Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 15 Oct 2007 (Monday) 11:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 EX DG

 
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
Avatar
13,313 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
Location: South Dakota
     
Jul 07, 2008 19:26 |  #901

LordAlex wrote in post #5868080 (external link)
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.

You've got some pretty tough harsh lighting to work with there. The one on the Dames Point Bridge isn't too bad, but the rest are definitely a bit over-cooked. It'd be tough to get a very good overall exposure with the lighting you were working with there.


Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=9903477#p​ost9903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 07, 2008 20:47 |  #902

DDCSD wrote in post #5868152 (external link)
You've got some pretty tough harsh lighting to work with there. The one on the Dames Point Bridge isn't too bad, but the rest are definitely a bit over-cooked. It'd be tough to get a very good overall exposure with the lighting you were working with there.

He was just using good technique by exposing to the right! :-D


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lexi73
Member
Avatar
184 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Madison, WI
     
Jul 07, 2008 21:49 |  #903

one question as I'm boxing mine to be sent out....did you all ship it in the included case and the original box or just in a package by itself, padded of course?


Canon 5DmkII, Fujifilm x100s, 70-200L 2.8 IS II - 17-40L, 24-105L, 15 Fisheye, 50 1.4, Bunch of Speedlights and other stuff.
Website (external link) | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
-spam-
I heart the title fairy
Avatar
7,703 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Waiting for a table at Campos
     
Jul 07, 2008 22:51 |  #904

lexi73 wrote in post #5869014 (external link)
one question as I'm boxing mine to be sent out....did you all ship it in the included case and the original box or just in a package by itself, padded of course?

Last time i sent a sigma lens away for repair to the australian importers, i just put it in the lens case that it came with, wrapped it in bubble wrap and dropped it in a courier sleeve from a friends work.

They sent it back after it was fixed in a box filled with those foam peanuts to protect it all.


Carp - flickr  (external link)- Blog log (external link) - Get Crumpled
You say tomato, we say 1/125 @ f/5.6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JackProton
Goldmember
Avatar
2,348 posts
Joined Feb 2007
     
Jul 08, 2008 00:04 |  #905

lexi73 wrote in post #5869014 (external link)
one question as I'm boxing mine to be sent out....did you all ship it in the included case and the original box or just in a package by itself, padded of course?

I used a slightly larger box, wrapped my lens in bubble wrap held with tape or a rubber band, filled the box a third of the way with foam peanuts, added the wrapped lens and then filled the box the rest of the way with foam peanuts. There was about an inch of bubble wrap and two inches of foam peanuts on every side of the lens. Sigma was a bit less anal retentive shipping it back but it returned in perfect condition. :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
javaprog
Member
123 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 08, 2008 09:09 as a reply to  @ DDCSD's post |  #906

Overexposed? I'm sorry but I just don't see it... not in the first four shots. I don't see any place where detail in the highlights have been lost; certainly not so much that it bears pointing out, unsolicited, in a thread devoted to the qualities of a lens. :confused:


400D, Sigma 24-60 f2.8 EX DG, EF 70-200 f4L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
griptape
Goldmember
2,037 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Home
     
Jul 08, 2008 11:08 |  #907

javaprog wrote in post #5871682 (external link)
Overexposed? I'm sorry but I just don't see it... not in the first four shots. I don't see any place where detail in the highlights have been lost; certainly not so much that it bears pointing out, unsolicited, in a thread devoted to the qualities of a lens. :confused:

The only reason I pointed it out is that when you blow highlights, there's no detail left to judge sharpness by. #3 and 4 are fine, and 1 and 2 are more a result of the harsh lighting. It was directed more at the corvette pictures (note to self, don't post when grumpy and sleep deprived). I apologize for not being more tactful about it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LordAlex
Member
116 posts
Joined Jul 2008
     
Jul 08, 2008 20:44 as a reply to  @ griptape's post |  #908

Thanks for clearing that up a bit. I threw the corvette pics in since I had been experimenting with a light box and used the 24-60 for those particular shots. In a PP effort to smooth out and the seamless paper, I did blow out some of the fake chrome which was fine in the originals. I was also focusing in the dark on those, ugh. At any rate, I really was curious how they look on other monitors which was why I suggested you fudge around with #1 if you felt like it. Cheers.


In sunny Florida with my..Canon 20D with grip, Canon 10-22 3.5-4.5, Sigma 24-60 2.8, Sigma 105mm 2.8 macro, Sigma 70-300mm APO 4-5.6, Dine macro ring flash, Vivitar Df 400MZ and bunch of Chinese accessories that cost almost nothing and work great

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shooter ­ mcgavin
Senior Member
Avatar
526 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
     
Jul 11, 2008 22:39 |  #909

After returning my lens to Sigma for calibration, I've fallen in love. I use it right beside my Canon 70-200 f/4L and honestly I can't tell the difference in the IQ between the two. These are two from the local public gardens that I took today. They are 50% crops, but considering this lens isn't "macro", it does a very nice job with flowers.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lexi73
Member
Avatar
184 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Madison, WI
     
Jul 11, 2008 23:22 |  #910

good news.....i cant wait till i get mine back!


Canon 5DmkII, Fujifilm x100s, 70-200L 2.8 IS II - 17-40L, 24-105L, 15 Fisheye, 50 1.4, Bunch of Speedlights and other stuff.
Website (external link) | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
brecklundin
Goldmember
Avatar
2,179 posts
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jul 13, 2008 07:32 |  #911

Just discovered this gem of a lens. Soon as I finish paying off the 150-500 I'll be adding this to replace my 28-135 kit lens. I actually am in the minority who likes the longer kit lens....BUT, I can do everything I use that lens for with this one with even better IQ. Only thing I give up really is the IS. But I have the 55-250 IS so, really any time I might need IS is on longer shots so it's covered.

This thread and the fact, fyi, right now Cameta has a couple listed on eBay for $199 + shipping...thought I would share that with the class since I can't splurge on two lenses right now...


Real men shoot Pentax because we're born with our own Canon's!!
{Ok...ok, some of use just have a PnS but it it always makes me happy! :D}
Pentax K5, K20D, Three Amigos (Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited Silver, Pentax FA 43/1.9 Limited Silver, Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited Silver), Pentax DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited, Sigma 24-60/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DStanic
Cream of the Crop
6,148 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Canada
     
Jul 13, 2008 09:12 |  #912

brecklundin wrote in post #5901707 (external link)
Just discovered this gem of a lens. Soon as I finish paying off the 150-500 I'll be adding this to replace my 28-135 kit lens. I actually am in the minority who likes the longer kit lens....BUT, I can do everything I use that lens for with this one with even better IQ. Only thing I give up really is the IS. But I have the 55-250 IS so, really any time I might need IS is on longer shots so it's covered.

I had the 17-85 IS. At first I did miss having the extra reach, but I found that the constant f/2.8 aperture worked much better than the IS on the other lens. I shot a wedding last weekend with this lens and most of my shots were nice and sharp and in focus. IMO the only lens that would work better in low light (aside from primes) would be the 17-55 f/2.8 IS.


Sony A6000, 16-50PZ, 55-210, 35mm 1.8 OSS
Canon 60D, 30D
Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 17-35, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 85mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dinanm3atl
Goldmember
Avatar
3,123 posts
Likes: 109
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 13, 2008 19:30 |  #913

brecklundin wrote in post #5901707 (external link)
Just discovered this gem of a lens. Soon as I finish paying off the 150-500 I'll be adding this to replace my 28-135 kit lens. I actually am in the minority who likes the longer kit lens....BUT, I can do everything I use that lens for with this one with even better IQ. Only thing I give up really is the IS. But I have the 55-250 IS so, really any time I might need IS is on longer shots so it's covered.

This thread and the fact, fyi, right now Cameta has a couple listed on eBay for $199 + shipping...thought I would share that with the class since I can't splurge on two lenses right now...

Wow that is quite nice!


Halston - MotorSports Photographer
1Dx - 1Dx - A7r - 400L f/2.8 - 70-200L f/2.8 - 24-105L f/4 - 17-40L f/4 - 50 f/1.4 - 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye - 1.4x TC - 2x TC
Photography Site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Avatar
1,908 posts
Gallery: 94 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 877
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
     
Jul 15, 2008 13:15 |  #914

Ka-boom.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i242.photobucke​t.com …p88/weather/IMG​_14436.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

mikedeep.com (external link) - rocket launch photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
brecklundin
Goldmember
Avatar
2,179 posts
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jul 15, 2008 13:57 |  #915

DStanic wrote in post #5902026 (external link)
I had the 17-85 IS. At first I did miss having the extra reach, but I found that the constant f/2.8 aperture worked much better than the IS on the other lens. I shot a wedding last weekend with this lens and most of my shots were nice and sharp and in focus. IMO the only lens that would work better in low light (aside from primes) would be the 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

I appreciate the feedback which confirms what I was hoping would be the case. I was hoping the f/2.8 would let me keep high enough shutter speed which makes up for the lack of IS.

And since I have the wonderful Canon 55-250 IS lens anyway, I can use it and this lens as a walk-around combo for those days when I want a simple option. Plus if I really need something with almost-a-macro I have the Sigma 70-300mm which has a macro mode between 200-300 that is, as I recall, 2:1 and thus really, really close to a true macro.

Nope this lens reall does fit into my gear list really well. Ironic once I sell off the 28-135mm to fund getting this lens and a couple filters, I will have only one Canon lens and that is a bargin basement "find" just like the 24-60mm. :)


Real men shoot Pentax because we're born with our own Canon's!!
{Ok...ok, some of use just have a PnS but it it always makes me happy! :D}
Pentax K5, K20D, Three Amigos (Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited Silver, Pentax FA 43/1.9 Limited Silver, Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited Silver), Pentax DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited, Sigma 24-60/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

349,941 views & 1 like for this thread
Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 EX DG
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is sfchen
999 guests, 339 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.