NEW SIGMA 18-50 f2.8 TEST PHOTO
- Thread starter ComB
- Start date
- Status
imaginary_number
Senior Member
mpenza said:thanks. have gotten the 18-125 in the end due to the more versatile rangeno regrets so far. if I need handholdable shutter speeds under low light conditions, I either use flash or up the ISO to 1600/3200.
That's a good choice too. For me, I wanted a bright wide (white was optional) lens. Was really tired of lugging all the other stuff around. The 20D+18-50 is a small and light combi that I figured I could carry around all the time. Basically, I can fit my 20+18-50+580ex+spare batt in a mere Lowepro Lumina Mini.
thomaschan
New Member
i had this lens for awhile, and was comparing it with my tamron.
not as contrasty as the tamron, and slightly less sharp than the tamron at all ranges.
the tamron is seriously on par with nikon 28-70 (canon 24-70L), but the sigma 18-50 doesn't quite compare.
but no doubt it is still sharp enuff, and the const 2.8 is a bonus!
i sold mine coz i got a nikon 12-24 which couples nicely with my 28-75 tamron.
for canon users, i'd say its a great lens, as there doesn't seem to be any 2.8 fixed aperture zoom at around the 18-50, aprt from the 17-40 f4 or 2.8 which both cost MUCH more.
Another draw back is that AF is slow. slower than my tamron. but it seems quite precise.
my tamron althoguh faster AF, sometimes misses the focus, and reaches one end and rotates back.
build quality is superb better than tamron.
but all in all, whether all these features are worth 200-300 more than the tamron is up to u to decide.
or maybe top up another few hundred go for 17-40L f4, but losing the 2.8 aperture, also another decision to be made.
not as contrasty as the tamron, and slightly less sharp than the tamron at all ranges.
the tamron is seriously on par with nikon 28-70 (canon 24-70L), but the sigma 18-50 doesn't quite compare.
but no doubt it is still sharp enuff, and the const 2.8 is a bonus!
i sold mine coz i got a nikon 12-24 which couples nicely with my 28-75 tamron.
for canon users, i'd say its a great lens, as there doesn't seem to be any 2.8 fixed aperture zoom at around the 18-50, aprt from the 17-40 f4 or 2.8 which both cost MUCH more.
Another draw back is that AF is slow. slower than my tamron. but it seems quite precise.
my tamron althoguh faster AF, sometimes misses the focus, and reaches one end and rotates back.
build quality is superb better than tamron.
but all in all, whether all these features are worth 200-300 more than the tamron is up to u to decide.
or maybe top up another few hundred go for 17-40L f4, but losing the 2.8 aperture, also another decision to be made.
- Status
Similar threads
