Quality of image using Sigma 12-24 on FF sensor

  • Thread starter Thread starter mho
  • Start date Start date
mho

mho

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,134
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Does anyone use a Sigma 12-24 on a FF sensor, especially at the 12-16 end of the range ?. I'm after their verdict as to the quality of the image and the distortion and vignetting seen, this may have to be my first Sigma as i need something wider than the 14L, even the 2mm will make all the difference.

thanks in advance
 
Jonnyreb is the man to answer this one for you. He uses one on his 5D. I'm sure he'll comment when he sees this thread. I know he raves about this lens / body combo and I've seen results from it which are superb. It's so bloody wide that even someone standing behind you still gets in the shot :lol:
 
Grendel thanks for the reply, i forgot jonnyreb had the combo.

I have a 14mm but really need the extra 2mm on the FF, Its quality of image as the photos taken from the combo will be use commercially.
 
I don't use the 12-24 with a FF but I do with a 1.3x

The image quality of that lens is hard to quantify in many ways. It's not what I would call a sharp lens by any stretch of the imagination. Compared to something like the canon 17-40 it's pretty nasty, raw file next to raw file.

The images do generally sharpen up well enough though and when looked at web sized, as we see them here, should look perfect.

You may well look at some of your first shots with it and wonder if it's up to the task but in the end, do you have any choice? If you need that extra 2mm then it's worth spending the process time to get the final version looking good.
 
I use a sigma 12-24 on a 1ds MKII, and it's excellent, , the vignetting is less (at 12mm) than 17mm on my 17-35mm f 2.8 L (and on my previous 17-40), I disagree with dazzajl, I consider it a very sharp (and sweet lens) and the raw files stand up very well.
The big downside (for me) is that you can't use filters with the lens because of the front element.

A couple examples taken at 12mm (on a ff body)

http://www.lesmclean.co.uk/pb/pier.jpg
http://www.lesmclean.co.uk/IP/newcastle/VK0I0719.jpg
http://www.lesmclean.co.uk/IP/newcastle/VK0I0722.jpg
 
Interesting thread. :thumbs:

I have a 16-35 f2.8L and a 16mm sigma prime and was wanting to go wider for some flying shots I have planned. At a sweet grand the 14mm Canon is a bit much so this sigma might be the answer. I was under the impression they used an EF-S type arrangment and would not fit my 5D - which model is it exactly.
 
I've tried the 12-24 on my 5D, borrowed one from a mate at our local camera club. Results were mixed TBH, many of the shots we see on hear from members who have the same combo are of the landscape variety which I too had no problem with, had a very slight darkening of the corners at the 12-14 end but it was very slight and easily PS'd out if wanted.

The problem came when I took shots wide open of either indoor or architucture, the lines of the subject being shot appeared to be pulled well out of shape in the corners. Were not talking fish eye sort of problems here just not a true interpretation of what was seen by the eye. That said when you see the front element which protudes fromt he lens a good inch you can well imagine why the images pulls a little in the corners.

That said if you use something like DXO's software then any distortion might be minimised.

Colour and contrast wern't a million miles off my 17-40 so that wouldn't be a concern for me either. I didn't end up buying one due to the reasons above and the other thought of "Do I really need the extra 5mm"? (mho.. I know in your case you do) In some cases when space is very tight then maybe yes, but on a hillside taking a landscape shot I supose I could walk back another 10 foot and get a similar sort of shot?? :thinking:

Some good opinions coming out in the thread though :thumbs:
 
Sorry - just too many threads to keep a track of!!

OK - first point - there's a noticeable difference between the 14mm and the 12-24. but then you'd expect that comparing an L prime to a Sigma zoom.

Second point - Its as sharp as you have any right to expect a 12-24mm zoom to be. I've used it happily on the 5d around cities and at the coast and on the 1Ds II in Morocco - absolutley no complaints from me. Sigma QC has vastly improved, but i guess its still possible to pick up a duff one, which dazzajl may be experiencing.

Thirdly - I've never noticed vignetting, but the distortion at the edge of the frame can be unsettling where branches overhang - PT lens resolves these issues though.

Having owned the DC 10-20 and this, the 12-24 is streets ahead in all respects. You may be disappointed aginst the 14mm though......

Oh yes - one niggle - on a FF there is no way to add a filter. On a crop, the lens cap is in two pieces and the outer cap can remain in place and accept a filter without terminal vignetting.

Hope thats useful - sorry its taken a while to find!!
 
HIMUPNORTH said:
Interesting thread. :thumbs:

I have a 16-35 f2.8L and a 16mm sigma prime and was wanting to go wider for some flying shots I have planned. At a sweet grand the 14mm Canon is a bit much so this sigma might be the answer. I was under the impression they used an EF-S type arrangment and would not fit my 5D - which model is it exactly.
Click to expand...

The 10-20 is a DC mount Gary - it doesn't protude into the chamber like an EF-S mount, but it is a short focus lens. The 12-24 is a 35mil equivalent mount :)
 
Thanks for everyones replies, I have found someone who is going to let me borrow the lens so I can give it a try for a few weeks.
I will put it through its paces next to my 14L and see what it can do.
 
Great thread, I have learned something here too..:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top