View Full Version : Sigma 12-24 EX DG, Canon 17-40L or 16-35L
Murph7355
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 09:10
Currently have a 10D (may be buying a 1DmkII) and am seriously considering one of the above to compliment my 28-135 IS and 100-400L.
Any views/experiences?
jgbeam
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 10:11
I have used the 12-24 Sigma on a MkII and a Rebel and the 16-35L Canon on a Rebel. Unless you REALLY need the extreme short end, I'd go with the Canon 16-35L, for image quality and speed. On the MkII, 16mm gives you 21mm, which is tight enough for most situations I shoot, but I ended up buying the Sigma because I have a couple of interior shots coming up which will require the 12mm (16mm on the MkII).
Jim
yallcome
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 10:33
I think I have just got to have that 12mm with a 10d -- just looks like too much fun!!!
RikWriter
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 10:40
I own a 12-24 and have tried the 17-40. Can't comment on the 16-35 as I have never even held one in my hand. As for the other two, well...I took several pictures with the 17-40 and then the 12-24 before I made my purchase, and I have to tell you, I couldn't tell the difference in sharpness between it and my 12-24. The 12-24 is a very clear, sharp lens with an awesome field of view.
The only advantages that I saw that the 17-40 had over it is no distortion when using the lens vertically (there is definitely some with the 12-24) and the 17-40 can use regular filters while the 12-24 can only use gel filters.
chris maddock
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 14:49
... and the 17-40 can use regular filters while the 12-24 can only use gel filters.
Unless you do this;
http://www.dslr.co.uk/filters_on_sigma_12-24/index.htm
KRs
Chris
Murph7355
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 17:03
Thanks for the replies.
Everything I've read on these lenses comes up a bit inconclusive :)
Think I might have to try them out and see what happens...but I can't help thinking the extra mm's of width will be handy. If only Canon did a 12mm lens.
Thanks again.
roanjohn
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 21:40
I was in the same boat as you.
In the end...........I chose Canon...........and guess what?? I never regretted it.
The 17-40 is a performer that never lets me down.
Ro1
Belmondo
20th of July 2004 (Tue), 21:58
I own all three lenses.
The Sigma is a lot of fun, but is not good for serious work at 12mm. The CA is excessive. The 17-40 is very good and the focal range is extremely useful. Certainly the price is right. If I didn't have the 16-35L, I would use it a lot, but when you have the 16-35L in your bag, you're going to use it, and you're going to use it often. Optically it's impressive, and it is faster than the other two.
Money notwithstanding, it's a no-brainer.
RikWriter
21st of July 2004 (Wed), 05:09
I own all three lenses.
The Sigma is a lot of fun, but is not good for serious work at 12mm.
Could you clarify what you mean? Because I have had no issues with it whatsoever at 12mm. I understand that in full-frame cameras it can have some vignetting at 12mm, but with the 1.6 crop, I have never seen it in either my Digital Rebel or 10D.
Belmondo
21st of July 2004 (Wed), 07:38
I own all three lenses.
The Sigma is a lot of fun, but is not good for serious work at 12mm.
Could you clarify what you mean? Because I have had no issues with it whatsoever at 12mm. I understand that in full-frame cameras it can have some vignetting at 12mm, but with the 1.6 crop, I have never seen it in either my Digital Rebel or 10D.
I'm using a Mk II (1.3X crop), and I am experiencing an unacceptable amount of chromatic aberration (CA) at the edges on the widest focal lengths. At 24mm, it isn't bad, but I have other lenses for that. Maybe its okay on the 10D and Rebel, and possibly my copy is worse than others. It's really hard to say, but that was the basis for my comment.
The lens really is fun, though. I just took a picture of my entire office from the doorway. I can't do that with my 17-40.
RikWriter
21st of July 2004 (Wed), 09:09
I'm using a Mk II (1.3X crop), and I am experiencing an unacceptable amount of chromatic aberration (CA) at the edges on the widest focal lengths. At 24mm, it isn't bad, but I have other lenses for that. Maybe its okay on the 10D and Rebel, and possibly my copy is worse than others.
I've heard other reports of edge problems with full frame cameras. I guess this is one time digital crop comes in handy. :D
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.