 5 day delivery.

Let me know how your purchase goes, I could also do with one of those at that cost.

 

[bwana]

Hilton : thanks I keep seeing people complain about how noisy the lenses are, so long its not a chain saw on my camera.
PS: Hilton I dropped you a PM.

GTi : due to portraits I am interested in the 28-75 although I have a feeling I am going to look for a nice 70-200mm lense ( or one in that ballpark ). I just like the way the zoom lenses works in a portrait.
I am looking to perhaps bringing a 28-75 in from US via adorama or BnH, would work out about R1000-R1500 cheaper and that includes 5 day delivery.

If you're looking to get a 70-200 then a 24-70 might be a better bet unless you have something that covers that deficit. Sigma's 24-70 HSM is an awesome lens (btw, there's no second "e" in lens ) but it might be a little out of your price range.

 

[DGremlin]

If you're looking to get a 70-200 then a 24-70 might be a better bet unless you have something that covers that deficit. Sigma's 24-70 HSM is an awesome lens (btw, there's no second "e" in lens ) but it might be a little out of your price range.

I originally was looking at the 24-70 and then saw mixed reviews so I looked at alternatives. I see at www.photozone.de on a APS-C it does really well while on a FF it suffers. Thats OK I wont be on a FF camera for a little while yet.
The Sigma is in my price range, but truth is I am using my lighting budget to fund this lense ( yep lense really is an acceptable alternative, just not commonly used ), and that budget is a lot smaller.

So bwana any comments on a 70-(up) lens/e ?

GTi : Adorama and BnH have the 28-75 for about $450 + $85 ( shipping UPS 3-5 day ) = $535 x 8.15 ( current exchange rate + 0.05 variance) = R4360
Locally the Tamron 28-75 is +/- R5690 so R5690 - R4360 = R1330

 

[bwana]

So bwana any comments on a 70-(up) lens/e ?

Sorry, no, while I happily went the sigma route for the 24-70 I stuck with canon's own 70-200 rather than a third party one. BTW I shoot the 24-70 on a APS-H body and there isnt anything soft about it.

If you were a sports enthusiast I'd suggest the Sigma 120-300 but I really don't know much about Nikon's lineup.

yep lense really is an acceptable alternative, just not commonly used

From that wiki page

The variant spelling lense is sometimes seen. While it is listed as an alternative spelling in some dictionaries, most mainstream dictionaries do not list it as acceptable

 

[floydthebarber71]

I haven't ordered anything from B&H before but my other photography imports cost 14% VAT for import duties which you'll probably have to add on to those figures.

You aren't on full frame so 28mm is not that wide. Up to you whether that matters with your type of shooting or not. 75mm is not that long either for portraits - but that's just personal preference, that limit might work for you from experience...