fisheye: sigma 15mm vs canon 15mm.......

[ben_r_]

I have owned both and ended up keeping the Canon because I thought I was sharper at 2.8 and 4 than the sigma. I do remember thinking that the colors seemed more saturated from the sigma as well. I also liked the build better from the canon and truthfully I kinda wanted to stay 100% canon anyway. The was better at staying on the lens on the sigma, but then the canon hasnt really given me all the problems others have had.

[jacobsen1]

[quote=ed rader;5323244]thanx Guys --- is the hood of the canon plastic or metal? /QUOTE]

metal.

only shot I have at f/2.8 with mine:

that's from the first day I got it... notice my jacket in the corner of the frame...

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by ben_r_

I have owned both and ended up keeping the Canon because I thought I was sharper at 2.8 and 4 than the sigma. I do remember thinking that the colors seemed more saturated from the sigma as well. I also liked the build better from the canon and truthfully I kinda wanted to stay 100% canon anyway. The was better at staying on the lens on the sigma, but then the canon hasnt really given me all the problems others have had.

interesting. i'm not surprised that the canon is sharper but i am surprised that you find the canon build to be better. i've never seen the canon fisheye but from using the sigma and seeing pictures of the canon i would have thought that the sigma build was much better.

the sharpness of the canon and smaller size may seal the deal for me if i choose to get a fisheye tho the MFD of the sigma is also quite attractive.

thanx ... .

ed rader

[killerbab]

this thread is helping me make the decision too. Thanks Ed.

[dbdors]

Originally Posted by ed rader

thanx for all the great info and pictures guys ... keep it coming .

now i'm really torn....first i have to figure out if i really need a fisheye and if so which one should i get.

i'd really like to try the canon so i can compare the two.

ed rader

You could always pick up one of the Zenitars. And then if you like Fisheye, then decide if you want the Sigma or Canon. You can just about sell the Zenitar for what you pay.
Or you could always rent.

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by dbdors

You could always pick up one of the Zenitars. And then if you like Fisheye, then decide if you want the Sigma or Canon. You can just about sell the Zenitar for what you pay.
Or you could always rent.

i'm on the second week of a renting the sigma 15mm now, and that's why i'm wondering how the canon stacks up against it .



ed rader

[argyle]

Originally Posted by ed rader

i'm on the second week of a renting the sigma 15mm now, and that's why i'm wondering how the canon stacks up against it .



ed rader

Rather than rely on anecdotal responses, why not rent the Canon also so your comparison will be based on first-hand experience? Or is there someone nearby that you can borrow the lens from for a few days or so?

[dbdors]

Originally Posted by ed rader

i'm on the second week of a renting the sigma 15mm now, and that's why i'm wondering how the canon stacks up against it .
ed rader

Sorry missed that post.

[jacobsen1]

beyond that surely in CA there is a camera store nearby enough you can drive there and see the canon first hand? IMHO the sharpness of either will be more than enough. These are fisheyes people, it's the effect that draws people in, not the ultimate sharpness. You'll only be able to tell a difference, if at all, when pixel peeping IMHO.

[Double Negative]

^ I'd have to agree, Ben - these things are pretty sharp and have an insane DoF...

[Kruzkal]

Build quality aside the Sigma has a minimum focus distance of 15cm where as the Canon's is 20cm.

That could be a factor if you want to take some close up creative shots.

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

beyond that surely in CA there is a camera store nearby enough you can drive there and see the canon first hand? IMHO the sharpness of either will be more than enough. These are fisheyes people, it's the effect that draws people in, not the ultimate sharpness. You'll only be able to tell a difference, if at all, when pixel peeping IMHO.

i have to go to palo alto today so i'll stop in at keeble & shuchat to check out the canon.

i dunno. this sigma is pretty darn sharp but if the canon were sharper wide open that could be the deciding factor.

if one lens focusses more accurately that could make it sharper.

ed rader

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by argyle

Rather than rely on anecdotal responses, why not rent the Canon also so your comparison will be based on first-hand experience? Or is there someone nearby that you can borrow the lens from for a few days or so?

what makes you think that i am relying just on the opinions of others?

like i said i am in the second week of renting the sigma and since this is a lens forum i am enquiring about the two lenses which is part of my decision making process.

i may also rent the canon or i may just buy the canon .... either way i'm in no hurry.

i suspect either lens will be fine.

ed rader

[Stan43]

Ed, I haven't owned or shot with the Sigma but I do love the Canon. Very sharp and the size and build quality seem very good as well. As you've said both are nice lenses but I have nothing but good things to say about the Canon.

[argyle]

Originally Posted by ed rader

what makes you think that i am relying just on the opinions of others?

like i said i am in the second week of renting the sigma and since this is a lens forum i am enquiring about the two lenses which is part of my decision making process.

ed rader

Wow...why are you getting all worked up? I merely suggested that you rent or borrow a Canon lens (since you made no mention of this in your original post and seemed to be soliciting opinions on the Canon only).