Anyone used 12-24mm sigma on a 5D?

Started Oct 4, 2008 | Discussions thread
ck_WTB
Regular MemberPosts: 298Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone used 12-24mm sigma on a 5D?
In reply to sebastian crespo, Oct 5, 2008

Thank you for the introduction to your work and website. Your photos are fantastic and an inspiration. Your website is the best I've encountered. I am an architect in Oregon, USA with an increasing amount of time and interest going into the art of photography. I am taking my first trip to Rio, Brazil this December for a photography book on the dance culture. Have you been to Rio, any special recommendations for Rio architecture?

As far as the OP question and the Sigma goes, well, I might have a bad copy because I've never been particularly pleased with the results. Before getting the 5D I used a XTi with 10-22 and 24-105. When I picked up the 5D I sold the 10-22 and purchased a Sigma 12-24. I found the Sigma to have less contrast, color and sharpness than the Canon 10-22. However, the Sigma 12-24 like the Canon 10-22 was remarkably distortion free and unlike the Canon, crazy wide. I eventually dropped the cash to pick up the Canon 16-35 mk2 and have found the results to be significantly better with this lens. The contrast, color and sharpness is better throughout, but there is barrel distortion, which I correct when needed with Photoshop's Lens Distortion filter. I have kept the Sigma basically to be used as a 12mm prime when shut down on a tripod. The Canon insanely expensive but it makes for an excellent all around wide angle. It's environmental sealing and decent performance from f/2.8 to 16 make it the best travel lens. At f/3.2 I had no problem getting plenty of nice photos of church interiors (no tripods allowed) during my recent trip to Europe. It's the best all around lens but probably to much money for the OP. If you go for a Sigma 12-24 try and test out a few copies, that is if you can find a store that actually carries the lens and has more than one copy. The 17-40 might be a better investment if you don't need ultra wide and don't mind the extra step of lens distortion adjustment.

In preparation to make the 16-35 purchase I took my 5D, Sigma and tripod to a local store, and during the slow part of the day spent close to an hour taking the same shot with each lens Sigma 12-24, Canon 16-35 and Canon 17-40 (same view running through full focal length and aperature rang). The most conclusive view/shot was when the camera was perpendicular to a floor to ceiling product wall. The 16-35 offered the best IQ (color, contrast, sharpness, low vignetting). Sigma had the widest view with least distortion but regardless of apreature, couldn't keep up with either Canon for resolution. The 17-40 had significantly more distortion at 17mm and really needed to be closed down to f/7.1 at a minimum. I can't remember but would bet that the 17-40 gives you the best IQ when using tripod with max DOF of around f/16.

I only tested out one copy of each lens so the test was hardly conclusive. Please, take these recommendations with some consideration to that fact. I know you all want to see photos of this test but I don't have the time to dig up the RAWs, process and post them on my website. Sorry. I do have photos on my website using these two lenses.

The best Sigma 12-24 images can be found in this gallery (no tripod and shot at f/5.6):
http://www.witnesstobeauty.com/p648704650

There are a ton of 16-35 images on my website, your best bet might be looking through my Europe gallery:
http://www.witnesstobeauty.com/f922342848

Hope that helps,
Chad

 ck_WTB's gear list:ck_WTB's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS M Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow