Previous news story    Next news story

Need the speed? Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM in-depth review

By dpreview staff on Sep 2, 2013 at 13:33 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $799.00

Sigma's 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM has generated a lot of excitement since its announcement in April, as the fastest zoom ever made for SLRs. Designed for use on APS-C / DX format cameras, it offers a 28-54mm equivalent zoom range, and promises similar depth of field control to an F2.8 zoom on full frame. But can an F1.8 zoom really work? Read our detailed review to find out. 

184
I own it
439
I want it
20
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 319
12
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (1 month ago)

PLUS: That SIGMA dare to do a zoom with an F 1.8 CONS: That it covers such a very limited range.

0 upvotes
Freddell
By Freddell (3 months ago)

I use this on Canon 70d and cannot get the auto focus to work in a friendly way. I can easily point the focus one one point and have the camera confirm, but focus on a different point. When I look at the picture I see the focus point where expected, but focus is somewhere else. So problem of consistency is more than soft images when pointing to the target, the camera might focus o something else entirely.

1. Do anyone know the latest firmware for the 18-35 Canon lens?
2. If I get USB dock to try to adjust focus (although it will not help with focus point errors most likely). When I set the distance, is the distance from the lens tip or camera body?
3. The only way to focus seem to be live view, but there it might front focus a little. Will the in lens adjustment work equally regardless of PDAF or Live View?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Freddell
By Freddell (3 months ago)

To follow up myself inconsistent focus is experienced with EFS 17-55 2.8 IS on Canon EOS 70D. Focus on one thing with live view, having the camera focus elsewhere. In fact today the Viewfinder was more accurate.

Might rehost this lens to DX if I give up on 70D.

0 upvotes
iggy kh
By iggy kh (2 months ago)

Have you tried to set Ai servo focusing mode on your camera?
It might be a workaround for the Sigma's focusing issue

0 upvotes
Trakx
By Trakx (1 month ago)

I've got the 70D and the Sigma 18-35 and USB Dock.
Unfortunatly the Sigma will not consistently focus with OVF even after MFA.
But in truth from my experience thats not that bad because LiveView works 100% focus and being a wide to standard i usualy dont have dificulty in tracking the target.
Video is very good.
Even without being able to use the Sigma with the OVF, i would STILL BUY this lens. There no other option on the market.
I mainly use it indoors without flash for shooting people (that are usually moving) so with shutter speeds of up to 1/125.
That 1.8 means i can keep my ISO as low as possible and the DOF although shalow is acceptable (18mm@2m DOF=93cm and 35mm@2m DOF=23cm)

My other two lens 18-135 STM and 50 1.8 II focus consistenly after MFA.

0 upvotes
Westmill
By Westmill (3 months ago)

I have been using this lens for a while on a D7100.
Its focus has been very accurate even at F1.8.
I have used it in the studio and out in the field. As the DOF is so shallow at F1.8 it works far better in continuous focus mode when anything like close. As even the slightest movement will throw it out of focus !
You do need to check carefully if shooting a landscape etc at F1.8.
This is true of any fast lens. You simply just need to look at that tiny focus square and see what you are asking it to focus on !
Slower lenses are fine because you are covering this with more DOF.
Something to consider with this lens is that F1.8 is there if you need it and it is certainly usable ! Like any lens... it performs better when stopped down.
I use this lens mostly at F2.8. The difference being is that at F2.8 the image quality is stunning already ! For low light and or people such as weddings this lens is simply unbeatable for APSC period !

2 upvotes
Average User
By Average User (3 months ago)

Hi Andy:
Great review.
I have checked a few other places and asked specifically about the af issue, and heard only great reports on the AF.
So I am going to take the plunge.
This lens is really potentially a game changer. Really, where there is plenty of light, the APS-c cameras do just as well as the full frames. It is in low light where these cameras struggle, especially now they have gone to 24 mp.
This lens gives full frame equivalent 24 to 52 mm which means that now there is a zoom lens that will cover all the sizes you need for everyday indoor photos of family and friends that is brighter than any equivalent ff zoom that I know of.
Add to that the lens is sharper even than the work horse Nikon DX 35 mm 1.8...and you have a combination that will meet or beat the best from current full frames.
It may mean a huge proportion of those who should have bought full frames will now not need to.

Green Flash

0 upvotes
Snaposaur
By Snaposaur (4 months ago)

Is this worth getting on the 7100? Need a general zoom lens for my 7100 before I get some of the single focal prime lens.

Was debating between this, the 16-85 or the 18-140.

0 upvotes
Westmill
By Westmill (3 months ago)

The 18-35 is an outstanding lens. However, unless you know exactly what you want, I believe this lenses short zoom range would frustrate most folk. Either the 16-85 or 18-140 would be a better option for most. Even the sheer size and weight can be a drag. For those like me that need it, then the 18-35 is worth its weight in gold :)

0 upvotes
David Kinston
By David Kinston (3 months ago)

Well, I bought this primarily to use at 18mm f1.8 as a prime. There is nothing of this quality in a 20mm f1.8 prime at anywhere near the price - so the zoom is just a bonus. It will reside on my D7000. Same logic with my Tokina 116 - another magic lens.

0 upvotes
Class A
By Class A (4 months ago)

It does not appear justifiable to me to criticise the lens for any AF issues, unless you have confirmed any issues with other cameras / mounts.

This isn't the first time I read about Canon AF being quicker than precise and maybe the camera you tested the lens with has additional issues.

Getting the best possible focus is the responsibility of the camera. Some lenses (usually through decentering or spherical aberration) make it impossible for the camera to achieve optimal focus. But a good copy, and in particular after micro-AF-adjustments that can deliver spot on AF, should do so every time (within small tolerances, of course).

If it doesn't, you are seeing the tolerances of the camera's AF system / algorithm.

So again, I don't see how you can blame inconsistent AF on a lens in the first place and before you have ruled out the particular camera you have used.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Nightly
By Nightly (4 months ago)

In fact you are mostly right, and I agree with you. It could be most probably problem on side of Canon. But still as Canon is not doing their cameras to be suitable with third party lenses, then the fact that third party lenses are made to be suitable with the particular brand (in this case Canon) make them responsible for all failures.

Even though they don't guarantee it works with all models, it will be appreciated if they be interested in this case, and either fix the issue if they can, or publish that the product is not suitable with particual model.

But ignoring the issue, which is being discussed among many customers, doesn't make issue gone. And even if it may work ecxellent on different models, still put some future customers into suspect and that harms the reputation of the product not fairly.

So being honest in this situation will help much to customers and also to company.

0 upvotes
Nightly
By Nightly (4 months ago)

After reading many posts about 70D and Sigma 18-35mm having incosistent results I got disappointed, cause I also wanted to buy this lens to my 70D. Though I am not resident of Turkey, but I reside so I am also bonded to their rules. Here shops don't allow to test the lens before you buy. Fortunately there is demo item to test, but still not in all shops.

I asked 3 dealers and official importer of Sigma about focus issues of this combination, but all of them denied this. Telling only about pause in videos, which is also stated here in forum. They stated that problem is because lens has very high resolution so camera can't handle. But nothing about back or front focusing. For my luck one of them had demo item. and I did a test with different apertures.

And the test showed that there are issues. Then I did a simple test from short distancde and it showed back focusing issue. Would you believe - shop assistants were not even interested in the results. I suppose they are already knew.

0 upvotes
David Kinston
By David Kinston (4 months ago)

From a different perspective!

I'm extremely tempted by this lens ... however ...

This lens has a very complex structure. What sort of issues does this raise, when considering long-term reliability, light absorption/reflection, etc.

0 upvotes
photoshack
By photoshack (4 months ago)

This lens looks fantastic and if it were spec'd at true 18-35mm for FF cameras that would be awesome (because I no longer have a rebel)...but really the focal range for APS-C bodies is not 18-35, and it is not made for FF cameras due to vignetting all over the range. So why call it 18-35mm??

0 upvotes
Osssis
By Osssis (4 months ago)

Because it actually is a true 18-35mm focal length. The field of view is different on FF and APS-C but the focal length stays the same. The sigma just doesn't cover the image circle required for FF.

If your idea was correct we could just ask why is FF 35mm called 35 mm as it vignettes on medium format and so on and so on.

0 upvotes
Nightly
By Nightly (4 months ago)

If so, then why EF-S 18-55mm lens is called 18-55 but not 28-88mm?

0 upvotes
DIGITALSCREAMS
By DIGITALSCREAMS (5 months ago)

Very good review....and I'm relieved (if somewhat disappointed) to be hearing about other peoples AF issues. I bought this at the same time as my Canon EOS70D. For sure, its super sharp and a quality built lens. But there is definitely a compatibility issue - many of my shots were missed. This happened under all different types of lighting, slow and fast moving objects. AF was random....maybe 2 out 20 shots were what I would consider impressively sharp. The rest looked about as impressive as any modern camera phone. For me, this turned into a deal breaker...I just got fed up of missing shots. The lens is amazing when it hits it...but it just didn't happen often enough for me. Originally I thought I had a defective lens. I never did micro adjustments...but from what I can gather its not the silver bullet fix people claim. All I can say is don't expect too much from AF. In manual mode...that's another story :)

0 upvotes
vesa1tahti
By vesa1tahti (5 months ago)

I have this lens and D7000. Several focusing problems. Only in live-view focusing is accurate when wide open.

0 upvotes
jtan163
By jtan163 (5 months ago)

Can you tell me which country you got your F-mount 18-35 sigma in and when you got it?
I paid cash for one about 2 months ago and am still waiting.
Sorta getting annoyed would be curious to know where they have landed. I like to support my bricks and mortar shops but this is getting silly.

0 upvotes
vesa1tahti
By vesa1tahti (5 months ago)

I got my lens in Finland, on 23th Oct., Rajala Pro Shop, Kuopio. Now it seems this lens is widely available in different stores here. BTW, I checked the microadjustment of my D7000, and now the focus is in good level ! Purchasing the USB-dock for further bodies and Sigma- lenses.

0 upvotes
nsantos923
By nsantos923 (5 months ago)

Im having the same issue with my D7000 and this lens. At very close range (within 3ft) it performs really well at any zoom range. As the distance between the camera and my subject increases, the focus seems to create a back focus issue.
i have been playing with the usb dock micro adjustments and i cant get it right.
Let me know if you find the correct adjustment
Thank you

0 upvotes
VREN
By VREN (5 months ago)

I have had this lens now for one week and have the same issues that you have been complaining about with my d7000 and d5100. Inconsistent focus. Great sometimes and out at others. I ordered the USB Dock but haven't received it yet as usps messed up. When I compare the focus of this lens with my 50 f1.8g, I find that the 50mm tries harder on a difficult subject but gets it right while this one confirms focus quickly and often gets it wrong. I have been trying different modes and surprisingly I find it noticeably more consistent using continuous focus mode when focusing on stationary objects. The only drawback is no focus assist light, but it is so bright it does fairly well in conditions that will normally require focus assist

0 upvotes
fosterwu1228
By fosterwu1228 (4 months ago)

Yes, I am experiencing the same focus problem. Particually, I have some finding that this inaccurated focusing might be seen when the shooting distance longer than 1M. It seems to be under controll when shooting less than 1M. By the way, the significant focus shifted can be seen at 18mm and can be fixed by using the USB Dock.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
focusnow
By focusnow (6 months ago)

Ok - I think I may have found the solution... for shooting wide open with this lens in combination with the 70D....

1) set micro adjustment to +20 far and near
2) set camera M, P or C
3) shoot in live view mode
4) press AF button on top, select Flexizone single
5) press magnifier 3x to zoom in 10x (2x = 5x zoom)
6) half press shutter to focus
7) take photo in focus

I ave tried this at 1.8, ISO 200 in dim lit room and got sharp focus in every shot...

Works for me. Curious to hear about your experience.

Thanks.

0 upvotes
xxx2
By xxx2 (5 months ago)

It worked for me too!!!!! Crazy.
I have the feeling that the Servo AF during video shooting somehow messes up the focusing system and then it needs to be "re-callibrated" via method you described.
Anyway it's a relief to get constantly sharp photos. I can finally enjoy my lens (a bit). Shooting photos in Live view (where the auto-focus works great) is only good for occasional family photos...

0 upvotes
xxx2
By xxx2 (5 months ago)

Are you also experience the video freezing I described here? https://vimeo.com/77078232

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (5 months ago)

@focusnow: The improvement you're seeing is simply due to live view AF being inherently more accurate. AF microadjustment is not applied when shooting in live view on the EOS 70D.

1 upvote
vesa1tahti
By vesa1tahti (5 months ago)

And the micro adjustment worked for me with D7000, too !!! In live view, it is absolutely accurate, and now with OVF very good. Maybe purchasing the USB-dock for further bodies and Sigma lenses.

0 upvotes
DIGITALSCREAMS
By DIGITALSCREAMS (5 months ago)

The video freezing issue is being caused by your aperture opening/closing as you go from areas of bright wall to dark sofa?

0 upvotes
focusnow
By focusnow (6 months ago)

Hi there, I recently bought the 70D and the Sigma 18-35mm....wanted to love the lens but got very frustrated about its inability to consistently get the focus right...I am still in the process of figuring out how to improve it while shooting wide open and am not done testing. However I think it may be related to a very thin focus pane in combination with the way the 70D focusses...see here for more info. http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-70d/9 I am hesitant to buy the USB hardware for the sigma lens. Also I have already micro-adjusted the lens +20 on both near and far....I hopeI can figure out a way to solve this quickly otherwise I may end up returning the lens....it is just too frustrating to miss focus in so many shots, especially indoors....BTW - I wonder why Sigma has responded to this issue yet....

0 upvotes
fosterwu1228
By fosterwu1228 (4 months ago)

Hello,
Not sure if your problem gets fixed?? I am experiencing the same problem now....@@

0 upvotes
Moderation
By Moderation (6 months ago)

Tested again today at 18 and 35, shooting full daylight f1.8. 70d with +18 micro compensation near and far set last night. (See below.) First a couple of manual focus live view shots, then auto alternating near and far focus distance. (On all these shots I'm using "One Shot" single central focus point on the 70d.) The live view shots are very sharp, the infinity focus shots are randomly slightly soft, the near and mid focus shots were mostly very soft, very off. (The USB dock might correct this.) AI Servo did better on the mid shots, bringing most into focus, but the long shots were more randomly softer.

I can deal with the USB dock, but don't think I can justify an $800 lens that viewfinder focuses randomly. I also originally thought this would be a superb video lens, but with the sensitivity of the manual focus there's no way I could do an accurate focus pull, or even reliably focus without a lot of sweat. (Haven't tried relying on the auto focus for movies. That's a new thing.)

0 upvotes
Moderation
By Moderation (6 months ago)

Played with my new 18-35 on my 70d tonight, trying to understand the focus difficulty. First, my lens required +18 near and far micro in the body to focus "correctly". (Tested by matching live view focus with viewfinder focus, then iterating with view focus.) I then simply banged off shots across the room (~25') at a clock on the wall, all at f1.8, either at 35 or 18mm, since they were the only focal lengths for which the lens was corrected. Sure enough I got random variations in focus of about +/- 2 microadjusts, (subjective scale,) regardless of focal length. Near, far, no difference.

AI servo was better, but still the occasional miss, though I think the error was perceptibly smaller. (Maybe +/- 1 micro?)

What I noticed, when manually focusing using live view, was that the difference between focused and not was an incredibly small barrel rotation. It's possible the focus motor simply doesn't have sufficient resolution. Maybe ML can come up with a dithering scheme.

0 upvotes
Trakx
By Trakx (3 weeks ago)

If it was a motor focus resolution problem it would not focus right with LiveView. But with LiveView it focus 100% of the shots

0 upvotes
BOB
By BOB (6 months ago)

Has anyone received the Nikon version of this lens from B&H or Adorama? I visited them both at the PhotoExpo in NY and both said that they have not received any yet. Yet, Sigma said that they have, hmmmm :( Got a chance to try it out though at the Sigma booth and its a beast of a lens. Can't wait to get one!

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
nsantos923
By nsantos923 (5 months ago)

I order it at the PhotoPlus Show in NYC from Sammy's camera. They had 1 in stock. Received in on monday. I got the USB dock from B&H yesterday since i was having trouble getting accurate focus on both my D7000 and D600.
The lens is impressively sharp at 1.8 WHEN IT FOCUS CORRECTLY! I spent about 2hrs yesterday playing with the micro adjustments and i still cant get it right. Focus is pretty accurate until you try focusing on something that is about 10ft and behond.
I hope i can get this issue solved otherwise i will have to send it back. I will be field testing it at a sweet sixteen and a baptism this weekend. Send me a message and i will let you know how it went.
If you want one, place a pre order with Allens camera in PA. They have been getting one copy every 2 to 3 weeks.

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (6 months ago)

Go Sigma.

0 upvotes
xxx2
By xxx2 (6 months ago)

Video test of Canon 70D + new Sigma 18-35.

Loud autofocues which freezes for a moment (11s and 19s of the video). The freezing happens in every video setting.

https://vimeo.com/77078232

0 upvotes
Gennady K
By Gennady K (6 months ago)

ISO is just a way to achieve the best SNR (noise level). Actually sensor counts the number of photons and at f1.8 APS-C sensor receives the same amount as FF sensor. If both sensors receive the same photon number they theoretically should have the same SNR (no advantage to anyone) It is still possible that internal implementation of the sensors or incorrect exposure will create some difference in actual SNR levels.

0 upvotes
tpag2000
By tpag2000 (6 months ago)

There's a comment in the introduction part of this review that doesn't make sense to me. I think it's wrong, but perhaps I'm missing something. Dpreview states, "it will also offer effectively the same light-gathering capability as an F2.8 lens on full frame", "meaning the same total amount of light is used to capture the image", "APS-C shooters will be able to use lower ISOs... substantially negating one of the key advantages of switching to full frame."

The total light has nothing to do with the exposure, it's the intensity of light (light per unit area) at the sensor that matters (right?). A smaller sensor doesn't mean you need a higher ISO to shoot at the same equivalent exposure. If that were the case the center of a FF would be 1 stop darker than the rest by the above logic.

It *IS* true that an f/1.8 will allow you to use a lower ISO than an f/2.8 but exposure wise f/2.8 is the same on FF or crop sensor. FOV and DOF are obviously different from crop to FF, just not exposure.

0 upvotes
cyberjayar
By cyberjayar (6 months ago)

i am contemplating on buying this stuff =)

0 upvotes
Theophilus101
By Theophilus101 (7 months ago)

Will this lens work on my Canon Rebel T1i?

0 upvotes
jvkelley
By jvkelley (7 months ago)

Yes

0 upvotes
laimbert3270
By laimbert3270 (7 months ago)

Hi Pros, this can be a good match to canon 6D? Im planning to buy 24-70mm tamron lens but its costly

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

The lens is designed for use on APS-C cameras, not full frame like the EOS 6D. This is covered on page 4 of this review.

1 upvote
laimbert3270
By laimbert3270 (7 months ago)

Yeah, just get some ideas from the Professional like you, so any suggestion for all around lens to my 6D except 24-70mm of canon & tamron they are costly.. what about the kit 24-105 but it was an old model. thanks for your reply Andy, hope you can help me to have a usable lens which is not soooo expensive : )

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (7 months ago)

I have the 24-105 f4 L for my 5D and it is a good lens. Yes the 24-70 2.8 will be a bit brighter and probably a bit sharper but as a general lens for Canon FF I have been very happy.

1 upvote
laimbert3270
By laimbert3270 (7 months ago)

thank you guys, so I have to save money to buy canon 24-70 2.8 till next time..

0 upvotes
jywade
By jywade (7 months ago)

Put this baby on the new Canon 70D and see if there are any autofocusing issues. The two are a match made in video heaven.

0 upvotes
DSin
By DSin (7 months ago)

I have the 70d and had the sigma 1.8 18-35 but returned it yesterday because the auto focus was horrible. I thought I had a defective unit, but after reading the updated review, maybe not. Admittedly I was trying to test focus using the viewfinder, and maybe it might be better in liveview, but frankly taking photos in live view isn't that great on the 70d because of the slow recycle times. I also don't have the USB disk so maybe that may have helped, but out of the box, anyway, it was unusable for me. In retrospect, I wish I played with the micro adjustment a bit more, but compared with the kit 18-135 lens, it was so bad I thought it must be defective.

2 upvotes
Mistur
By Mistur (7 months ago)

Went out shooting like any other day with my 70D and the auto focus missed too often. I never shot below 1/125 sec. The colour and contrast was very nice and when it hit, the images were beautiful. What's the point of having f/1.8 if the hit rate for keepers is so low. I returned mine as well. After reading this review, I was reluctant to try another copy. Too bad, I really wanted to like this lens.

0 upvotes
DSin
By DSin (7 months ago)

I don't understand why sigma wouldn't calibrate the lenses better at the factory. Instead they offer a separate dock to calibrate it stand alone (without camera body) so that it can focus properly. I don't get it, do they expect that most people that buy this lens would buy a separate appliance to do something that should be done before it ships out? I had really high expectations for this lens based on all the previews. Maybe I'll give it another shot in the future if the problem is fixed, but for now, it sucks being the guinea pig.

2 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (7 months ago)

I'd have liked to see it on a D7100, to see if the better AF on the Nikon would have helped its performance. I'd hate to have a good lens that is inconsistent re AF. Other relevant issu is flare, my Sigma (17-50mm f/2.8) is not that good in that respect, this one looks a bit better (but flare is ugly when it shows, with that greenish tint that is the same as in my Sigma).

0 upvotes
SteveCooper
By SteveCooper (7 months ago)

Excuse me for sounding dense, but isn't autofocus a function of the camera? How can you blame a lens for the shortcomings of the cameras autofocus system inability to lock on to the proper focus point? Also wouldn't a 51 point focus system behave differently than the camera AF you just tested?

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

AF has to be a lens issue in the first place.
why we need AF lens,
fast AF lens,
quiet AF lens,
smooth AF lens, and
accurate AF lens, etc.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Eric Ouellet
By Eric Ouellet (7 months ago)

@ yabokkie,
I think your comment is inappropriate and show an incredible incomprehension of how works a digital camera. Perhaps you should learn how it works before adding comment that do not add any value to a post.

3 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (7 months ago)

No, it's not only a body issue. AF uses camera-lens comm and lots of calculations. I have tested carefully the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and compared it to the Nikkor 35mm f/2, and the Nikkor performs much better re AF consistency and accuracy compared to the Sigma.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

@Eric Ouellet,
just ask yourself why we should ever need an AF lens which may be a good starting point and read something about the EOS system and EF lens design (AF changed the way we design lenses and it's still one of the major factors behind new lens designs).

0 upvotes
Eric Ouellet
By Eric Ouellet (4 months ago)

@yabokkie, you are right here (AF drive way to design lenses and partly other aspect of the internal of the body). The only point that disturbed me very much is that you said :"AF has to be a lens issue in the first place." where you are totally wrong (at least for this lens, and most cases). Reading the canon EOS 70D review conclusion on this web site should confirm you what I'm saying. It is the camera who read focus and tell the lenses where to go. Bad reading from the camera itself (body) results in bad focus (not accurate).

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Climber Chris
By Climber Chris (7 months ago)

I've used this lens for a wedding and have to say that I really do not agree with the micro focussing comments in the review. It is a superb lens with amazing optical quality, a very usable f1.8 at all focal lengths, and spot-on focus in all light levels and for a wide variety of contrast levels. Out of 800 images I only had a handful that were blurred or soft focused. Maybe I've got a good one and the reviewer had a bad one, but from my own real world use it is a stunning lens!

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (7 months ago)

How is it re flare? The DPR tests says it's good, but that's my main problem with the otherwise very good Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 on the D7000. Even a sideways brigh window may cause ugly greenish flare that is absent when I use even the cheapest kit lenses.

0 upvotes
appelpix1
By appelpix1 (7 months ago)

I will certainly consider this lens when there are rapports that the autofocus has been fixed and is consistent.
The test site SLRgear also noted this in their review:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1609

0 upvotes
iggy097
By iggy097 (7 months ago)

Ordered mine this morning. Very excited to put it on the C100 - it will compliment my 24-105 and 70-200 perfectly.
I wasn't a huge fan of the Tokina 11-16 like everyone else - a bit too wide for shooting talent inside - as I do often, and the 24-105 isn't wide enough most of the time for me.
Sold the Sigma 30mm 1.4 as soon as I placed the order for this lens.

0 upvotes
John McMillin
By John McMillin (7 months ago)

Given the large size of this honker, I'd rather carry my smallish FF camera (Sony a850) and a conventional lens. Might as well be a prime, with this scant zoom range. Still, it's an achievement that it's as sharp as it is.

1 upvote
drif8r
By drif8r (7 months ago)

How much does a smallish FF camera (Sony a850) and a conventional lens cost and weigh compared to this lens and a crop camera.

0 upvotes
jadmaister2
By jadmaister2 (7 months ago)

A lovely lens if you use that focal range. However, the argument for it over a 35mm prime is unconvincing for me. You always have to compromise on focal range if you want a large aperture and quality results. This particular compromise may suit more people than they realise. Try doing a careful analysis of the focal lengths you used in you 'best' what? 50 shots? I did this and realised that for 85% of what I do I could use a 35mm, so for a little flexibility this zoom will be fine. Or I can save money, get sharper glass, 1 more stop and walk a few yards forwards or backwards (oh, and save a few grammes to boot).

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

the image circle is tight but you can use it as a 35/1.8 on 35mm format.

0 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (7 months ago)

This lens is like three primes: 18, 24, 35 mm. Or in case you can live with large gaps: 18 & 35 mm primes.

I shoot with 35 mm prime most of my time and I am considering buying now a lens in the 18 mm range. So this one lens can replace 2 ... 3 primes.

1 upvote
BernardRoughton
By BernardRoughton (7 months ago)

Excellent review! My Sigma 30mm F1.4 also has very inconsistent focussing abilities, wide open it constantly misses the focus point..

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

I don't have the issue maybe it's because different environment or handling but maybe that's why Sigma invented the USB dock.

just like Canon invented a great mount that all the modern mounts follow because they had so many troubles with their crappy mounts before.

0 upvotes
Preternatural Stuff
By Preternatural Stuff (7 months ago)

High praise indeed and long may it continue for innovation's sake.
My next prime lens (macro) decision would certainly involve considering Sigma.

This also brings to mind what I have said long ago. Optical View Finders are dinosaur/submarine/WWI tech. That is why the focus is impossible to ascertain in the viewfinder.

EVFs are the only way to go. They are so good nowadays, they even offer focus peaking which would allow the photographer to see the point/areas of focus. Its an essential feature which any photographer needs (if only they ditch the OVF).

7 upvotes
Hetty
By Hetty (7 months ago)

Your view on viewfinders is almost laughable. Why the hell would some of us even want EVF, it is terrible on battery life and most important of all it is more annoying to use than a standard viewfinder. Many photographers still use film and they wouldn't dare replace the viewfinder. I think you should try using a camera more than commenting trash mate.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 55 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
13floorphoto
By 13floorphoto (7 months ago)

Wow, Hetty. Preternatural Stuff's comment is far from trash. OVFs are archaic technology. EVFs offer far more advantages than OVFs. New DSLRs today offer live view purely for the reasons why people love EVFs. I figure you trust your camera's metering to rely on proper exposure, huh. Focus peaking on a manual lens is a godsend. Mirrorless tech and EVFs are the future.

5 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (7 months ago)

One thing that people forget about is that when using an OVF you look THROUGH the viewfinder, with an EVF you look AT the viewfinder.

The OVF is much easier on the eyes. If you have ever had to shoot a 10 hour sporting event you'd be really miserable with eye fatigue at the end of the day with an EVF.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (7 months ago)

Sigma knew about this in an interview. For newer, high resolution systems, contrast detect is the way to go to for their future high quality lenses. It must have been the reason, they went the trouble to create and give a USB dock.

4 upvotes
Marvol
By Marvol (7 months ago)

The cynical reason to release the USB dock is that they can skimp on quality control and pass some suboptimal lenses, then have the user pay extra for said USB dock and to top it off have the user spend their own time to actually make the lens behave as it should have out of the box...

>)

1 upvote
Jack Simpson
By Jack Simpson (7 months ago)

Cons: "Physically rather large for a standard zoom" ... well, geeez loueeeze, whattay expect for a constant 1.8 zoom :(

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

simple comarison in weight:
- Sigma 18-35/1.8, 810g
- Sigma 24-70/2.8, 790g
- Tamron 24-70/2.8, 825g
- Canon 24-70/2.8L2, 805g
- Nikon 24-70/2.8, 900g

quite similar weight for a narrower zoom range but relatively longer back focus to overcome.

1 upvote
Marvol
By Marvol (7 months ago)

It's a valid point though. It simply IS large which is a consideration.
If you were to go landscaping and you have to choose between this and your standard 18-70 at half the weight and size, knowing you will not go below f/8, the size is objectively a con.

The f/1.8 OTOH is clearly listed at the plus side, so DPR are consistent.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

the size, weight, and price are all in line with existing lenses beautifully except the performance for an APS-C SLR lens.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
KBarrett
By KBarrett (7 months ago)

What the heck? Why are third-party lenses tested on the smallest available sensor with which they are compatible? Test it on a 1.5x crop APS-C sensor and make your results valid to a wider audience.

3 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

We have data for plenty of lenses on both 1.5x and 1.6x crops, and the difference between them is utterly insignificant in terms of assessing how well a lens performs.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

the difference is just under 5%.
the limit that we tolerate (or we used to tolerate?)

0 upvotes
KerryBE
By KerryBE (7 months ago)

Who is "we" in your statement?

1 upvote
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

@KerryBE: 'We' in this statement refers to this very website, dpreview.com: I write all the lens reviews here. Here's a comparison between the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC OS Macro HSM |C on Canon and Nikon cameras. The slight difference between sensor sizes has little impact on the lens measurements.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
KerryBE
By KerryBE (7 months ago)

Thank you. I was wondering who @yabokkie viewed as "we". Is he/she on your staff?

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

I think the problem is that sensor resolution has outpaced autofocus system accuracy. I noticed this with the previous generation of cameras as well. If you don't focus with live view on its highest magnification the camera is not going to focus on the exact point you want it to and the shot will look off. Maybe Hasselblad is going the right direction by sticking to a single focus point.

3 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (7 months ago)

I agree that with current high resolution of sensors and current high resolving lenses at large aperture focus becomes very critical indeed.

That being said, I now have a company which I can move the AF point over quite a large area. It does so swiftly and the AF is always spot on ( low light, wide open, high res). So after I say this can be done, you could never sell me single AF again.

0 upvotes
Eigenmeat
By Eigenmeat (7 months ago)

I think DPR is being really unfair on the focus issue about this lens.

This Canon 19-point AF module(used in 7D and 70D) is not really known for its extreme accuracy. The same can be said for the rest of the Canon APS-C AF modules. Lensrentals did a excellent test on Canon bodies, and it can be read here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras
In the test, they are using the 28mm f/2.8 IS, which is less demanding then this sigma, and still get very inconsistent AF results.

I highly suggest DPR do the same AF "evaluation" with a fast prime on the same body and tell us how consistent the result is. I suspect that those fast primes are so soft at F1.8 that it's hard tell slight focus consistency.

The reality is that current PDAF sensors simply does not have resolution to satisfy ever higher pixel count main sensor. With CDAF, this lens will be sensational.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
12 upvotes
Grummbeerbauer
By Grummbeerbauer (7 months ago)

I can confirm your observation about general AF precision on Canon APS-C bodies. I have had a 7D for more than three years now. While I like the camera overall, I never fully understood all the buzz about its purportedly great AF module. It has let me down more often than not with inconsistent focusing.

About the Sigma 18-35: I recently orderered one. My first tests didn't show any more inconsistent focusing than I am used to from my 7D. However, depending on focal length and subject distance, the AF was either OK or (consistently!) off (always frontfocus, sometimes needing around +20 microadjust). Sounds like a case for the USB dock, but it was so bad that I decided to not take any chance, I think my copy was defective. Since I liked everything else about the lens (IQ, speed, built), I opted for a replacement, which I am now waiting for.
BTW: I tried the Sigma on three different bodies, my 7D and 450D, and a colleagues 60D, focus deviation was more or less the same on all of them

6 upvotes
Marvol
By Marvol (7 months ago)

I don't think DPR are being unfair. They found this issue, went in-depth to find if they could resolve it, and reported back with what they found.

In the end they scored the lens 86%, gave a glowing review and a Gold Award, and padded the focus issue with several clear YMMV statements.

I think that is exactly what could be expected of them, but many peeps here seem to have only read the critical part of the review.

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

I don't know how others tested but 7D's AF module is quite conservative that it covers only a small area at center for better accuracy, and the accuracy is good (though I strongly prefer 51-point Nikon which covers much large area on APS-C).

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

The autofocus problems - is it Sigma or is it Canon? You really should make a followup with other bodies.

6 upvotes
hoof
By hoof (7 months ago)

Question: Do all F/1.8 lenses have this "focus" issue, or just the Sigma 18-35mm? Or are we mistakenly blaming the Sigma for what might really be a body PDAF issue? What if the PDAF is tuned for an F/2.8 light cone? Then the AF tolerances might be fine for the 24-70 F/2.8 but not an F/1.8 lens?

3 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

From my experience, usually large aperture prime lens like the Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 or even the Canon 85mm f/1.2L MkII has focus shift issues. As long as one understand it and know how to adjust accordingly, its OK. The focus shift normally will occur when one try to focus at close distance at the wide open aperture.

This problem seldom occur on f/1.8 lenses like the Canon 85mm f/1.8.

So far, no other brand except Sigma has made an 18-35mm f/1.8. As such, it is difficult to compare.

Other possibilities could be poor quality control and "not so compatible third party firmware" Remember, this is a third party lens after all. Sigma does it by reverse enginneering.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 15 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (7 months ago)

I'm pretty sure if Sigma made an 18-300 f/0.95 lens that was 3 inches long was built out of unobtanium, weighed 3 grams, nailed focus on every shot, was sharp at all focal lengths across the frame and cost $35, that 75% of the people here would STILL find something to complain about.

6 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

Can I preorder that lens, please?
I won't complain, I promise!

3 upvotes
SETI
By SETI (7 months ago)

Wide angle is not wide enough! Bad lens! =)))

4 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (7 months ago)

Amen ...

1 upvote
BrettM2
By BrettM2 (7 months ago)

Too bad this lens has inconsistent focus issues.

0 upvotes
VaLeX
By VaLeX (7 months ago)

I'd buy this lens for indoors pictures of my kids. I need a wide and fast lens. My ideal lens would be a prime 18-20mm F2. But this zoom is also appealing. Sadly, the pictures in your gallery are not very relevant for my interests. So, can you guys go into a pub, in the evening, and take some pics of the people there? Please! I might even pay for a pint! No flash - just the indoor lights!

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
1 upvote
LauP
By LauP (7 months ago)

I don't have pub pictures, but these were taken in very poor lighting in a closed of city Street. Hope it helps:

http://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1lksqe/need_the_speed_sigma_1835mm_f18_dc_hsm_indepth/cc0y5db

3 upvotes
VaLeX
By VaLeX (7 months ago)

Thanks!

0 upvotes
Eric Ouellet
By Eric Ouellet (7 months ago)

Why those micro focus adjustment are necessary and would it be true for the new Canon EOS 70D also ?
The focus adjustment should be necessary on any lenses because it is the camera who read its and tell the objective to focus nearer or further.
How this could only affect this lenses ? Is this only a question of incompatibility between brands or could it be corrected by a firmware update ?

2 upvotes
Eric Ouellet
By Eric Ouellet (7 months ago)

I have the impression that you penalize the lens for a problem of the camera body itself (focus evaluation) ???

3 upvotes
gftphoto
By gftphoto (7 months ago)

It seemed a bit strange that in the DXO test article not a single Nikkor lens was included in the extensive list of comparison lenses.

1 upvote
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

DxOMark's article is titled "Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM A Canon mount lens review", which might explain the lack of Nikkor comparisons. Expect those to show up when DxOMark gets a Nikon mount version to test.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Daniel Bliss
By Daniel Bliss (7 months ago)

I think DXO also kind of borked their test of the Nikkor 17-55. Their perceptual resolution shows the 17-55 at only 6MP on the D7000, a performance that would leave it well short of 35mm film and no better on the D7000 than on the D200 which has very heavy anti-aliasing and 40 percent less resolution. I can tell you that isn't the case at all. I suppose there was something wrong with DXO's test — perhaps a D7000 AF system out of adjustment or something like that. I can only say that my own experience of the 17-55 leaves me very curious to see how it would perform with a D7100 — in other words, it's in the ballpark with the Sigma.

The other question, of course, is focusing accuracy out of the lab. f1.8 gets into some pretty demanding territory on the AF system so I'll be interested to hear how that pans out for people. The combination of the 17-55 and most Nikon bodies is finicky enough already; the AF on the body has to be PERFECTLY in adjustment to run that lens reliably.

2 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

DxOMark's lens testing doesn't rely on autofocus, but uses manual focus instead, carefully checked to ensure that the lens is optimally focused.

A far more likely reason for getting disappointingly low sharpness data would be that they may have tested a 'bad copy' of the lens.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

we are all human but I don't think people at DxOMark are stupid enough to use AF in their tests. MF on live view should be the standard for many years. only the sharpest shots will get processed and the highest number used.

btw, I only see bad copies of DX17-55/2.8, a good example of "good build, no good glass."

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

I agree with Daniel that the DxOMark test of the 17-55 Nikkor seems flawed to say the least. I owned the 17-55 f/2.8 a number of years ago pre-D7000 days, but remember it being bitingly sharp lens with extremely good color/contrast typically found in higher grade Nikkors.

Note that 17-55 f/2.8 performed extremely well in the Photozone and Lenstip resolution tests.

1 upvote
Dazed and Confused
By Dazed and Confused (7 months ago)

These comments have made me realise that lots of people don't understand what the 'standard' in standard zoom means....

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

it could mean different things and can be made clear with one word, standard aperture/grade or zoom range.

no problem unless some one call standard super high grade.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

A "standard zoom" traditionally goes from wide-to-short telephoto like the classic 24-70 f/2.8 FF zooms. The APS-C equivalents are the 17-50 or 17-55 f/2.8 lenses.

The Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 only goes from wide-to-normal (27-50 on Nikon/Sony, or 29-56 on Canon) and therein lies the confusion.

Since it lacks the telephoto focal lengths it would seem to be a more specialized, slightly less versatile lens than a traditional standard zoom.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (7 months ago)

This is crap. Who can define a standard zoom? For that, we need first to fix that standard. If you look at other manufactureres, a fast Zoom with such an aperture is always short in range, the Nikon 17-35/2.8 for example, the Tokina 11-16/2.8 is another one. The faster a zoom gets, the shorter the range. Doing a zoom of a displacement of more than 20 mm with such an aperture is a challenge, and imagine the size you need to do this.

So, if Sigma brings us a 18-35 with 1.8, one can only say, "hats off" it's a performance. Now, if they did a 18-55/1.8, it would be the size of 300/2.8 barrel, and I doubt that anyone would buy it. My only concern is that it is somewhat expensive, but, i will not buy it anyway, I prefer to invest that money in a huge prime with 1.8 or 1.4 aperture.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

it used to be 35-70mm before but makers have been pushing it wide and wider to 28-70 and 24-70 now.

18-35/1.8 is about 28-54/2.8 equiv. so only thing we may complain is the narrower range which makes it more "standard" than standard 24-70/2.8 ones.

2 upvotes
Dazed and Confused
By Dazed and Confused (7 months ago)

@Shamael

"the Nikon 17-35/2.8 for example, the Tokina 11-16/2.8 is another one."

But that's my point - those aren't standard zooms. They're both wide zooms - the first for Full Frame, the latter for APS-C.

1 upvote
vladimir vanek
By vladimir vanek (7 months ago)

hey, would "a premium aperture standard-range lens with standard wide-end and a bit shorter-than-standard tele-end" designation do? :)

0 upvotes
AmateurSnaps
By AmateurSnaps (7 months ago)

Can
"Physically rather large for a standard zoom"

And whats standard about a f1.8 18-35mm lens.

Nice review and a very impressive achievement by sigma. Shame the likes of Canon can't innovate on anything less than £10,000

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

f/2.8 zooms for 35mm format are good reference.

Sigma 24-70/2.8 is sold for less than half of C/N so price is not a special issue for this lens.

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

Just to tidy up the unexpected controversy over my use of the term 'standard zoom' - this is traditionally used for a zoom that covers the 'normal' focal length range (~28-35mm on APS-C), and so might plausibly used 'as standard' for everyday shooting. The 18-35mm fits within this category.

4 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

When is controversy ever unexpected on this site?

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

From the Lenstip review: "accuracy of the autofocus, our assessment is very positive". Any AF errors were less than 4%.

Note they tested it on a Canon 50D.

The Lenstip Con list for the Sigma 18-35 is appropriately short.

Any large aperture lens shot wide open, especially handheld will give occasional focus errors.

The Gold Award is cool but DPR's rather long list of "Cons" for this ground-breaking lens is unfortunate as Sigma truly deserves nothing but Kudos for.

5 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

The lens's AF accuracy is great if you sit in a studio and point it at high contrast, well-lit test charts. Much less so if you go out and actually take photos with it in the real world. Personally I think photographers should be more interested in the latter. YMMV.

7 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Valid point Andy. Lenses do need to be tested under lots of different types of lighting otherwise problems like the one you discovered are well... not discovered. As soon as you test two or more lenses that show the same issue then it starts to turn into a major issue.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

No my mileage is pretty much the same. The point is your review even talks about focus errors "wide-open" in "less than ideal conditions". But judging by the comments, the big takeaway from this review is that the 18-35 has an AF problem.

ALL lenses shot wide open in low-light have a lower accuracy hit rate related to the thin plane of focus. This "problem" is even greater on FF.

3 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

@marike6: "ALL lenses shot wide open in low-light have a lower accuracy hit rate related to the thin plane of focus."

Obviously I know that full well (chances are I've shot with more different lenses and systems than almost anyone commenting here), but in my judgement the 18-35mm has an unusually high misfocusing rate when shot wide open in real-world use. This is corroborated by my colleagues who've also used the lens. The limited depth of field is not all that there is to it here - it misfocuses more often, and more obviously, than a Canon EOS 6D + 24-70mm F2.8 shot side-by-side at F2.8.

6 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (7 months ago)

Relevance of AF accuracy in bad light

I frequently shoot with 35mm f/2 wide open. And I actually do shoot wide open more in less than ideal lighting, because then you need to. So AF in real life in low light to be accurate is important, as it would be a popular shooting condition for people who would buy such a lens.

Is repeatedly accurate focus in low light 35 mm f/2 in real world even possible?

Until a few months ago, I would have set no. With cameras I shot in the last decade I could not accomplish it. With my own dated DSLR AF was so bad wide open that I always focused manually with split screen. Works 100% with tripod and fixed target. In real life everything moves and I lived for a decade with more misses than hits.

Then I got a new camera and suddenly pretty much all my pictures are accurately focused. Bad light, wide open and moving subjects.

I was stunned. Now I would not accept less with new equipment at this price level. I guess that is what Andy is saying.

2 upvotes
Pitbullo
By Pitbullo (7 months ago)

How the heck can you have limited zoom range as a "con"? If you buy a 18-35mm, then that is what you get.
If you buy a 16mm prime, you cant say that it is a negative that it is too wide. It is what it is!

16 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

The lens doesn't exist in isolation. If you compare to other standard zooms that you might buy to put on your camera for everyday use - a 17-50mm F2.8, for instance - it has limited zoom range. If you go out and shoot with it, the limited compositional flexibility this imposes really is quite obvious.

The list of 'Cons' is simply things we find users may need to consider when making a purchasing decision. The whole idea is that you can look at them and decide whether they matter you to you. If not - no problem.

9 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (7 months ago)

But the 18-35 is not a Standard zoom, and there aren't ANY standard zooms with f/1.8 max apertures.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

18-35/1.8 is a standard f/2.8 equiv. zoom for APS-C SLR. Sigma did a great job that it's much better than small aperture 17-55/2.8 zooms from Nikon and Canon.

what's great is not the aperture, but a high quality wide-standard angle zoom for APS-S SLR which is the most difficult mount (that happened to become popular for some technical reasons we had more than a decade ago).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
DanielFjall
By DanielFjall (7 months ago)

Would you ever go and buy a 18-35mm zoom? Probably not. Unless it's a 1.8 throughout the whole range and has some superb optical performance - which makes one wish it stretched a bit further to perhaps 50mm, no? As much as I'd love to have this lens, the limited zoom range is a dealbreaker for me.

2 upvotes
webmiser
By webmiser (1 week ago)

I sometimes change my lens when I'm out shooting. I have been known to carry as many as five :o! With my 70D I can do 8-400mm with three lenses and still carry a 100mm macro and 85mm portrait.
My 'usually on' lens is now the 18-135mm STM. It has replaced the 24-105L as it is more versatile and handles movie clips much better.
I use the 18-35mm F1.8 for indoor stills and movies and have found no focussing issues. It is a fantastic lens in my view.
I have been a Sigma fan for a long time. QC issues have been unfortunate, but Sigma can usually fix them and if they can't they will replace the lens. They want to keep their customers. The recent offering from Sigma have been outstanding. I love the 35mm F1.4 which I use on my old 5D to give me amazingly sharp shots wide open.
In closing may I say that the DPR.com reviews seem to be pretty fair and accurate to me. I only read them after I've bought something, though :o)

0 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (7 months ago)

Good job in the AF tests IMO. Thanks

2 upvotes
Total comments: 319
12