Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 EX DG [Archive] - Page 6 - Canon Digital Photography Forums

kcbrown

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 13:57

Here is the sigma focus test, very near minimum focus @60mm @f/2.8. Af used. Camera on tripod, 45 degree angle, af center point, 2 second timer and remote switch.

Your Sigma appears to be focusing correctly. While the line isn't in the exact center of the focus field, it's definitely well within the focus field.

And your 17-85 appears to be a very sharp copy by the looks of that image.

Bottom line: looks to me like you have a nice, sharp copy of the Sigma lens, and as you said, it's just a question of understanding how to shoot with it.

I know from experience that IS can really spoil you. :-)

JackProton

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 16:25

Revisited a handheld pano stitch today...
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/weather/th_IMG_09356-09367.jpg (http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/weather/IMG_09356-09367.jpg)

Cool! Handheld too. Nicely done.

javaprog

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 16:29

I will not test anymore with it, I'll just go mad.
I know that feeling :lol:

DStanic

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 16:50

Perhaps I have also been expecting too much from the Sigma, as well.

I'll email Sigma my concerns, but continue to use this lens and wait and see. I will not test anymore with it, I'll just go mad.

Thanks.

That's kinda how I feel about my Sigma 70-200 that I just got. I haven't had any "real world" shooting yet so I can't complain about it. I love my 24-60 though, I think my keeper rate has gone up from my 17-85. Maybe it's just a mental thing with the fact that I have a lens "with 2.8 aperture" cause I even feel like the focusing is more accurate than the 17-85, and it has USM which doesn't really make much sense. Perhaps it's just the perfect balance on my gripped Xti, I dunno.

jer_randolph

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 16:51

kcbrown

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 17:04

Just received my order from Amazon (Cameta) and upon opening the box I was shipped a Tameron 70-300 lens. Not what I wanted to see and support has left for the day 5pm EST. SO I'll deal with this tomorrow - bummer though as I was hoping to take it with me on my little trip this Thursday.

Does it take good pictures?

If it weren't for the fact that you'll want to return it in new condition, I might , if I were in your position, be tempted to take a few shots with it just for the fun of it. :-D

DStanic

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 17:09

Just received my order from Amazon (Cameta) and upon opening the box I was shipped a Tameron 70-300 lens. Not what I wanted to see and support has left for the day 5pm EST. SO I'll deal with this tomorrow - bummer though as I was hoping to take it with me on my little trip this Thursday.

Jer

Too bad it wasn't a 70-200 f/2.8 then it would be worth keeping. They have fast shipping.. it's possible they could send you one by Thursday.

DDCSD

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 18:43

That's kinda how I feel about my Sigma 70-200 that I just got. I haven't had any "real world" shooting yet so I can't complain about it. I love my 24-60 though, I think my keeper rate has gone up from my 17-85. Maybe it's just a mental thing with the fact that I have a lens "with 2.8 aperture" cause I even feel like the focusing is more accurate than the 17-85, and it has USM which doesn't really make much sense. Perhaps it's just the perfect balance on my gripped Xti, I dunno.

As for the focusing, the wider aperture allows more light in, therefore the camera will be able to attain focus more accurately.

I am not at all disappointed with the focusing ability of this lens. At Easter we had a family get-together and the 24-60 had no problem keeping up with 2 5 year olds and a 2 year old in my sisters typically lit basement. I seriously only had a handful of shots that were out of focus, and most of those were from having a child run in front of me while I was tracking a different one.

pointerDixie214

19th of May 2008 (Mon), 21:40

OK- sorry I've been off this thread...

Long story short, Cameta Camera is Amazing.

After really putting this lens through the ringer, I noticed it was front focusing just a hair. Well, it was after my 14 days return policy at Cameta had run out. Contacted Sigma last Wednesday just to have it calibrated before my honeymoon in four week. They said it would be about 6 weeks before I would get it back.

I am thinking, OK it's not front focusing that bad as you've seen some of my shots with it. But I contacted Cameta via email and explained the situation. How the lens was for my honeymoon etc... They said no problem. Just send us the lens with everything it came with and we'll send you a new one. Even though the return policy is 14 days and I have had it for almost two months!!! Sent it to them Thursday afternoon. It arrived this morning. Just got an email saying my new lens has been shipped to be delivered Wednesday! Less than a week turn around.

Best of all, in the email the girl I was working with even wished us a happy honeymoon and a great marriage!

Amazing people and I will ALWAYS recommend them with confidence.

lexi73

20th of May 2008 (Tue), 08:40

I took mine with me to a concert last weekend and it worked pretty good.....ill post some photos soon

WhyFi

21st of May 2008 (Wed), 07:12

I'm getting to know my 24-60 after having it undergo calibration at the service center - crappy weather hasn't helped in my efforts to shoot a lot. There still seems to be a slight front focus, particularly at the long end of the lens, but I certainly think that it's manageable. Otherwise, I think that it'll be a fruitful relationship!

A couple of snaps -
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2010/2511234050_559e790d7e_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2390/2510494699_3501fbf97a_b.jpg

javaprog

21st of May 2008 (Wed), 09:25

I had a CPF on for this one

http://rhenry74.homeip.net/pics/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=16868&g2_serialNumber=2

griptape

21st of May 2008 (Wed), 15:49

Excellent shots WhyFi and Java. Makes me want to spend money on a CPL Java. Thanks a lot. :p

I was out with my daughter today and ran across this little guy, and decided to see what I could get out of it. And this makes me want extension tubes. Man, I need to stop looking at decent pictures. These are both 100% crops from the full image:

f/11
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/spider1.jpg

Wide open at f/2.8
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/spider2.jpg

lexi73

21st of May 2008 (Wed), 22:37

Here are a few recent shots with my 24-60

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/24_60-1.jpg

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/24_60-2.jpg

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/24_60-3.jpg

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/24_60-4.jpg

griptape

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 00:11

There's a lot of energy in those, great captures lexi.

javaprog

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 13:50

Excellent shots WhyFi and Java. Makes me want to spend money on a CPL Java. Thanks a lot. :p

I was out with my daughter today and ran across this little guy, and decided to see what I could get out of it. And this makes me want extension tubes. Man, I need to stop looking at decent pictures. These are both 100% crops from the full image:

Jumping spiders are cool!
What ISO is that?

Here are a few recent shots with my 24-60

#3 is awesome
I'm a bit suprised there's no flare

griptape

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 18:06

Jumping spiders are cool!
What ISO is that?

ISO 100.
On an XT body.

VDMTom

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 21:59

lookin good ! haha

pointerDixie214

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 22:04

Got mine back today from Cameta... still a small front focusing issue, but not bad.

Will post results later.

lexi73

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 22:12

Here are 3 more that i have taken recently....i really like this lens!

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/20-60-6.jpg

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/20-60-7.jpg

http://www.ianmdesign.com/photos/20-60-8.jpg

pointerDixie214

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 22:29

lexi- how would you compare this lens to the 17-40L? besides the obvious focal difference...

I still love this lens, but I am thinking (after getting my first L) that I would like another... hehehe Just wasn't sure.

lexi73

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 22:43

Pointer,
The 17-40 is super sharp and fast focusing. Also has great color. I was originally going to get the 24-70L but at this price i thought i would give this lens a go. If i liked it then great, I'd save myself $800. If not then I would just sell it and move on. Honestly I've been impressed. Its damn good for the $200. Obviously the 24-70L is going to have better IQ, Focus Time, Build Quality, Etc...but is it going to be worth 4x more than what I have spent?? not sure... This lens offers great quality and a very affordable price!

Even if i do upgrade to the 24-70L sometime i don't think ill ever sell this lens just because of the price i got it for and the great vivid photos its capable of producing.

pointerDixie214

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 23:34

Lexi,
Thanks! I am playing with this lens right now and I think my first copy was better. D'OH!!!!!

I don't know. I might just need to get used to the lens. It seems like the AF "locks" on no matter the lighting condition, but it only seems accurate in good lighting. Has anyone else noticed this?

I am going to play with the lens tomorrow some more to get more used to it again and to give it one last chance. I think I might just be spoiled by my L... but I need better focusing than I am getting for sure.

I really want to like this lens more though since I don't want to spend $400 on the Tamron 17-50 or $600 on the 17-40L...

kcbrown

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 00:02

JackProton

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 00:19

I don't know. I might just need to get used to the lens. It seems like the AF "locks" on no matter the lighting condition, but it only seems accurate in good lighting. Has anyone else noticed this?

No (though my old XT did this). Are you using the center high-precision f2.8 focus point?

I am going to play with the lens tomorrow some more to get more used to it again and to give it one last chance. I think I might just be spoiled by my L... but I need better focusing than I am getting for sure.

I really want to like this lens more though since I don't want to spend $400 on the Tamron 17-50 or $600 on the 17-40L...
Definitely try the focus test chart. Many of the Sigma's do seem to need a warranty tune-up but work like a champ afterwards.

diehard6.0

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 01:33

Mine arrived today after recalibration. Still misfocuses occasionally, however very sharp even at f/2.8 if the focus is on the target.

JackProton

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 02:13

Mine arrived today after recalibration. Still misfocuses occasionally, however very sharp even at f/2.8 if the focus is on the target.
The narrow DOF gets me occasionally - focus on a cat's eye and sometimes the camera locks on an eyebrow whisker instead.

If you think the lens still isn't perfect, though, there's always the ultimate Sigma tuneup -- send your camera in with your lens and they'll create a custom chip. I had this done with a 17-35mm and it focuses absolutely perfect now on my XTi.

Jason C

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 03:03

Here is one of my girls, Chloe. I focused on her right eye, but her nose is in focus...

1/50th sec @ f/4
fl=60mm iso 400
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3135/2515102783_a49dd33458_b.jpg

WhyFi

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 05:45

I've been getting less-than-stellar results, as well - it seems to be a small, but annoyingly noticeable, front focus... but I need to just get out and do more walk-around shooting... I'm new, so I'm not going to rule out user error (although shots with my nifty haven't been this inconsistent), but I want to see if it's performing poorly *only* under certain conditions (because at times, it's great). So far, it seems to be worst at the times when DOF is at it's most shallow - 2.8, long end of the lens, and close to the subject... and these are the moments when you want it at it's sharpest... *sigh*

I should actually have nice weather this weekend, so I'll give it a go under good lighting conditions.

To end on a positive note, here's a capture of the reclusive Repair Tech, in his natural environment - the test bench cave... ;)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2395/2515211948_df7020f5a9.jpg

barq

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 06:43

WhyFi, most of us have this problem to. The lens is not sharpest at 2.8, mine is sharpest at 4 to 5.6.

Here are two sample shots, the first one is taken on f3,5 and the last one f5.6. You can see that the f5.6 is sharper than the f3.5. Look at the crown.

pointerDixie214

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 06:47

Definitely try the focus test chart. Many of the Sigma's do seem to need a warranty tune-up but work like a champ afterwards.

Going to do this today. This usually wouldn't be a problem and I would send it in, but I HAVE to have this lens back by June 12 since the whole reason I bought it (Read: Justified the purchase to future wife) was for our honeymoon.

I already had the 18-55mm IS but wanted an f/2.8 so we upgraded... Dang 18-55mm IS was awesome with exception of CA issues...

WhyFi

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 07:02

WhyFi, most of us have this problem to. The lens is not sharpest at 2.8, mine is sharpest at 4 to 5.6.
Yeah, I know that they tend to be sharper stopped down a little, but mine actually IS sharp at 2.8... just not where I want it to be sharp! If it weren't sharp at all at 2.8, it would be a little less frustrating, but right now I feel like a school teacher with a talented but misbehaving student "little Johnny, if only you'd live up to your potential!"

Another from this morning - colors tweaked a bit...
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2329/2515368299_cc56d4ff33.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/whyfinyc/2515368299/sizes/o/)

pointerDixie214

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 08:01

See, my last copy was SHARP at f/2.8 just not where I wanted it to be too. This one is pretty danged sharp at f/2.8 also, but again, not where I need it to be.

I contacted Sigma to see if I can have it serviced and returned by June 12. If not, I contacted Cameta again to see if I could exchange it and pay the difference for either of the below and in this order...

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8

We'll see what happens. Bottom line is I will have a sharp, focusing lens by the honeymoon even if I have to eBay this one and buy one of the above.

javaprog

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 10:12

So has anyone here shot with this lens on a 5D? I'm curious how good the image quality is when on a full-frame camera. In particular, how well they control various aberrations towards the edges and in the corners on full-frame. Often, that's the real difference between an L lens and a non-L lens...

Dunno if this will help or not but I took some pictures on a film camera (full frame.) Post #627 in this thread

and several shots here http://rhenry74.homeip.net/pics/main.php/v/photography/Sigma24-60/040608/fullframe/

javaprog

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 10:16

The narrow DOF gets me occasionally - focus on a cat's eye and sometimes the camera locks on an eyebrow whisker instead.

If you think the lens still isn't perfect, though, there's always the ultimate Sigma tuneup -- send your camera in with your lens and they'll create a custom chip. I had this done with a 17-35mm and it focuses absolutely perfect now on my XTi.

Maybe I should do this with both of my lenses at the same time. Did you send them to Canon? Will they do it for free if either the body or the lens is under warrenty? Will they do a Sigma lens? Should I start a new thread? :lol:

WhyFi

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 11:53

I just spoke with a rep at Sigma, and he said that I could indeed send my camera body along with my lens for further calibration and that it would all be done under warranty, free of charge.

Now I just have to decide if I want to be without my camera for a week or if I want to use this as an excuse to move to a 17-40 f/4L instead :twisted:

JackProton

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 15:44

Going to do this today. This usually wouldn't be a problem and I would send it in, but I HAVE to have this lens back by June 12 since the whole reason I bought it (Read: Justified the purchase to future wife) was for our honeymoon.

Sorry to hear that. I've found Sigma takes an average of two weeks though they somehow got my 24-60 back in one week exactly (but mine had a misaligned lens element rather than a focusing issue). There's always manual focus for those narrow DOF shots until you can get the lens serviced.

Maybe I should do this with both of my lenses at the same time. Did you send them to Canon? Will they do it for free if either the body or the lens is under warrenty? Will they do a Sigma lens? Should I start a new thread? :lol:
Oh, no - Canon would evacuate their headquarters and call in a hazmat team if you sent them a Sigma lens! You send your camera along with the lens(es) to Sigma Factory Service. Sigma will use focusing data from your own camera to create a custom chip for your lens. They don't actually adjust the camera focusing so you should be sure your camera focuses correctly before doing this. Once done, your camera and lens are perfectly matched. I actually sent in two lenses at the same time and now both focus perfectly on my camera.

I just spoke with a rep at Sigma, and he said that I could indeed send my camera body along with my lens for further calibration and that it would all be done under warranty, free of charge.

Now I just have to decide if I want to be without my camera for a week or if I want to use this as an excuse to move to a 17-40 f/4L instead :twisted:
Heh, heh - or a 40D or XSi. I broke the In-Case-of-Emergency glass and grabbed my trusty film Rebel and then unlocked the hermetically sealed refrigerated underground film vault.

pointerDixie214

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 22:03

DStanic

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 22:21

JackProton- Shipped the lens out Priority today to be delivered Tuesday. Talked with the Sigma rep and they said they would get it back to me within my time line...

I really hope this works because I really like this lens... and the money saved on it!

I hope so too! I will never ever sell this lens (unless I switch systems.. God forbid!) because I don't think there is a better standard zoom lens out there for the price. And as long as Cameta is selling them new for $220, I'd never be able to sell mine for enough.. :p

If I ever want a different standard zoom, I'd just keep it and get a second body for it. ;)

DStanic

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 22:37

full size: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/2517851984_d45640ab50_o_d.jpg

60mm f/4 and sharpened in RAW.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/2517851984_f303d15582.jpg

JackProton

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 23:42

JackProton- Shipped the lens out Priority today to be delivered Tuesday. Talked with the Sigma rep and they said they would get it back to me within my time line...

I really hope this works because I really like this lens... and the money saved on it!

Very glad to hear Sigma is trying to help you out! That's very cool. Got my fingers crossed for ya.

JackProton

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 23:48

full size: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/2517851984_d45640ab50_o_d.jpg

60mm f/4 and sharpened in RAW.

Nice!

You know, you'd almost think Sigma was giving away free cats with this lens. :D But, seriously, I had to get an additional cat after the first two started running away whenever they heard the flash unit charge up.

DDCSD

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 00:06

After walking around Savannah last week with this lens, i do wish it was a bit wider for general walk-around use. With that said, it was the only lens that my 20D saw the whole day, and I am more than pleased with the results.

Hand-held 1/80s f/5.6 ISO 400
http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/300389682_zaANh-XL.jpg

diehard6.0

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 00:28

Does a type of lens influence body's metering? XTi with 24-60 tends to underexpose.

JackProton

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 05:38

Does a type of lens influence body's metering? XTi with 24-60 tends to underexpose.

If you're not talking about flash, then no, not really (flash is a more complicated topic). I've heard some complaints about the XTi itself underexposing but I've never experienced this. At least not when I didn't expect it.

Sorry if you know this already but... All auto-exposure systems try to set the exposure to 18% gray. It had been decided that, in general, averaging together all light values in a scene usually come out to about 18% gray. This isn't always true, though. If you're shooting a scene with lots of white, you'll tend to see underexposures. Shooting scenese with black, you'll tend to see the opposite and get overexposures. I see this all the time with snapshots my sister-in-law sends of her kids -- white shirts always come out gray. The bottom line is that no auto-exposure system is perfect and you'll need use some technique to get a proper exposure in these types of circumstances.

With an XTi, you can switch to Partial metering mode and lock the exposure on the relevant part of the scene closest to 18% gray using the '*' exposure lock button. Or you can set the exposure compensation according to your subject ("for white, add light"). Or you can use manual mode and adjust the exposure according to the builtin lightmeter.

DStanic

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 08:58

With an XTi, you can switch to Partial metering mode and lock the exposure on the relevant part of the scene closest to 18% gray using the '*' exposure lock button. Or you can set the exposure compensation according to your subject ("for white, add light"). Or you can use manual mode and adjust the exposure according to the builtin lightmeter.

And also keep an eye on the histogram- expose to the right but don't over expose. ;)

DDCSD

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 09:02

Mine is pretty darn sharp wide open, and I like the bokeh.

1/250s 2.8 ISO 200 60mm - Hand held
http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/300498790_KCC75-XL.jpg

pointerDixie214

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 09:04

Thanks guys. I agree... if this lens comes back working, I won't even sell it when I upgrade to the 17-40mm L... especially as long as they are going for next to nothing new...

DDCSD- I really like that shot. Cool composition.

griptape

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 12:43

You know, you'd almost think Sigma was giving away free cats with this lens.

Oh, that's what that meowing from the other box was. I just did what I normally do with packages I'm not expecting and stuck it in the microwave to kill any chemical agents someone might have sent to try and kill me.

pointerDixie214

24th of May 2008 (Sat), 21:25

Oh, that's what that meowing from the other box was. I just did what I normally do with packages I'm not expecting and stuck it in the microwave to kill any chemical agents someone might have sent to try and kill me.

Yeah- but if you did that with the lens and a cat inside the box you could have ruined the metal mount on the lens! :p

WhyFi

25th of May 2008 (Sun), 09:45

Still just messin' around with the lens - 2.8, 1/250, ISO 200
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3265/2521392038_18d464e365_b.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3265/2521392038_e6a0fc1697_o.jpg)
Going to take it to the NY Botanic garden tomorrow, see how it does.

shooter mcgavin

25th of May 2008 (Sun), 18:41

Jason C

25th of May 2008 (Sun), 18:54

I just got mine. I really want to like it...but my 18-55 kit lens puts it to shame. I'm not a pixel-peeper at all, but I did a few quick tests and it isn't even close. Should I send it in to Sigma for repair, or do I just have an awesome 18-55?Can you post some pics? My first copy of the 24-60 was horrendous. My second copy is much better, and perhaps a very good copy (I'm still trying to convince myself).

DDCSD

25th of May 2008 (Sun), 18:58

Well, I think my kit lens is pretty darn good, but it can't compare with my 24-60.

-spam-

25th of May 2008 (Sun), 19:02

I just got mine. I really want to like it...but my 18-55 kit lens puts it to shame. I'm not a pixel-peeper at all, but I did a few quick tests and it isn't even close. Should I send it in to Sigma for repair, or do I just have an awesome 18-55?

What aperture are you shooting at with them? There would be pretty much no use comparing 2.8 on the sigma with whatever wide open on the kit lens is.

JackProton

25th of May 2008 (Sun), 21:40

I just got mine. I really want to like it...but my 18-55 kit lens puts it to shame. I'm not a pixel-peeper at all, but I did a few quick tests and it isn't even close. Should I send it in to Sigma for repair, or do I just have an awesome 18-55?
You'll probably want to send it to Sigma, yeah. It would be helpful to figure out if its a focusing issue or something else though. The lens could be front- or back-focusing making your subject appear soft or there could be a misaligned lens element - like mine had - that makes the lens soft at all focal lengths and apertures even when focused properly.

shooter mcgavin

26th of May 2008 (Mon), 01:07

Thanks everybody. Looking at the images again, I'm seeing I just need to send it in. No lens should look this bad at f/8 or 11 shooting from a tripod with a release...if nothing else it did revive a little faith in the kit.

javaprog

27th of May 2008 (Tue), 11:15

"There will be no more talk of microwaves... got it?"

http://rhenry74.homeip.net/pics/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=16658&g2_serialNumber=2

You don't want to mess with Buddy! :)

DDCSD

27th of May 2008 (Tue), 12:49

"There will be no more talk of microwaves... got it?"

You don't want to mess with Buddy! :)

:lol:

griptape

27th of May 2008 (Tue), 14:48

"There will be no more talk of microwaves... got it?"

You don't want to mess with Buddy! :)

:lol: He seems genuinely concerned. I'll certainly be watching what I say from now on.

orinth

28th of May 2008 (Wed), 12:14

I still can't believe how this lens/thread has taken off. Hardly anyone had this lens initially, even with the cheap price for a while.

I just took a trip to chicago and snapped off a few pics. This was my first time taking in RAW and doing all PP myself, so a few pics may look off. Here is the gallery...

http://chrismartin.smugmug.com/gallery/5040013_qJNTr#302751247_GNhu7

a few from the gallery

http://chrismartin.smugmug.com/photos/302751247_GNhu7-XL.jpg

http://chrismartin.smugmug.com/photos/302754717_LtVZz-XL.jpg

http://chrismartin.smugmug.com/photos/302755354_QKrjM-XL.jpg

http://chrismartin.smugmug.com/photos/302757146_qAQTj-L.jpg

http://chrismartin.smugmug.com/photos/302762350_bQM44-L.jpg

Jason C

28th of May 2008 (Wed), 14:20

Just for giggles, Chloe and the 24-60 on the 40D with ISO expanded to 3200...
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2113/2531958742_b301d1490e.jpg
1/50th sec @ f/4
fl=60mm ISO 3200

-spam-

28th of May 2008 (Wed), 17:46

Time for one from me again...

Click the thumbnail for a bigger version.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2181/2526901809_2ed226ec91.jpg?v=0 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/-spam-/2526901809/sizes/l/)

Ive barely touched it since i got the sigma 30mm 1.4 ;)

Jason C

31st of May 2008 (Sat), 02:09

JackProton

31st of May 2008 (Sat), 21:49

I am coming to terms with my second copy, and most likely I will not send it to Sigma at this time.

I kind off let the 'hype' get to me, and expected the 24-60 to be the second coming, when in fact it's just a really good budget fast piece of glass.

I still don't count lenses that typically retail for $400 as "budget glass" even though I also own the exceptional 70-200 f4L IS. Yes, the 24-60 is merely "really good" (at least in comparison) but I really don't see anything wrong with that nor in the way the lens has generally been characterized here.

Jason C

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 03:09

I did run into an issue today in which I'll have to further investigate. I was taking pics of a friend's son's outdoor hockey match. I got some really good snaps with my 70-200 and my 100. I switched to the 24-60 for some up close action, maybe 20 feet, wide open at 60mm fl...it performed fine. But when the distance increased when I pulled back a bit, maybe 40 to 50 feet, for the game ending shootout, the goalie was out of focus but the building behind the hockey court was in focus.

Like I said, I'll need to investigate this further. The lens may be going to Sigma after all.

-spam-

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 03:39

WhyFi

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 06:40

^^^ great effin' photo!

-spam-

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 06:59

^^^ great effin' photo!

Cheers mate :)

pointerDixie214

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 09:19

I present a fresh one from 6am this morning (well, semi fresh given that was 12 and a half hours ago). Probably the sharpest photo i have from this lens.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2061/2540219217_f5efcaa4c2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/-spam-/2540219217/)
That is an awesome image! Man i can't wait until I get this lens back... only lens I have in my arsenal until it gets back is the 70-200 (Awesome lens, but can't stand not having this one...

JackProton

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 15:24

-spam-

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 18:23

That is an awesome image! Man i can't wait until I get this lens back... only lens I have in my arsenal until it gets back is the 70-200 (Awesome lens, but can't stand not having this one...

Thanks :)

Oh and you have to bear in mind that i did drop it from about 5 foot about 6 months ago :oops::confused:

shooter mcgavin

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 22:59

I'm thinking that I'm going to send my copy in for calibration, but how would you describe what you're seeing here? Is it a focus issue? These aren't perfect 100% crops, but you get the idea. I'm not really into testing lenses, but there is definitely something wrong here. It is possible that my testing technique is flawed, but I think I was pretty careful. Any thoughts?

20d, tripod, cable release, 35mm, ISO 100, 1 sec, f/5.6, center focus with "with pulp" at the center

Canon 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 (top)
Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 (bottom)

(I did test at different focal lengths and apertures, but all the results were similar)

JackProton

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 23:34

I'm thinking that I'm going to send my copy in for calibration, but how would you describe what you're seeing here? Is it a focus issue? .......

(I did test at different focal lengths and apertures, but all the results were similar)

Your test setup looks a little ambiguous. Try the test chart or some batteries staggered in a line (no overlap). Also, try not to shoot around the minimum focusing distance -- its too easy to get a misfocus. How's your manually focused images look? Could be a focus issue here or something else, hard to say from this image. If you're tired of testing and just want to send it in, say something like "images appear soft at all apertures and focal lengths".

shooter mcgavin

1st of June 2008 (Sun), 23:57

Thanks for the reply, and yes, I'm sure there are some things I am missing in my tests. These images are crops, basically 100%s, so I wasn't anywhere near minimum focusing distance. The manual focus images have the same soft, washed look, so I suppose it isn't a problem with the focus (or I'm just that bad at manual). I'll probably take your advice since I am kind of tired of testing. Thanks a lot though!

JackProton

2nd of June 2008 (Mon), 00:33

Ah, that "soft, washed look" sounds something like what I was seeing with my copy. Misaligned lens element. Even manually focusing at f8 or f11 showed only a little improvement.

pointerDixie214

3rd of June 2008 (Tue), 22:03

WOW! Got my lens back from Sigma already today! Sent it out a week and a half ago and got it back already!

Took it out and immediately set up the tripod for the focus test...

Took two shots at f/2.8 and the verdict is....

Sharp as a tack wide open and focus is dead on! WOO-HOO!!!!

I now love this lens to it's full potential. Will take some shots tomorrow, so I will post them up later...

DDCSD

3rd of June 2008 (Tue), 22:05

Awesome, glad to hear they got is sorted out for you, and in plenty of time!

JackProton

3rd of June 2008 (Tue), 23:12

WOW! Got my lens back from Sigma already today!

Excellent news!

pointerDixie214

3rd of June 2008 (Tue), 23:44

Thanks! Here are just a couple goofing off... a couple of one of my dogs doing what she does best... and one of one of HER toy dogs... ;)

Focus on snout
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/pointerDixie214/IMG_2341Large.jpg

Focus on her left eye
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/pointerDixie214/IMG_2343Large.jpg

Focus on his left eye
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/pointerDixie214/IMG_2346Large.jpg

DDCSD

3rd of June 2008 (Tue), 23:46

Looks good. Good looking Shorthair as well.

Kevin M

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 04:18

5D + 24-60/2.8 @ 24mm

http://homepage.eircom.net/~bot/fm/train.jpg

pointerDixie214

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 07:09

Looks good. Good looking Shorthair as well.

Thanks! She's a great dog. Completely the opposite from my male pointer/hound mix.

Jason C

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 10:28

The 24-60 gets shipped to Arizona today.

Medic85

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 18:09

Well, I'm a slacker. I've taken a few shots with mine but have yet to upload them to the PC yet:(

I know...sad, isn't it? I do really like the lens though.

pointerDixie214

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 20:52

Couple more...
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/pointerDixie214/IMG_2355copy.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/pointerDixie214/IMG_2355cropcopy.jpg

samhengon

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 21:20

-spam-

4th of June 2008 (Wed), 21:27

Hi PointerDixie,

I have a question. Did you send in your body along with the lens for them to fix it? I sent in my lens only for fix last time but got just a very little improvement @f2.8 ... depressed... I hope I could get similar results as yours.

Sincerely,
Heng On Sam

I somewhat doubt that they would have sent their camera with the lens to sigma. You certainly wouldnt catch me sending my camera to anyone but canon...

jakks

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 04:09

Really happy with mine - even if customs stung me for import ...a quick shot, still got to play with it more ...

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i89/jakks360/IMG_9263-1.jpg

jakks

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 04:11

Can someone tell me how to use a focus test chart - sorry for asking a daft question!
Thanks Jackie

-spam-

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 04:25

Really happy with mine - even if customs stung me for import ...a quick shot, still got to play with it more ...

Ouch, we only get hit by customs charges and GST if its $1000 US including shipping.

Noice photo too :)

jakks

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 05:01

Ouch, we only get hit by customs charges and GST if its $1000 US including shipping.

Noice photo too :)

Uk = taxed to death! Still a saving due to exchange rate but they charged me £48 import, VAT and some other thing on a £130 purchase!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

Jackie

-spam-

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 05:07

Uk = taxed to death! Still a saving due to exchange rate but they charged me £48 import, VAT and some other thing on a £130 purchase!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

Holy cow :shock:

Its great down here, even if we spend enough to get taxed, it still usually comes out heaps cheaper than buying locally (even when compared to some grey importers as well)

pointerDixie214

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 08:12

I did not send in my Camera. I thought about it, but decided I would go this route first. Glad I did!

Good luck with yours.

DDCSD

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 12:33

Can someone tell me how to use a focus test chart - sorry for asking a daft question!
Thanks Jackie

This should tell you all you need to know.

http://focustestchart.com/chart.html

jakks

5th of June 2008 (Thu), 15:47

Thanks for the link - I will get that printed and test at the weekend. Jackie

kcbrown

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 00:14

Thanks for the link - I will get that printed and test at the weekend. Jackie

Note that at a wide aperture like f/2.8, the focus target on the focus test chart that he referred to may end up being too large to give you a real idea of what's going on if your lens is marginal.

Feel free to use the focus test chart I posted in this message: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5534139&postcount=707 if you need a high-precision focus target.

The same usage instructions as the original one apply to that one as well.

bikinicenter

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 00:16

JackProton, very clean pictures. I love cats.

Anyone ever hear of those painted cat pictures that are floating around? BTW, I first found some over on www.picturesofcats.ca in the cat gallery.

lexi73

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 08:50

pointerDixie214 Great results.....mine is pretty sharp but i think im going to send it in just to see if it improves at all, i guess it wont hurt any..just some $$ for shipping.

ro0f

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 11:27

Hi guys,
i registered a new account just because of this thread. I got my copy today, but the first pictures are a little bit disappointing for me. Anyway, there's are very bad light conditions (and it's raining), so i'll try my luck tomorrow again and see what it's really like.

there are lots of nice pictures in this thread, so keep posting! ;-)

JackProton

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 16:28

JackProton, very clean pictures. I love cats.

Thanks! The other occupants in the house aren't at all happy being my photographic models. Not even for a scratch behind the ear. :)

Anyone ever hear of those painted cat pictures that are floating around? BTW, I first found some over on www.picturesofcats.ca (http://www.picturesofcats.ca) in the cat gallery.
Those are pretty funky! Our cats seem to prefer dirt and thistles with the occasional feather.

griptape

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 20:29

there are lots of nice pictures in this thread, so keep posting! ;-)

Well, if you insist:

I dare you mother trucker.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3264/2556697675_ef9be7de38_o.jpg

TeamSpeed

6th of June 2008 (Fri), 20:57

In the midst of the storms that raced through our area at 70mph... caught this sign of promise through the trees...

ro0f

7th of June 2008 (Sat), 04:29

Ok guys, here's a test shot of my copy, i focused the 'J' on the keyboard. 1/160, F2.8, ISO 200, Autofocus:

http://www.rfzone.de/fotos/kram/Sigma_test_04.jpg

And here's a 100 % crop:
http://www.rfzone.de/fotos/kram/Sigma_test_04_crop.jpg

What do you think? Useable?

griptape

7th of June 2008 (Sat), 07:21

Looks pretty darn accurate to me roof.

pointerDixie214

7th of June 2008 (Sat), 07:54

ro0f- looks great to me... roll with it!

DDCSD

7th of June 2008 (Sat), 07:57

Ok guys, here's a test shot of my copy, i focused the 'J' on the keyboard. 1/160, F2.8, ISO 200, Autofocus:

And here's a 100 % crop:

What do you think? Useable?

That looks outstanding! Tough subject to achieve focus in the correct spot too.

I'd wouldn't bother sending it in, looks darn sharp too!

-spam-

7th of June 2008 (Sat), 08:07

Ok guys, here's a test shot of my copy, i focused the 'J' on the keyboard. 1/160, F2.8, ISO 200, Autofocus:

And here's a 100 % crop:

What do you think? Useable?

Looks damn near perfect to me. Now just dont drop it like i did to mine :oops::lol:

ro0f

7th of June 2008 (Sat), 08:32

Looks damn near perfect to me. Now just dont drop it like i did to mine :oops::lol:

Haha, i'm definately trying not to do so!:oops::D

Bobarazzo

8th of June 2008 (Sun), 13:27

Thanks to all who posted regarding the 24-60 Sigma. I just grabbed one on ebay from Cameta ($215.95 total Priority Mail shipping). I'll be sure to post my lens test when it arrives. I bought it "Eyes wide open" and know I may have focus issues but it sounds like it not a big deal getting it corrected if I get a bad copy.
Thanks again!

ro0f

9th of June 2008 (Mon), 16:30

Ok guys, I finally found some time to take a few first shots with the lense.

http://www.rfzone.de/fotos/08/06/09/Sandwespe2.jpg

A wallpaper i made for myself:

http://www.rfzone.de/fotos/08/06/09/Grass_WP.jpg

DDCSD

9th of June 2008 (Mon), 19:01

That thing is sharp! You definitely got a good one. Are you using tubes there?

DStanic

9th of June 2008 (Mon), 21:07

All images were shot in RAW, with basic corrections done in Lightroom. No major photoshop stuff here.

Canada Geese

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/2565757783_d614077081_o.jpg

Am I gonna jump? No, cause my lens is TACK sharp and perfect focus! LOL
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3090/2566583914_905832fe65_o.jpg

cool backlighting
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3190/2565757397_45f937136f_o.jpg

flowers...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3177/2565757237_6ef672d907_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/2566582720_0085ef2b8d_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3275/2565757055_b61775f894_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3261/2566580554_6c7aee5f12_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3021/2566580702_dd680bcac2_o.jpg

Check out the whole set in my Flickr. Some are taken with my 70-200 aswell.

ro0f

10th of June 2008 (Tue), 02:25

That thing is sharp! You definitely got a good one. Are you using tubes there?

No Sir, it's just made with the Lens, no tubes.

-spam-

10th of June 2008 (Tue), 02:31

One from today. You see its a bit soft on the full size but thats only because i had the camera resting dodgily on a rock for 20 seconds.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/2566902890_3abe85ee9f.jpg?v=0 (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/2566902890_3abe85ee9f.jpg?v=0)

ro0f

11th of June 2008 (Wed), 02:54

Looks pretty good to me. I'd really like to see it fullsize!

Kevin M

11th of June 2008 (Wed), 06:14

At 28mm f/9

http://homepage.eircom.net/~bot/fm/upper5.jpg

javaprog

11th of June 2008 (Wed), 11:40

great shots all

-spam-

11th of June 2008 (Wed), 19:07

Looks pretty good to me. I'd really like to see it fullsize!

Largest i have online is 1600 on its longest side

http://www.flickr.com/photos/-spam-/2566902890/sizes/o/in/photostream/

And if the flickr page doesnt work, try this instead...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/2566902890_e9a5c67c16_o.jpg

splunk

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 00:15

Excited! Just got my 24-60 delievered today! After reading this thread (well, most of it) decided against the 24-70. Shall add to the gallery soon.

DDCSD

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 00:46

Excited! Just got my 24-60 delievered today! After reading this thread (well, most of it) decided against the 24-70. Shall add to the gallery soon.

Looking forward to it!

Welcome to POTN!!!!

Jason C

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 01:35

Still waiting for my lens, sent it to Arizona 2 weeks ago...

TeamSpeed

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 05:12

Still waiting for my lens, sent it to Arizona 2 weeks ago...

Okay, sorry to hear about that, but did you mean to reply to your post in the poll?
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5684331&postcount=13

Jason C

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 18:26

Okay, sorry to hear about that, but did you mean to reply to your post in the poll?
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5684331&postcount=13
No, this is the thread I wanted to post in.

Oddly, however, I recieved a call from C.R.I.S. (http://www.criscam.com/) of Arizona today about my 24-60: the part that is needed is on back order. C.R.I.S. did not give me a time frame, because they just don't know when they'll get the needed part.

I can look at this as "the glass is half full" reasoning; I was right that my 24-60 was not to spec, necessitating not only warranty service, but also replacement "parts" to boot.

I feel this will be my last Sigma purchase...

TeamSpeed

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 19:16

No, this is the thread I wanted to post in.

Oddly, however, I recieved a call from C.R.I.S. (http://www.criscam.com/) of Arizona today about my 24-60: the part that is needed is on back order. C.R.I.S. did not give me a time frame, because they just don't know when they'll get the needed part.

I can look at this as "the glass is half full" reasoning; I was right that my 24-60 was not to spec, necessitating not only warranty service, but also replacement "parts" to boot.

I feel this will be my last Sigma purchase...

And this belongs in the Sigma 24-60 photo gallery thread why?

-spam-

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 22:16

And this belongs in the Sigma 24-60 photo gallery thread why?

Because people have been discussing the quality of their copies the whole way along in the thread.

Jason C

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 22:33

Because people have been discussing the quality of their copies the whole way along in the thread.What he said.

I'm not trying to cause any fuss, but with the hit and miss nature of a good copy of the 24-60, coupled with POTN members considering purchasing this lens, my posting in this thread is just a documentation of my experience with this lens with both performance and warranty service.

TeamSpeed

20th of June 2008 (Fri), 22:49

What he said.

I'm not trying to cause any fuss, but with the hit and miss nature of a good copy of the 24-60, coupled with POTN members considering purchasing this lens, my posting in this thread is just a documentation of my experience with this lens with both performance and warranty service.

But with over 30 posts (20% of your overall post count) in this thread over the last month or so about the dismay over your lens and not being a fan of Sigma, etc, I would think a separate thread dedicated to your findings and experience with Sigma quality, build, and service would be warranted for others to comment on, and would serve better as a research thread for those contemplating the lens. Then you can put a link in the gallery to the thread that discusses your issues with it. This way you get to document your saga, and still notify others in the gallery.

Now, back on track with gallery shots from this lens.... Here is the last shot from my 24-60 of my newest child (before I got my 85L), as it is my primary lens on the MKIII, and always comes in handy with my daughter shooting me a very ornery look. Wide open at 46mm, with my normal contrast/high pass steps. The 85L has supplanted this lens as my portrait lens since though!

griptape

30th of June 2008 (Mon), 09:14

Really cute kid TeamSpeed. I like your copyright logo too by the way.

Figured I'd add a couple more to the thread. I wasn't out to shoot bees (hence the seriously strange settings for such a thing if you look at the exif), but when I saw one, I figured why not. First one is about 75% crop, second one is 100% crop. RAW conversion and crop only, no other PP. Worth noting is the purple fringing; the first time I've seen it, but the flowers did have some actual purple fringe of their own, so it's not entirely the lens.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/bee1.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/bee2.jpg

javaprog

2nd of July 2008 (Wed), 09:03

Bees love clover.
http://rhenry74.homeip.net/pics/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=18259&g2_serialNumber=2

lexi73

2nd of July 2008 (Wed), 13:47

what was the process you all used to send in your lens? i need to send mine in so that i can get it back before August.......

JackProton

2nd of July 2008 (Wed), 15:01

what was the process you all used to send in your lens? i need to send mine in so that i can get it back before August.......

I've found that two weeks is pretty typical for them to get your lens repaired and returned to you.

Instructions can be found at http://www.sigmaphoto.com/sigmaonlinemall/ebay_service.asp

No need to contact Sigma beforehand, just send the lens to Sigma's NY office (rather than the authorized service centers):

Sigma Factory Service Department
Sigma Corporation of America
15 Fleetwood Court
Ronkonkoma, NY 11779

There's a form you can use at http://www.sigmaphoto.com/sigmaonlinemall/SIGMA_SERVICE_REQUEST.pdf

Include

Name and address.
Warranty card(only required for warranty service).
Copy of purchase receipt(only required for warranty service).
Brief note explaining issue with your product.

canons900

2nd of July 2008 (Wed), 15:45

JackProton

2nd of July 2008 (Wed), 21:15

I got mine yesterday and here are two photos the first one on a tripod, the second handheld

Do you think there is a focus issue going on?

Let me know if you want some more photos, I can post them and I will be taking some more this afternoon tonight.

Assuming you shot these at f2.8, they look fine. The narrow DOF takes a little getting used to. I imagine you focused on the stamen in the first and those are pretty sharp. In the second, a small camera movement or wind could account for the focus shifting a small amount. Shoot the focus chart if you're worried.

Chip Andrews

3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 12:01

I just sent my Paypal payment to Citizensmith for this lens. Can't wait to get this. Hoping to have it next week as there is a parade right here in Waterloo, NY for Super Bowl winning coach Tom Coughlin (he is from Waterloo). I will post some pics if I do.

Shahid

3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 23:58

Just received mine yesterday, now have to go and do some shooting. Will try to post some samples. Also, mine comes with a 10year Sigma Warranty.

JackProton

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 00:31

Just received mine yesterday, now have to go and do some shooting. Will try to post some samples. Also, mine comes with a 10year Sigma Warranty.

10 years? Sweet. I didn't think anything came with a 10 year warranty anymore.

Shahid

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 01:12

10 years? Sweet. I didn't think anything came with a 10 year warranty anymore.

It does in Canada. :D

beatdownvictim

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 03:31

10 year warranty FTW!
but you gotta pay gentec 15 bucks each time u send it in....... oh well, 10 years! what a damn steal!

Shahid

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 11:18

10 year warranty FTW!
but you gotta pay gentec 15 bucks each time u send it in....... oh well, 10 years! what a damn steal!

$15 each time...I can live with that for the 10 year warranty. :)

S.Horton

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 11:24

At the price point, this lens continues to get my attention.

Mike Deep

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 12:06

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/closeup/flowers/IMG_11303.jpg

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/closeup/flowers/IMG_11432.jpg

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/closeup/flowers/IMG_11509.jpg

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/closeup/flowers/IMG_11541.jpg

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/closeup/flowers/IMG_11724.jpg

DStanic

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 21:51

Those are stunning!

LordAlex

6th of July 2008 (Sun), 00:04

Wow! Cameta is awesome. I ordered Thursday and had my lens on Saturday! I thought for sure with Friday being the 4th that it wouldn't be here til Monday. Their in-store processing time is the best I've ever experienced. I shot the test chart and my focus is fine. I love all the nature shots but I didn't have access to good nature subjects today to I went with the industrial. Thanks to all the posters who helped me make this decision

http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/boxcar.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/boxcars.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/bridge.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/towers.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/corvette-1a.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/corvette-2a.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~clokwrko/corvette-3a.jpg

DStanic

6th of July 2008 (Sun), 23:01

I shot my first wedding on Saturday, great results with this lens! :)

It could be a little wider (in the church), but for the quality, accurate focusing, very very sharp it's a worthwhile lens for someone on a budget. Worked great in the low light of the church, but I gotta do a fair bit of PP on the ISO1600 images (the no flash shots).

griptape

6th of July 2008 (Sun), 23:10

Although fairly sharp, every single picture you posted is over-exposed LordAlex.

-spam-

6th of July 2008 (Sun), 23:45

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff27/mdeep88/closeup/flowers/IMG_11541.jpg

Man, that photo just makes me wish it wasnt the middle of winter here :|

LordAlex

7th of July 2008 (Mon), 19:07

Although fairly sharp, every single picture you posted is over-exposed LordAlex.

They look pretty different on my two different monitors as well. I see quite a variety in the archives, over and underexposed as seen on my screen. Just for kicks please download the top pic and post what looks right to you on your screen, I'd like to compare. Cheers.