Sigma wide angle fast macros

It's not Macro, it's not that fast, and it's not a prime....just grab a manual canon or nikon wide angle prime @ f2.8 if that's fast enough.
 
So, I know most of the time you get what you pay for...

But I did pick up a Vivitar(!) 24mm 2.8 today on ebay for $38! My Nikon 50mm 1.8 is loads of fun to use on my GH1, but wanted to get something a little wider...

Will let you guys know in about a week!
 
Do these lenses manual focus when not electronically connected to a camera?

"the focusing ring does not rotate during auto-focus, yet it provides adequate focusing torque of the focusing ring during manual focusing of the lens. "
 
The Sigmas? They should. They're not focus-by-wire lenses.

Looking closely at the lens, it appears to use a clutch mechanism not to dissimilar to the Tokinas. In AF mode the focus ring is disengaged. Pull back on the focus ring to disengage AF and engage the focusing gears.
 
There's not much out there as far as 24mm and 20mm focal lengths that go f2 and larger
reviews say
nikon ais 24mm f2 -has bad ghosts
sigma 20mm f1.8 -soft when wide
sigma 24mm f1.8 -soft when wide
canon 24mm f1.4 -expensive when new, bh reviews show poor QC from canon, no aperture ring(?)

edit:please add to this list
 
Last edited:
My Sigma 24mm f1.8 is supposed to be here sometime today, unfortunately I have a shoot today so I am hoping that USPS will heed the note i left on my door and drop it off without signature confirmation, then I can duck away from the shoot for a few minutes and pick up the lens...which we will then use. lol.
 
J Davis said:
There's not much out there as far as 24mm and 20mm focal lengths that go f2 and larger
reviews say
nikon ais 24mm f2 -has bad ghosts
sigma 20mm f1.8 -soft when wide
sigma 24mm f1.8 -soft when wide
canon 24mm f1.4 -expensive when new, bh reviews show poor QC from canon, no aperture ring(?)

edit:please add to this list
Click to expand...

With most glass being soft when wide open, I wouldn't rule any of these out just because someone says such things. I don't see a reason to shoot at 1.8 anyway unless you're inside somehwere and can't or just not bothering to light, but it'll be better to have that 1.8 in those situations than a 2.8
 
Right now I'm shooting normal / 24mm with a nikon f2.8. I own the nikon 24/2 but its not up to par. I'm looking for f2 or larger + ND's for ultra dof for a particular project I'm on, not light reasons. Whatever the project tho, ideally I want the option to shoot sharp at 24mm f2. As far as sigma's I'm being super cautious and weighing my options, not ruling them out. Just read a lot of different opinion reviews about them.
You're shooting 24mm with zeiss tho right? Or do you shoot with these sigma's?
 
I had a Sigma in my possession for a bit and liked the image it produced, even wide open. Had to return it though. Since I've got the MKii right now, a 35mm tends to be the widest I ever have to go, and 2.8 is plenty fast/shallow on a Full Frame sensor.

When I go back to APS-C or 4/3 System, I'll definitely rock a 20 or 24/1.8 Sigma and a 35/1.4 Zeiss C/Y or ZF as my primary lenses.
 
Got my sigma 24mm f/1.8 macro today. I freaking love it. Still don't quite have a feel for what it does non-macro in regards to DOF, etc...the focus control is, of course, incredibly fine-tuned, and changes in scale immensely...0.18-1 meter takes up more place on the focus ring than 1 meter to infinity. It seems like when you're pretty far from the subject and stopped down you can use it for a deeper DOF look, or get close and use macro and shallow DOF....it is also freaking amazing low light. Basically even though the DOF seems very shallow and unforgiving at close distances at longer distances it seems more forgiving...if something is slightly out of focus it still looks great and doesn't get really soft like on my nikon 50mm f/1.4.....anyway I am happy with it...the image just seems like a cut above what I've been getting in terms of detail, etc, in most situations...even in very low light.

Oh and for those of you that don't know...the lens is freaking HUGE (I'm used to little Nikon AIs) for a 35mm prime.

Not sure that this image does it justice...it's really long, especially with the adapter ring, and is massive...dwarfs the kit lens...which before I got this I thought was beefy.

n725925057_8016797_2778944.jpg
 
ben can u do a test for me and post results here?
Can you take a shot at f2 with the new sigma and exactly the same shot at f2 on the nikon 50/1.4 ais that you have? If possible make sure sharpening in the GH1 is dialed all the way back. I know the 50/1.4 and this way I can judge. Am really interested in the sigma and would love to see how sharp it is (especially at f2).
cheers
 
If I recall the Sigma jumps from f1.8 to f 2.8....hmmm. The first comparable f-stop the have is 2.8...which is probably pretty sharp on both of them. I can tell you right now though that the sigma seems sharper @ wide open: when focusing open and close on somebody's face I can't even tell where the Nikon's focus begins or ends...it's so narrow and so soft...the Sigma is like a little band...of course they both suck for faces (in a closeup at least) at wide open..unless you want just like, the bridge of the nose in focus...I will post some test images pretty soon...I have to grab some shots for a film I'm working on today and we have a VERY limited schedule and then I have to do some stuff for work till like 5 or so, and then off to a dinner engagement...but I should get a chance to do something before we lose all the light (or just do low light...) what would you prefer since the Sigma doesn't have f2.0 (I'm 90% sure.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top