Just got Sigma 24-60

[snibbetsj]

Well, I just got my Sigma 24-60 f2.8. I didn't really want a zoom as I prefer primes instead but when I shot the Hooters bikini contest, I found I needed the zoom as I was stuck in one place and shooting the girls walking down the runway led to some serious cropping when they were at the other end. So I started looking into some mid-range zooms.

I initially thought about the Tamron 28-75, the Sigma 24-70, Sigma 24-60, Tokina 28-70, and of course the Canon 24-70. I needed a fast focusing lens and reports of the Tamron indicate that it is rather slow, as is the Tokina. No one seemed really happy with their Sigma 24-70s so that went low on the list. Belmondo seemed really happy with his Sigma 24-60 so that went to number 2 on the list. I spent a week and a half trying to justify to myself that I really needed The Canon. Just couldn't do it, yet. :) So I ordered the Sigma 24-60. It got here last night and I took it out the Thunder beach for a test run. Thunder beach is a motorcycle rally which happens here in PCB in the spring and fall. Here's a couple of shots from last night: I'm pretty pleased with the lens so far.













http://www.pbase.com/image/42747518.jpg




http://www.pbase.com/image/42747522.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/42747519.jpg

[Olegis]

Nice pictures !
How is the AF speed and accuracy of this lens ? How does it perform wide open ?

[rbush83]

Ditto everything Olegis said/asked. I'm interested in the performance of this lens. If the image quality is comparable to the Tamron and the focusing is better, I think I'd like to get this 24-60.

[Dante King]

like the shots, but every one seems OOF. Maybe its me, lack of coffee or the compression for the web.

[snibbetsj]

Dante,

Well I normally shoot raw and the smallest jpeg so I can use the jpeg for proofing. I posted the really small jpegs so that may have something to do with it. Also, I had AI servo on and I really need some practice panning so I think that part's user error.

However, I was trying to get some wide open shots for Olegis and rbush83 and it look like the lens is front focusing on the wide end by about 2-3 inches. At 60 it's spot on but at 24, sadly, no go. To make sure it wasn't me, I tested directly against my Canon 24 f2.8 and the Sigma is not right.

Well, Monday I'm either going to call Sigma for calibration or, if I can do it, convince myself to send the Sigma back and just go for The Canon.

:) :)

[Belmondo]

I have this lens, and I really love it. I bought it with the intent of having a smaller lens to put on the 20D as a walk-around setup. It fills the bill perfectly, and the f/2.8 is kinda' nice, too.

[snibbetsj]

I have this lens, and I really love it. I bought it with the intent of having a smaller lens to put on the 20D as a walk-around setup. It fills the bill perfectly, and the f/2.8 is kinda' nice, too.

I know you love it belmondo and that's one of the reasons I decided to buy. (I know, inadvertent recommendation). But I do want it it to focus correctly. :)

[Dante King]

Dante,

Well I normally shoot raw and the smallest jpeg so I can use the jpeg for proofing. I posted the really small jpegs so that may have something to do with it. Also, I had AI servo on and I really need some practice panning so I think that part's user error.

However, I was trying to get some wide open shots for Olegis and rbush83 and it look like the lens is front focusing on the wide end by about 2-3 inches. At 60 it's spot on but at 24, sadly, no go. To make sure it wasn't me, I tested directly against my Canon 24 f2.8 and the Sigma is not right.

Well, Monday I'm either going to call Sigma for calibration or, if I can do it, convince myself to send the Sigma back and just go for The Canon.

:) :)

Dude, I did not want to rain on the new lens parade. Being a small jpeg most likely has alot to do with it. would love to see some raw processed shots.

[snibbetsj]

Dude, I did not want to rain on the new lens parade. Being a small jpeg most likely has alot to do with it. would love to see some raw processed shots.

Dante,
Believe me, you didn't :D . The first shot is really not bad but the second two are a little OOF due to user error on my part, need practice with panning.

But it still doesn't focus right at 24mm :cry:

Oh well, service centers need work too :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Dante King]

Dante,
Believe me, you didn't :D . The first shot is really not bad but the second two are a little OOF due to user error on my part, need practice with panning.

But it still doesn't focus right at 24mm :cry:

Oh well, service centers need work too :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Quite a bummer to not have something you want perfect when its NIB!

[snibbetsj]

Quite a bummer to not have something you want perfect when its NIB!

I quite agree but 99.5% of the people would never know... but I know...:lol: :lol: :lol:

Aaaaah well, it'd be really nice if this were the worst thing that ever happened to me :lol: :lol:

[Olegis]

That's too bad, Jeff - I hate when I buy something new and it fails to operate as it should ! My first copy of the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 was very soft wide open, so I brought it back to the store and got it replaced with a new one - that's what you should do, in my opinion.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Are you sure its the lens?

I'd do some more work with it before calling service.. what was the shuuter speed on these images? The lighting looks overcast.. and the subjects are moving..

They do look more out of focus, I agree but it might be worth some more shooting before sending it in.

[snibbetsj]

CDS,

Here's some 3 of the test shots I did last night.

http://www.pbase.com/snibbetsj/test

In all case f2.8, ISO 400, focal point on the II on the coozie, distance to focal pt ~ 4ft. Center focus point. ACR default settings cropped. No sharpening

#1844 is the Sigma 24-60 at 60mm, shutter at 1/160
#1850 is the Sigma 24-60 at 24mm, shutter at 1/100
#1851 is Canon 24mm f2.8, , shutter at 1/100

If someone can explain why this may not be valid I'm willing to listen.

Thanks:)

[ron chappel]

If someone can explain why this may not be valid I'm willing to listen.

Thanks:)



You're on the right track but there are potential problems in the test.Because the sensor plane is at an angle to the cup,the focus point could be locking onto anything from the top of the cup to the tablecloth-it's hard to be sure

Somewhere on the net there is a very good write up on how to do an accurate test (by chuck westfall i think-the canon tech guy for the USA).
He also describes WHY it must be done a certain way-things like the actual size of the focus points,etc + shows how to set it all up.

It basically involves making a focus target (lookes like a white clipboard with black stripes) with a slightly tilted ruler beside it but it has to be set up reasonably well


I'll see if i can find it...

[snibbetsj]

Ron,

I found the test page and shot 3 photos with it the first at 60, 2nd at 24, and 3rd at 38. All were 1/320, f2.8, ISO 400, one-shot AF, on tripod, ~45 deg angle, remote, ~ 40 in from thick black line. Center focus with the black line splitting the box. I put them on pbase in the same URL as the others.

I'll call Sigma tomorrow.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Ouch.. yep looks bad :(
If the lens is brand new it may be a return as opposed to a fix.. but see what Sigma says.