Sigma astonishes the world again: 18-35mm f/1.8

http://www.dxomark.com …-length-quality-in-a-zoom

Enough said!

Aressem wrote in post #16148005
http://www.dxomark.com …-length-quality-in-a-zoom

Enough said!

And a $25,000 subaru impreza does 0-60 almost as fast as a $75,000 BMW M3, but they are totally different cars. For starters, BMW handles a lot better. Not everything is 0-60 times.

Replace the 0-60 with fast aperture and sharpness, and there you have your Sigma. I wonder how the focus is in that thing and how many usb dock sessions you have to have before it starts producing reliable results.

The Sigma Art line requires the art of focus adjustment.

I started reading the response and thought to myself, "I bet TheLensGuy agrees with this post" only to discover it is TheLensGuy.

We get it, you don't like Sigma. Many of us disagree. My focus adjustment on my Sigma 35/1.4 Art lens was +1, +1, +2, -3. My single MA on my Canon 50/1.2L was -14. I suspect my 50 would benefit greatly from 4 different adjustments, but that's not an option with Canon lenses. Sigh.

seanlancaster wrote in post #16148106
I started reading the response and thought to myself, "I bet TheLensGuy agrees with this post" only to discover it is TheLensGuy.

We get it, you don't like Sigma. Many of us disagree. My focus adjustment on my Sigma 35/1.4 Art lens was +1, +1, +2, -3. My single MA on my Canon 50/1.2L was -14. I suspect my 50 would benefit greatly from 4 different adjustments, but that's not an option with Canon lenses. Sigh.

I have never had to dial in a single MFA number on any of the Canon lenses I have owned (L or non-L), I really don't understand how people have so much bad luck with Canon. Could it be your body that is not calibrated or mine that focuses better (5D3)?

Sorry, I didn't mean to just come in and bring in all this negativity. But you have to understand how I have tried SO MANY sigma lenses over the course of years and never got one that actually worked properly.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #16148121
Sorry, I didn't mean to just come in and bring in all this negativity. But you have to understand how I have tried SO MANY sigma lenses over the course of years and never got one that actually worked properly.

Hey TLG I think we forum members deserve to see some of your real work by now right?

So how about posting some of your photos apart from test charts and 100% crop of toys?

TheLensGuy wrote in post #16148080
And a $25,000 subaru impreza does 0-60 almost as fast as a $75,000 BMW M3, but they are totally different cars. For starters, BMW handles a lot better. Not everything is 0-60 times.

Replace the 0-60 with fast aperture and sharpness, and there you have your Sigma. I wonder how the focus is in that thing and how many usb dock sessions you have to have before it starts producing reliable results.

The Sigma Art line requires the art of focus adjustment.

Say what you want. Benchmarks don't lie. The results are embarrassing if you're a die hard canon/nikon fan boy. But since you're comparing camera lenses to cars, one of my close friends owns a Neon SRT-4 that was completely rebuilt/tuned. It's a 10 second quarter-mile car. Finicky? Heck yeah. It's to be expected when you are going for high-performance bang for the buck.

I own the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 and it's micro adjusted using the DOT tune method. +7. I micro adjusted it as soon as I got it and it's done nothing but amaze me. I've shot with just about every prime Canon L series lens under 200mm and can very confidently say that this is one of the only lenses I trust shooting with wide open, all day long.

If this zoom lens is anything like my 35, I'm sure it'll sell like hot cakes and force Canon and Nikon the stop @#$%ing around and start producing lenses capable of producing similar results. I don't expect them to be cheap, but hey... at least try to get on the same level as a 3rd party manufacturer.

All in all, it's a good thing for you and me. Be happy.

kin2son wrote in post #16148129
Hey TLG I think we forum members deserve to see some of your real work by now right?

So how about posting some of your photos apart from test charts and 100% crop of toys?

You guys think I'm some dumb idiot who spend 10k on lenses and only shoot charts:o

I know we have our differences, but come on.

what's canon equivalent of this lens?

Lens Guy, Lens Guy. You do get tiring. From everything I have read about this lens, the focusing is steller.

Aressem wrote in post #16148131
Say what you want. Benchmarks don't lie. The results are embarrassing if you're a die hard canon/nikon fan boy. But since you're comparing camera lenses to cars, one of my close friends owns a Neon SRT-4 that was completely rebuilt/tuned. It's a 10 second quarter-mile car. Finicky? Heck yeah. It's to be expected when you are going for bang for the buck.

I own the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 and it's micro adjusted using the DOT tune method. +7. I micro adjusted it as soon as I got it and it's done nothing but amaze me. I've shot with just about every prime Canon L series lens under 200mm and can very confidently say that this is one of the only lenses I trust shooting with wide open, all day long.

If this zoom lens is anything like my 35, I'm sure it'll sell like hot cakes and force Canon and Nikon the stop @#$%ing around and start producing lenses capable of producing similar results. I don't expect them to be cheap, but hey... at least try to get on the same level as a 3rd party manufacturer.

All in all, it's a good thing for you and me. Be happy.

You can buy a $10,000 used civic, chip it and destroy 911s. That doesn't mean I will pick the civic over Porsche

You are completely right about your argument about Canon getting their act together and developing better lenses, what Sigma is doing helps the customer base more than anything.

Benchmarks are benchmarks. They were there when Sigma 50 was release and they were there when their 85mm were released. After 1-2 years, reviews and forums started piling up with complaints as they are doing now for the Sigma 35.

When it comes to optics, you need reliability before you need performance. No point of shooting with the sharpest lens of the world when you don't know it focuses where it should all the time.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #16148132


You guys think I'm some dumb idiot who spend 10k on lenses and only shoot charts:o

I know we have our differences, but come on.

Your words, not ours.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #16148148
You can buy a $10,000 used civic, chip it and destroy 911s. That doesn't mean I will pick the civic over Porsche

You are completely right about your argument about Canon getting their act together and developing better lenses, what Sigma is doing helps the customer base more than anything.

Benchmarks are benchmarks. They were there when Sigma 50 was release and they were there when their 85mm were released. After 1-2 years, reviews and forums started piling up with complaints as they are doing now for the Sigma 35.

When it comes to optics, you need reliability before you need performance. No point of shooting with the sharpest lens of the world when you don't know it focuses where it should all the time.

See that's where I beg to differ. Sigma is now producing world class optics. The difference? The price. Amateurs (mostly) are going to snag this lens up, while the pros are going to stick to their weather sealed L lenses and not waste their time/money giving Sigma a chance. With that said, the majority of people buying Sigma lenses are more than likely inexperienced users that don't normally have the luxury of playing with super fast primes. In the end, it boils down to user error as far as I'm considered.

Again, car comparisons. OKAY. You get in my buddie's custom built 700+ HP Neon, and run a 15 second quarter mile lap and blame the car for being "inconsistent". No. You just don't know how to use it properly. Same goes for lenses. I'm not saying Sigma hasn't had issues with QC in the past. They certainly have. This new Art line though? Far and few between. No more complaints regarding their 35mm f/1.4 A than the 35L.

I'm done. Now show me some photos please

TheLensGuy wrote in post #16148121
I have never had to dial in a single MFA number on any of the Canon lenses I have owned (L or non-L), I really don't understand how people have so much bad luck with Canon. Could it be your body that is not calibrated or mine that focuses better (5D3)?

Sorry, I didn't mean to just come in and bring in all this negativity. But you have to understand how I have tried SO MANY sigma lenses over the course of years and never got one that actually worked properly.

I might have you beat on lenses attempted, as well as countless bodies, many with MFA capabilities. I have had just as many canon lenses that needed adjustments as sigmas. I have only had one bad Sigma that I had to send to them, and they corrected it. I still own that lens, it works outstandingly well now.

Bottom line, this thread is to discuss one new lens from Sigma, your views on Canon vs Sigma lenses have nothing to do with this, other than for you to use it as a sounding board against Sigma.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #16148121
I have never had to dial in a single MFA number on any of the Canon lenses I have owned (L or non-L), I really don't understand how people have so much bad luck with Canon. Could it be your body that is not calibrated or mine that focuses better (5D3)?

Sorry, I didn't mean to just come in and bring in all this negativity. But you have to understand how I have tried SO MANY sigma lenses over the course of years and never got one that actually worked properly.

Lens Guy,
You need to consider that many others have good luck with Sigma. Just because you have bad luck with Sigma doesn't mean its the God spoken truth. My advice, take a statistics class and read up on optics and manufacturing.

so the Sigma is for crop bodies only? Why would they do that? Seems like it limits their market.