| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/06/2004 04:11:13 AM · #1 |
Got the lens today from B&H and needed a test subject to play with. The car in the link is a model of a Audi R8 in 1/18 scale. The car is 10 inches long and 4 1/2 inches wide. I'm quite pleased with the lens so far but there a one or two very minor things that I don't care for, but given the price... I can live with them. :)
Gallery pics of the Audi R8 |
|
|
|
02/06/2004 04:34:12 AM · #2 |
I like the detail, what don't you like about the lens? I was thinking about buying one so please 'fess up... :-)
|
|
|
|
02/06/2004 05:53:00 AM · #3 |
Nice pics Jason, looks like you figured out how to use it :)
|
|
|
|
02/06/2004 06:28:51 AM · #4 |
Is my birthday in a few weeks, and spent all last week deciding on a new lens. Choice was a 105 EX Sigma Macro like yours or a Wide Angle, couldn't decide but then found the Sigma 20mm f1.8 EX Macro so have that being delivered next week.
Anyone know what this lens is like? I think it can focus down to 17cm so not all that close, but nice and wide.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2004 07:06:57 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Jason:
Got the lens today from B&H and needed a test subject to play with. The car in the link is a model of a Audi R8 in 1/18 scale. The car is 10 inches long and 4 1/2 inches wide. I'm quite pleased with the lens so far but there a one or two very minor things that I don't care for, but given the price... I can live with them. :)
Gallery pics of the Audi R8 |
With such a jewel as 10D is, I would personally avoid Sigma lenses. Annoying lens-flare, extremely visible vignetting, a quite low image quality is evident if compared to an original Canon lens like the wonderful Canon 100 mm f/2,8 Macro.
Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
02/06/2004 07:34:49 AM · #6 |
1 word: rubbish. Sigma EX lenses are high quality glass. Sigma has cheap lenses, as does Canon. Sigma's EX lenses are worth looking into. Such a craving for high quality craves the question: why a 10D and not a 1D.
Please show pictures with this vignetting, lens flares and all those quality issues with the Sigma 105mm. Too funny. You may claim opinion, but I claim rubbish without proof.
Originally posted by paolobnr:
Originally posted by Jason:
Got the lens today from B&H and needed a test subject to play with. The car in the link is a model of a Audi R8 in 1/18 scale. The car is 10 inches long and 4 1/2 inches wide. I'm quite pleased with the lens so far but there a one or two very minor things that I don't care for, but given the price... I can live with them. :)
Gallery pics of the Audi R8 |
With such a jewel as 10D is, I would personally avoid Sigma lenses. Annoying lens-flare, extremely visible vignetting, a quite low image quality is evident if compared to an original Canon lens like the wonderful Canon 100 mm f/2,8 Macro.
Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
02/06/2004 07:46:20 AM · #7 |
I have the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX and it is superb, never had "Annoying lens-flare, extremely visible vignetting, a quite low image quality"
|
|
|
|
02/06/2004 07:50:56 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by paolobnr:
With such a jewel as 10D is, I would personally avoid Sigma lenses. Annoying lens-flare, extremely visible vignetting, a quite low image quality is evident if compared to an original Canon lens like the wonderful Canon 100 mm f/2,8 Macro.
Just my opinion. |
To agree with Jacko and Jonpink, I think we're going on opinion there rather than facts.
Unfortunately PhotoDo don't have the Canon 100/2.8 macro evaluated, but they do have the Sigma.
"Grade: 4.1 35mm/AF Sigma AF 105/2,8 EX Macro"
If you're thinking the Canon 100 macro is much above that, you're in fairy land..
EDIT: Fixed quote.
Message edited by author 2004-02-06 07:51:49. |
|
|
|
02/06/2004 09:37:19 AM · #9 |
The Lens Performance Survey does give a slight edge to the Canon, but they are both excellent lenses. The biggest differences are performance wide-open at f/2.8 and in the focus speed (the Canon has USM). (Scores out of 100, higher is better):
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM macro
Performance wide open: 91
Performance stopped down to f/8: 99
Vignetting: 96
Distortions: 100
Color: neutral
Flare: 90
AF Speed: 96
Build Quality: 88
Number of survey inputs: 47
Sigma AF 105mm f/2.8 macro EX
Performance wide open: 82
Performance stopped down to f/8: 96
Vignetting: 94
Distortions: 99
Color: neutral
Flare: 85
AF Speed: 30
Build Quality: 86
Number of survey inputs: 65 |
|
|
|
02/06/2004 09:44:14 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Unfortunately PhotoDo don't have the Canon 100/2.8 macro evaluated, but they do have the Sigma.
"Grade: 4.1 35mm/AF Sigma AF 105/2,8 EX Macro"
If you're thinking the Canon 100 macro is much above that, you're in fairy land. |
You know, it's never been clear to me what the photodo grades actually mean (are they on a linear scale?), nor how the tests are conducted, how many times, or under what conditions. Still, their numbers provide good general indicators, but I wouldn't put too much faith in them. Besides, you're speculating; the Canon lens might be far superior to the Sigma lens.
You can find additional data over at photozone, where they provide both survey data (user input) and lens test data (external formal tests). According to that data, both lenses are comparable, although the Sigma's AF speed is slow, but that's true for pretty much all Sigma lenses (AF sucks). |
|
|
|
02/06/2004 11:04:41 AM · #11 |
My "issues" are minor.
I don't like the screw on lens hood and once the hood is on, you can't put on the lens cap. Then as Jacko pointed out to me, the glass sets pretty far inside the lens making the lens hood almost absolete anyways.
The push/pull focus ring is weird but I got used to quickly.
Image quality is excellent as well as build. |
|
|
|
02/09/2004 04:20:08 AM · #12 |
[quote=Jacko] 1 word: rubbish. Sigma EX lenses are high quality glass. Sigma has cheap lenses, as does Canon. Sigma's EX lenses are worth looking into. Such a craving for high quality craves the question: why a 10D and not a 1D.
Please show pictures with this vignetting, lens flares and all those quality issues with the Sigma 105mm. Too funny. You may claim opinion, but I claim rubbish without proof.
Of course I can't show you any pic with vignetting, lens flare etc simply because I do not own any Sigma lens; but I see you quite nervous: not agreing with you means you will send me some clever bomb to destroy my house? I am no a terrorist, if you want to know and I do not have any mass distruction lens: i own Canon, not Sigma. |
|
|
|
02/09/2004 05:27:51 AM · #13 |
The Web has a wealth of samples of Sigma lenses, and lots with the 105mm EX Macro. Buddy, you have no credibility with your claims. You don't make me nervous, you make me laugh. An I thank you.
Originally posted by paolobnr:
[quote=Jacko] 1 word: rubbish. Sigma EX lenses are high quality glass. Sigma has cheap lenses, as does Canon. Sigma's EX lenses are worth looking into. Such a craving for high quality craves the question: why a 10D and not a 1D.
Please show pictures with this vignetting, lens flares and all those quality issues with the Sigma 105mm. Too funny. You may claim opinion, but I claim rubbish without proof.
Of course I can't show you any pic with vignetting, lens flare etc simply because I do not own any Sigma lens; but I see you quite nervous: not agreing with you means you will send me some clever bomb to destroy my house? I am no a terrorist, if you want to know and I do not have any mass distruction lens: i own Canon, not Sigma. |
|
|
|
|
02/09/2004 05:30:29 AM · #14 |
| I love the lens,very sharp and precise,nice portrais and head shots!Beautiful macro's! |
|
|
|
02/19/2004 09:08:39 PM · #15 |
So everyone agrees that the Sigma 105mm/f2.8 EX macro is a worthwhile investment? I am thinking of ordering one tomorrow!!Wacko J is the man, you to Kosta!
Message edited by author 2004-02-19 21:10:20. |
|
|
|
02/19/2004 09:15:09 PM · #16 |
I just got mine Tuesday and have only taken a couple shots with it, but have been satisfied so far.
I ordered mine from ADORAMA for $309.95
|
|
|
|
02/19/2004 09:20:58 PM · #17 |
Thanks Rick, I will go get one!
Message edited by author 2004-02-19 21:22:22. |
|
|
|
02/19/2004 09:46:17 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Dim7:
So everyone agrees that the Sigma 105mm/f2.8 EX macro is a worthwhile investment? I am thinking of ordering one tomorrow!!Wacko J is the man, you to Kosta! |
Love mine. |
|
|
|
02/19/2004 10:01:23 PM · #19 |
Thanks justine, just thinking of nicer weather!
Message edited by author 2004-02-19 22:02:30. |
|
|
|
02/19/2004 10:53:53 PM · #20 |
I think pretty much everyone agrees that either the canon 100mm macro or the sigma 105mm macro are two of the sharpest, best primes around.
The only depressing thing is they make you notice just how comparatively bad most consumer grade zooms are.
Both the 50mm f1.8 and 100mm f2.8 macro primes that I have (both Canon) are the two most optically great lenses that I've tried or own. Everything I've seen about the sigma 105mm macro indicates its just as good.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2004 11:44:29 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
I think pretty much everyone agrees that either the canon 100mm macro or the sigma 105mm macro are two of the sharpest, best primes around. |
Why no mention of Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 macro??? :( *cries* *sniff* *sniff*
|
|
|
|
02/19/2004 11:47:37 PM · #22 |
Why no mention of Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 macro??? :( *cries* *sniff* *sniff* [/quote]
Huge conspiracy.
You were absent the day Sigma gave out the $$.
:) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 03:00:41 PM EDT.
