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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 26 Jul 2012 (Thursday) 19:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Return Sigma 17-50 for Canon 17-55?

 
asc11
Mostly Lurking
15 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jul 26, 2012 19:11 |  #1

I recently purchased a Sigma 17-50 and to be honest I wasn't impressed at all with it. I took some sample shots and yes it was very sharp in the center but on the corners it was extremely soft. Even stopped down to f4 (which is supposed to be the sharpest). I did some comparisons with my 18-135 at the same focal length/settings and it was noticeably sharper in the corners than the sigma!

I have sent the lens in to be calibrated but I don't know that it will make that much difference. Will I be better off returning this lens for a refund and going for the highly acclaimed canon 17-55 instead?

Sample shot - https://www.dropbox.co​m …c1ds3wq3sm33/IM​G_5680.JPG (external link)
The whole left hand side seems to be very soft - in particular the bottom corner.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
PhilipAlex
Member
57 posts
Joined Jul 2012
     
Jul 26, 2012 20:09 |  #2

It definitely does look soft at the bottom left. I went through 3 Sigma 10-20's before I finally got one that looked decent all around so I know how you're feeling. If I could do it over again I probably would have gone with the Canon 10-22 in the first place. If you can still return it I would at least try and exchange it for a better copy. Sometimes (for me anyway) its worth spending the extra money rather than wasting time over-analyzing every picture I take with a lens that I don't think is as sharp as it should be.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Judsonzhao
Goldmember
Avatar
1,198 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Jul 26, 2012 21:02 |  #3

yes that's the problem of sigma.
17-55 is better, sharp wide open through center to corner, maybe better color rendering than sigma. you will not be disappointed. Pick up a refurb one next 20% off :)


Fly me away.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raylon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,078 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Plainfield, IL
     
Jul 26, 2012 21:04 |  #4

Honestly that bottom corner looks more OOF that soft to me.


7D l Canon 70-200 f/4L IS l Canon 85mm f/1.8 l ∑ 17-50 f/2.8 l Canon 50mm f/1.8 II l S95
Full Gear List and Marketplace Feedback
My SmugMug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
klr.b
Goldmember
2,509 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Jul 26, 2012 21:54 |  #5

Raylon wrote in post #14775354 (external link)
Honestly that bottom corner looks more OOF that soft to me.

LOL, at f/4?


gordon
Gear and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raylon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,078 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Plainfield, IL
     
Jul 26, 2012 22:04 |  #6

klr.b wrote in post #14775601 (external link)
LOL, at f/4?

Depends how far he is from the wall, how parallel to the wall the sensor is. I don't see what that is hilarious.


7D l Canon 70-200 f/4L IS l Canon 85mm f/1.8 l ∑ 17-50 f/2.8 l Canon 50mm f/1.8 II l S95
Full Gear List and Marketplace Feedback
My SmugMug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
asc11
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
15 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jul 26, 2012 22:15 |  #7

Raylon wrote in post #14775354 (external link)
Honestly that bottom corner looks more OOF that soft to me.

Here is a shot from the 18-135 @ f/3.5 from the same spot. Corners are much better even though this shot is slightly OOF
https://www.dropbox.co​m …at5bf2q6k6fl/IM​G_5697.JPG (external link)

I seriously doubt it is OOF. Was straight on to the wall from about 2-3 meters back




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silverfox1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,195 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 55
Joined Aug 2009
Location: South Texas
     
Jul 26, 2012 22:18 |  #8

asc11 wrote in post #14774760 (external link)
I recently purchased a Sigma 17-50 and to be honest I wasn't impressed at all with it. I took some sample shots and yes it was very sharp in the center but on the corners it was extremely soft. Even stopped down to f4 (which is supposed to be the sharpest). I did some comparisons with my 18-135 at the same focal length/settings and it was noticeably sharper in the corners than the sigma!

I have sent the lens in to be calibrated but I don't know that it will make that much difference. Will I be better off returning this lens for a refund and going for the highly acclaimed canon 17-55 instead?

Sample shot - https://www.dropbox.co​m …c1ds3wq3sm33/IM​G_5680.JPG (external link)
The whole left hand side seems to be very soft - in particular the bottom corner.

IMO, you either have a lens, camera, or technique problem so i would definitely wait and see the results after Sigma checks the lens out. Did you send the camera in with the lens ?

Below is a group pic just recently taken at f4 and the problem your experiencing is definitely not common at f4 with this lens:

IMAGE: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/Silverfox111/IMG_2310.jpg

Regards & Good Luck, Ron ;)

Silverfox1 POTN Feedback / TC Extender Tests / Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
asc11
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
15 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jul 26, 2012 22:26 |  #9

Silverfox1 wrote in post #14775716 (external link)
IMO, you either have a lens, camera, or technique problem

Well that's covering all the bases then isn't it? It's def not the camera and I don't think it's technique as I have had the camera for 2+ years and been able to take fantastic shots with the kit lens. I just wanted to upgrade the lens to something faster for better indoor shots.

Silverfox1 wrote in post #14775716 (external link)
Below is a group pic just recently taken at f4

This is the quality that I was expecting from the lens given the reviews and sample shots that I saw.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
klr.b
Goldmember
2,509 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Jul 27, 2012 01:50 |  #10

Raylon wrote in post #14775664 (external link)
Depends how far he is from the wall, how parallel to the wall the sensor is. I don't see what that is hilarious.

Check the EXIF. He shot it at 17mm and f/4. Even if he stood 3 ft away, he'd still have 1.5 ft (DOF isn't exactly razor thin). Double the distance and he's got over 7 ft in focus. If you look at the picture, the lower right side is quite soft as well, so I don't imagine this being a DOF issue.

Even if it was, he'd have to be shooting this at about 1-2 ft away, and no one shoots something that large from that distance. Even if he did, he wouldn't be getting that field of view. Sorry I laughed at you.


gordon
Gear and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6604
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 27, 2012 02:25 |  #11

klr.b wrote in post #14775601 (external link)
LOL, at f/4?

even at F4, it depends how close he is to the wall. Perhaps some more real world shots or focus the corner with live view 10x.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
klr.b
Goldmember
2,509 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Jul 27, 2012 02:41 |  #12

Charlie wrote in post #14776377 (external link)
even at F4, it depends how close he is to the wall. Perhaps some more real world shots or focus the corner with live view 10x.

You obviously didn't read my post. :rolleyes: Plus, he already said he was about 6-10 feet away.


gordon
Gear and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6604
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 27, 2012 04:37 |  #13

klr.b wrote in post #14776396 (external link)
You obviously didn't read my post. :rolleyes: Plus, he already said he was about 6-10 feet away.

What does it matter if he were 3-10 feet away? He can still be OOF. You're assuming that his initial center focal point was bang on to start with. He could have been front or back focusing a large amount to start with (or completely OOF) and still have the center in focus due to the DOF.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keyan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,319 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Mar 2011
     
Jul 27, 2012 04:49 |  #14

The 17-55 is very nice. The other advantage it has over the Sigma is FTM if that is something you use.

Even the 17-55 can have copy issues, mine front focused like crazy when I first got it, but Canon had it fixed up in less than a week.


Cameras: 7D2, S100
Lenses: 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, 18-135 STM, 24-70 f/4L IS USM, 50 f/1.4 USM,70-300L IS USM
Other Stuff: 430 EX II, Luma Labs Loop 3, CamRanger

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jul 27, 2012 07:27 |  #15

asc11 wrote in post #14774760 (external link)
Will I be better off returning this lens for a refund and going for the highly acclaimed canon 17-55 instead?

probably, some people will never be satisfied until they have the absolute best .... cost be damned




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

4,294 views & 0 likes for this thread
Return Sigma 17-50 for Canon 17-55?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 Simon Lokie
936 guests, 215 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.