sigma 18-125

[scott stokes]

If canon would only make one like this in a L lens,I think this would be a good walk around lens,if they did. has anyone used this lens ?

[timmyquest]

Thats kind of asking a lot...

[MarkH]

I'd be happy with a Canon 24-135 f2.8L IS, preferably around $1000 or not too much over (I'd still be keen at $1200).

[Steveo31]

18-125 is a bit big of a range in my opinion. Maybe a 18-80 or something would be good.

[ron chappel]

A good quality zoom of that ratio they could build but i'm not sure how many they would sell at the price they would have to charge.
Note that the 28-300 IS L is quite good but cost's an arm,a leg and a firstborn male son :shock:

[toglenn]

When comparing these lenses, an important point to remember is that the 18-125 is not built for a 35mm camera, it's designed for a maximum APS-C size sensor.

That makes a big difference to me. Personally, I am tired of lenses designed for 35mm full frame on digital cameras with a 1.6 multiplyer. A "wide Angle" 28mm turns out to be 44.8mm and a 24mm becomes 38.4, not really wide angle lenses.

Sigma and Nikon have made the decision to produce lenses made for the smaller digital sensors and I think thats great. In fact I've ordered an 18-125 and hope to test it soon. Canon on the other hand, has not supported the digital format and continued to supply full frame 35mm lenses for their digital cameras. Sigma even has a 12mm zoom designed for digital which I understand is very good.

I'm happy with the 1.6 multiplyer and don't want a full frame digital which produces much larger files and requires more storage space plus the bonus I get with telephoto lenses.

Commiting to a lens designed for digital is all the better for me. In fact I'll probably sell some of my "35mm" lenses to pay for the digital lens as they won't be needed.

toglenn

[scott stokes]

Hi toglenn.I would love to know how the lens performs when you get it.I think this would be a good lens for my 10D.I am going to the hot air balloon festivel in New Mexico in October,and I would like to have a lens like this.

[ron chappel]

I too am curious-especially when comparing it to the kit lens
Past sigma wide to tele superzooms have been very average.I did test a recent model 28-300 (non macro with "an improved optical formula") and must say it wasn't to bad at all.Not useless anyway

I'm betting canon don't ever make the lens size in question though.They have shown a great reluctance to make any lens for a reduced format size.They obviously think full frame is still widely acheivable

[scott stokes]

hi toglenn ,have you got your 18-125 lens yet.b-h is out of stock.

[ron chappel]

Someone has done a comparo here

http://www.pbase.com/hankster65/sigma_vs_kit_lens

[toglenn]

hi toglenn ,have you got your 18-125 lens yet.b-h is out of stock.

Yes Scott, I received the Sigma 18-125 yesterday and had a chance to play with it a bit. So far, I have a very favorable opinion of the lens but my likes and dislikes may not be the same as yours. Foremost in my requirements are sharpness and contrast (I define contrast as the ablility of the lens to distinguish between objects of similar color). The lens does well on both counts. I place more importance on size and weight than on speed. An increase of one f/ stop can add a lot of weight to a lens and I can usually gain that much increase through processing. I sold a Canon 70-200 IS because it was too big and bulky for my tastes.

There is slight vignetting @ 18mm but the disappears @ 20mm. This might be a problem for some users. AF works perfectly and reasonably fast, I use the center focus point only, and low light presented no problems. The focus motor makes a bit of noise but hardly worth mentioning.

The lens hood causes a shadow on wide angle shots with the built in flash but whole field is well lighted. Removing the lens hood or using a external flash solves the problem (the lens hood can be mounted in reverse if you have no place to put it).

I'll be using it more in the coming weeks but so far I think it's worth every penny. By the way, my favorite lens is the Canon 28-105 f/3.5 f/4.5 (yes really!). I have used this lens for several years on both the D30 and the 10D and recently took over 2,000 photos with it in Europe. It delivers everything I want in a lens except a wider angle. I hoping the Sigma will fill that need.

If I spot any problems with the Sigma, I'll post them here.

toglenn

[Tom W]

I think folks would like to hear how the lens works out, ToGlenn. It sounds like a very useful zoom range for general shooting - a good carry zoom on the 1.6. Sometimes, people aren't in the mood to carry a pile of lenses.

As for Canon's lens selection - I think we're going to see which direction(s) the company is going at Photokina. Their weakness at the wide end leads me to one of two conclusions - either they're going to bring out several wide lenses, or they are going to abandon the smaller sensor in favor of the 1.3 and 1.0X size.

[Mike H]

Would this lens work on cameras with a 1.3x crop factor (such as the Mark II and 1D), or is the image circle too small? Thanks.

Mike H

[Tom W]

I don't believe that it will, Mike. It would vignette pretty bad at the wide end.

[Case]

Sigma even has a 12mm zoom designed for digital which I understand is very good.


If you're refering to the 12-24mm Sigma, it is not designed for digital cameras only. I've tried mine on a friends film EOS and it works great (it does suffer some distortion effects while wide-open on the film body, but there is no vignetting...)

Cheers

Chris

[ron chappel]

Wow Toglen,a comparo with the 28-105 and 18-55 would be great!
Just about everyone knows where at least one of those lenses stand in the overall image quality .
And even more usefull i think is that the 28-105 is the 'lower limit' for most people for image quality so would be a very good benchmark :)

[toglenn]

I think folks would like to hear how the lens works out, ToGlenn. It sounds like a very useful zoom range for general shooting - a good carry zoom on the 1.6. Sometimes, people aren't in the mood to carry a pile of lenses.

As for Canon's lens selection - I think we're going to see which direction(s) the company is going at Photokina. Their weakness at the wide end leads me to one of two conclusions - either they're going to bring out several wide lenses, or they are going to abandon the smaller sensor in favor of the 1.3 and 1.0X size.

I just remembered that Canon does make a lens for the 1.6x, the 18-55 Kit lens for the Rebel although they hobbled it for use with the 10D, some users have hacked it for the 10D.

toglenn

[toglenn]

Just an update about the Sigma 18-125. I have decided not to keep the lens. I noticed some vignetting @ 18mm which is acceptable but after examining some test photos, I noticed the lens is also vignetting @ 125mm.

This is unacceptable to me and I am returning the lens.

http://www.pbase.com/image/31221835/medium.jpg

toglenn

[Tom W]

I think folks would like to hear how the lens works out, ToGlenn. It sounds like a very useful zoom range for general shooting - a good carry zoom on the 1.6. Sometimes, people aren't in the mood to carry a pile of lenses.

As for Canon's lens selection - I think we're going to see which direction(s) the company is going at Photokina. Their weakness at the wide end leads me to one of two conclusions - either they're going to bring out several wide lenses, or they are going to abandon the smaller sensor in favor of the 1.3 and 1.0X size.

I just remembered that Canon does make a lens for the 1.6x, the 18-55 Kit lens for the Rebel although they hobbled it for use with the 10D, some users have hacked it for the 10D.

toglenn

Actually, the 17-40 was made with the 1.3 and 1.6 in mind, but it isn't cheap. The 24-85 has a desirable range, though 24 might not be wide enough. I find myself occasionally bumping into the 24 end of my zoom, though not real often.

[till]

I am content with the Sigma 18-125 lens, it replaced my kit lens as "always-on", sharper and less CAs than the kit, zoom range like a prosumer (like 28-200 on 35 mm film), more solid and with hood included... vignetting disappears when stopping it down, so now big problem. Here some pics (http://www.linuxprinting.org/till/images/paris-20040717/) of the city where I live.

Till