GH3 Sigma 18-35 alternatives

S

Stab

Well-known member
Just last year I bought 3 Samyang (rokinon) primes with a Speed Booster. I'm really happy with the results, but lately I'm doing more weddings and shooting with primes is really not ideal.

So I'm in the market again for a zoom. The Sigma 18-35 1.8 will be awesome with the Speedbooster, no doubts about it, but it is huge, heavy and has a limited reach. Again, not ideal for shooting at 14 hour wedding.

So what are my options here? Budget is around $1000. I need a decent range (wide to medium tele) and a fast aperture.
Did anyone try a Sigma 17-50 2.8 with the Speed Booster for instance? On my GH3 it will act as a 12-35 F2.0, which is still pretty good.

Any other options or ideas?
 
For under $300 used, I'm very happy with my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 on a Nikon-mount speedbooster. Vignettes slightly on a GH2 but OK on my AF-100, which matches your GH3 sensor. Sharp, good contrast, low flare - fully manual if course and aperture control is via the speedbooster's ring.
 
GrahamH said:
For under $300 used, I'm very happy with my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 on a Nikon-mount speedbooster. Vignettes slightly on a GH2 but OK on my AF-100, which matches your GH3 sensor. Sharp, good contrast, low flare - fully manual if course and aperture control is via the speedbooster's ring.
Click to expand...


Thanks. And how is the Tamron wide open at f2.8? (f2.0 with Speed Booster)? Sharp enough?
 
I commonly use the Tamron+Speedbooster wide open, and consider it suitably sharp. I have the Rokinon 85mm and Sigma 30mm 1.4s and in intercuts ok with those.
 
Like aonavy I also use the panny 12-35 2.8 for weddings and you can always extend it's reach with the ETC mode. Been very happy with it.
 
Hmm considering now the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 and the Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.

The funny thing, I would never consider these lenses if it wasn't for the Speed Booster. The Sigma 17-50mm will be a 12-35 f2.0 constant zoom for only like €400,00. Amazing.
Even the non constant aperture of f2.8-f4.0 isn't that bad anymore with the Speed Booster. Great stuff.

Anyone has any experience with any / both of them?
 
The good thing about the 18-35 is the Focus throw which makes manual focusing much easier. The focus throw on the Tamrons and Sigmas 17-50 id 45 odd degrees at best.
 
I had a Sigma 17-70mm and traded it for a Tamron 17-50, which I found to be a little sharper (and constant aperture). There's some lens-to-lens variation in these cheaper zooms, however, so YMMV.
 
Does anyone also know if autofocus of any of the Tamron's / Sigma's will work with the Nikon Speedbooster on a GH3?
 
Alright thanks.

I narrowed it down to the 3 Sigma's :D

18-35 1.8
+ Fast aperture
+ Optical performance
+ Focus ring
- Heavy
- Short zoom range

17-50 F2.8
+ Pretty good aperture with Speed Booster (f2) but don't know how it performs wide open in real life
+ Weight /size
+ Better zoom range

- Probably not as good as the Sigma optically.

17-70
+ Perfect zoom range.
- Optically the worst out of the 3 (probably)

For the rest I don't know much about them. More experiences?
 
Hello Stab,
I dont have a GH3 but I have all the lenses you re reffering to in your above post (I am using a canon 70D).
Sigma 17-70 was the first I bought and while the range is perfect I always hated the fact that is not constant aperture. Optically is just ok and the fact that it is macro is a bonus if you want to shoot details without changing lenses.
Sigma 17-50 was the next one. I decided to give away a little range and macro function in favor of constant fast aperture. I think its a little better optically than the 17-70 but again nothing special.
Sigma 18-35 was the last one...and it really came to stay!!! Since last September when I bought it it lives on my camera! There is no comparison with the other two! The difference with the others is night and day in every aspect!
Range is short...ok...but really useful. Does the GH3 has any kind of crop mode? Because if it has you can use that to extend the range. The 70D has a 3X crop mode and I use it all the time when I need to extend my range.
Normally the crop mode of the 70D is a little softer than usual mode (yea I know GH guys...canons are generally soft...haha) but that lens is so sharp that you really can't tell...:)
I guess you re using some shoulder support, so the lack of IS and the added weight is not really an issue...I also shoot mainly weddings so trust me on that!
If you consider the difference in built quality, handling and performance between those lenses...the given price difference seems like a joke...:-)
Anyway I would suggest you to go to a store and try them all...I know with which one u ll return home...!
 
Last edited:
lyrov said:
Hello Stab,
I dont have a GH3 but I have all the lenses you re reffering to in your above post (I am using a canon 70D).
Sigma 17-70 was the first I bought and while the range is perfect I always hated the fact that is not constant aperture. Optically is just ok and the fact that it is macro is a bonus if you want to shoot details without changing lenses.
Sigma 17-50 was the next one. I decided to give away a little range and macro function in favor of constant fast aperture. I think its a little better optically than the 17-70 but again nothing special.
Sigma 18-35 was the last one...and it really came to stay!!! Since last September when I bought it it lives on my camera! There is no comparison with the other two! The difference with the others is night and day in every aspect!
Range is short...ok...but really useful. Does the GH3 has any kind of crop mode? Because if it has you can use that to extend the range. The 70D has a 3X crop mode and I use it all the time when I need to extend my range.
Normally the crop mode of the 70D is a little softer than usual mode (yea I know GH guys...canons are generally soft...haha) but that lens is so sharp that you really can't tell...:)
I guess you re using some shoulder support, so the lack of IS and the added weight is not really an issue...I also shoot mainly weddings so trust me on that!
If you consider the difference in built quality, handling and performance between those lenses...the given price difference seems like a joke...:-)
Anyway I would suggest you to go to a store and try them all...I know with which one u ll return home...!
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply mister. Very helpful.

Yea i'm sure the 18-35 is a brilliant lens, no doubt about it. I'm only hesitant because it is neither really wide, neither 'tele' enough. The crop mode of the GH3 is great, but still induces more noise + artifacts and some quality loss.

You really see the difference in image quality in video mode between the 18-35 and the 17-50?
 
Stab said:
You really see the difference in image quality in video mode between the 18-35 and the 17-50?
Click to expand...

Well If by image quality you mean sharpness only...to be honest I cant see any difference in normal video mode...but I see a big difference in crop mode which I use very often given the short range of the 18-35. In crop mode both the 17-50 and the 17-70 are noticeably softer.
Keep in mind though that my observations are based on the image I get from the generally ''soft'' canons. If you put those lenses on your GH3 or maybe a GH4 in 4K probably the difference in sharpness will be more apparent.
Another thing to note is that image quality is much more than sharpness alone. Colors, contrast, bokeh etc are better on the 18-35. Built quality and handling are also impportant and the 18-35 is far better. A good lens is an investment in my opinion and I learned it the hard way (trying to offload a bunch of lenses I dont use anymore).
However because I know that for a wedding videographer the first priority when choosing gear MUST be convenience...you should really try them and see what fits better your needs...
 
lyrov said:
Well If by image quality you mean sharpness only...to be honest I cant see any difference in normal video mode...but I see a big difference in crop mode which I use very often given the short range of the 18-35. In crop mode both the 17-50 and the 17-70 are noticeably softer.
Keep in mind though that my observations are based on the image I get from the generally ''soft'' canons. If you put those lenses on your GH3 or maybe a GH4 in 4K probably the difference in sharpness will be more apparent.
Another thing to note is that image quality is much more than sharpness alone. Colors, contrast, bokeh etc are better on the 18-35. Built quality and handling are also impportant and the 18-35 is far better. A good lens is an investment in my opinion and I learned it the hard way (trying to offload a bunch of lenses I dont use anymore).
However because I know that for a wedding videographer the first priority when choosing gear MUST be convenience...you should really try them and see what fits better your needs...
Click to expand...

Thanks again.

I'm mostly shooting from a Fig Rig with an external monitor on top (with a huge battery on it). My current most used lens is the Samyang 35mm 1.4, which is big and heavy but not as huge as the Sigma 18-35. This is already actually my upper limit when it comes to size and weight. During long takes I get shaky hands and after a wedding my back hurts like hell. Mind you that I also have a Speed Booster attached which makes the whole setup longer and a tad heavier.
"Why wouldnt u use another rig or monopod or so", I hear you say, but with this thing I'm extremely mobile and can even make 'slider shots' that I woulnd't be able to do with a shoulder rig for instance.

So the thought of smaller and lighter zoom lens which stays on the camera all day, is rather appealing to me now. I will read some more reviews. From your experiences I understand that the 17-50 is better than the 17-70, but not as good as the 18-35. Sharpness is actually the most important for me. Colors and contrast are hopefully good enough to be color graded.

Although I make high-end wedding films, I can live with a lens which isn't the best of the best. For other stuff I do, I keep using my Samyang primes which are rated pretty damn good and I'm not selling them.

Will update when I bought something :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top