15-30 on full frame.

Started Aug 22, 2008 | Discussions
AdamScot Contributing Member • Posts: 602
15-30 on full frame.

Everything I'm reading suggests that for corner to corner image quality, I should get a Sigma 15-30, rather than a Canon 17-40 (16-35 is out of budget). (I realize I may have to work to find a good copy).

Is this the general consensus?

-- hide signature --

Adam

 AdamScot's gear list:AdamScot's gear list
Canon PowerShot S70 Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x II +9 more
gdanmitchell
gdanmitchell Veteran Member • Posts: 7,730
Re: 15-30 on full frame.

No.

Where did you get the idea that this is a "general consensus?"

Dan

AdamScot wrote:

Everything I'm reading suggests that for corner to corner image
quality, I should get a Sigma 15-30, rather than a Canon 17-40
(16-35 is out of budget). (I realize I may have to work to find a
good copy).

Is this the general consensus?

ed rader Veteran Member • Posts: 8,393
mediocre at best.........

loud, slow focussing, bulbous front element and that yellowish color cast.

better check your sources :).

ed rader

-- hide signature --
 ed rader's gear list:ed rader's gear list
Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Sigma 15mm F2.8 EX DG Diagonal Fisheye Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM +3 more
Symple Contributing Member • Posts: 521
Great lens, unreliable though.

I'm on third aperture repair. Best on 1.3, but I use it on 1.0 too. I stay in the 15-20 range, and will likely buy a 20 prime since I like that best on all three sensor sizes for wide (20/26/32 or something like that) and hopefully won't have all the down time. Very sharp for a zoom though, and fall-off is an issue for some, but I like it actually for but is corrected fairly easily. It is pretty large, and I don't want to invest in the gelatin filter system so prime is where I am going from 15-30. Lost the lens cover twice now, but still easy to buy replacement. I would honestly "try" to find the perspective you want and find the prime closest to it simply for the filter options.

boudro_ Senior Member • Posts: 1,190
17-40

17-40 is a great lens. sure, there are stories about duds, but I get sharp corner at f/4 on my 5D.

 boudro_'s gear list:boudro_'s gear list
Canon EOS 5D Samsung NX210 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM +6 more
OP AdamScot Contributing Member • Posts: 602
Re: 15-30 on full frame.

gdanmitchell wrote:

No.

Where did you get the idea that this is a "general consensus?"

I didn't. That's why I asked, as I only have info from reviews, such as on 16-9.net, so far. I was after a wider opinion.

 AdamScot's gear list:AdamScot's gear list
Canon PowerShot S70 Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x II +9 more
Kevin Lyness Regular Member • Posts: 431
Re: 15-30 on full frame.

I had a 15-30 and switched to the Sigma 12-24 and found the 12-24 to be both sharper and to have much less CA. Not sure you need to go that wide, but the 12-24 is a good performer on my 5D.

-- hide signature --
 Kevin Lyness's gear list:Kevin Lyness's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T2 Nikon D850
bionet Senior Member • Posts: 1,072
Re: 15-30 on full frame.

AdamScot wrote:

Everything I'm reading suggests that for corner to corner image
quality, I should get a Sigma 15-30, rather than a Canon 17-40
(16-35 is out of budget). (I realize I may have to work to find a
good copy).

Is this the general consensus?

It depends very much on your copy if the corners are good or not.

I returned the first one I bought on the net because it had extreme field curvature. Either the center of the corners were sharp but never both, even on APS-C.

I tested 2 more copies in a local store, which were much better, and bought one. I mostly use it on my 350D. Made a few with film (don't own FF digital yet) but I don't think I scanned any of these. I did see samples of a good copy on a 5D at a German site when I did my research before choosing the lens, and the corner sharpness was quite good.

I will likely continue to use this lens on the 5D Mk2 or D700, whichever I'm going to get next. As long as the 16-35 has the same complex "moustache" type distortion, I see no reason to spend that much money for it. For Nikon I would probably get the 14-24 though.

p.s. Autofocus is very unreliable, typical for Sigma on Canon bodies. I have a split-image focusing screen and the next camera will have live view, so this is not an issue for me.

Jon Laye Senior Member • Posts: 2,485
Re: 15-30 on full frame.

For sharpness the 15-30 is excellent. There is some softness in the corners, a bit more then the Canon 17-40 F4, but I think the Sigma is a bit sharper in the center area. The Sigma is very flare prone while the Canon 17-40 is extremely resistant. BUT, nothing optically can alter the poor handling of the Sigma. The switch/clutch AF.MF system is very poor. I traded my 15-30 in for the 17x40 even before I saw the first images from the 17-40.

Jon

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads