Sigma announce 18-35mm f1.8 lens...

SDK^ said:
I don't get this lens.

Sure the constant 1.8 aperture on a zoom is a world first but the focal range isn't useable on a crop body.
For many years people have been ditching the Canon 17-40L on crop bodies because it's not wide enough but now because a similar focal range lens has a wide aperture it's suddenly amazing.

Hmmm
Click to expand...

It's not suddenly amazing because of the range. The range is nothing new. The 17-55 is stlll being used by crop users all over because it's a stellar lens whilst the 18-55 kit lenses are doing their job just fine as mid zooms. What this lens offers is something completely new and I see it being hugely popular even if it comes at a cost.

The benefits to FF users are obviously much higher but still...
 
L0rdMike said:
Come to the Darkside we have the 14-24. :p

1424fq.jpg
Click to expand...

LOL - Come to the even darker dark side, we have the 12-24 :p

wp20130202001.jpg


Seriously though, it looks like a very good lens, Im trying to find out whether they are doing the dock for it on Pentax, as I can only find it listed for Canon and Nikon so far.
Congrats to Sigma for their pricing, very aggresssive
 
edgedemon said:
LOL - Come to the even darker dark side, we have the 12-24 :p



Seriously though, it looks like a very good lens, Im trying to find out whether they are doing the dock for it on Pentax, as I can only find it listed for Canon and Nikon so far.
Congrats to Sigma for their pricing, very aggresssive
Click to expand...

FYI that Pentax 12-24mm is only for crop cameras, Nikon also have a 12-24mm f4 for crop and a 10-24mm (and cannon a 10-22mm). I might be mistaken but I think the Pentax 12-24 is actually a Nikon designs that Nikon shared/sold, similarly the tamron 10-24 is a Nikon design.


No, the reason the Nikon 14-24 is so famous is that it covers the FF sensor and it is basically sharper than every single prime lens in existence that covers the wide end and makes the cannon 16-35 look like a plastic fisher rice you lens:D it is probably Nikon's most interesting lens, ultra wide angles are incredibly complex lenses, much harder designs than fast primes or super teles.
 
This could be what I've been after to give my trusty 400D a new shine. I think this focal length would be great for me, especially f1.8 all the way through. Might be able to take some indoor shots properly!
 
Lenstip also have an exceedingly positive review:
http://www.lenstip.com/368-Nikon_Nikkor_AF_18-35_mm_f_3.5-4.5D_IF-ED-lens_specifications.html

Very sharp lens by the looks of it, amazing.

If Sigma could come up with an 35-85mm f/1.8 or f/2.0 (possibly with OS) and a some fats wide primes of quality like their 35mm (say a 14mm f/2.8, 16mm f/1.8 and 24mm f/1.4) then the crop line up will be phenomenal.

Samyang have no released a 16mm f/2.0 for crop cameras, hopefully Sigma can do something similar.

I am way more tempted than ever to ditch FF plans and just buy a Nikon D7100- pro-AF covering almost the entire frame, solid sensor, combined with the latest crop lenses could be a stunning setup for nature and far cheaper than paying for a 500mm f/4.0!
 
Hmm. I'm going to be brutally honest... I can't see that big a market for it. 15-20mm shorter at the long end than popular walk about crop lenses, and no wider at the wide end either. OK so it's constant f/1.8 but I can't see that being enough.

It's too limiting unless your specific shots are always in this focal range. If they are, then wow what a lens for you. But I don't think many people would buy this as it's a fair amount of cash for a limited focal range. With this lens in a lot of people's bag, they would still want another lens for wider shots, and another one for longer general walk about, and then a telephoto zoom or longer prime as well. It overlaps too much. If they could have made it 12-35, or 14-35, or even 18-40 it would have been so much more desirable to crop DSLR users. I can't see it stealing sales from any other lenses because it doesn't really compete with anything else out there. This will be however why some buy it...unique. The only constant aperture f/1.8 zoom out there.
 
It definitely doesn't make a walk about lens, for that lenses like the Nikon 1685, Canon 15-85 have their purpose. This is more of an event camera, e.g. a wedding tog has this 18-35mm f/1.8 on a D7100 and 50/85mm prime on another.


i would prefer if it started at 16mm or even 15mm and it would be a big step back to go to 18mm for me (the 16mm end of my 16-85 is what makes the lens for me). but 35mm is certainly long enough. I rarely go that far as it is. The Nikon 35mm f/1.8 is popular for a reason against the 50mm f/1.8.




You also have to consider that selling point is the aperture. This lens is equivalent to owning an 18mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.8, 24mm f/1.8, 28mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/1.8 all in one single lens. All of those focal lengths are sold as prime lenses at those apertures except at the wide end you have to make do with f/2.8 typically.


As I said, the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 is incredibly popular, throw in a 24mm f/1.8 and 18mm f/1.8 for a reasonable some of money and this lens is a bargain AND offers something unique - fast and wide which is completely absent on all camera systems for crop sensors.



With any luck in the future they can find a way to stretch to a 16-35mm lens.
 
I think it's an awesome lens. As I don't need a backup camera anymore I'll be selling my 7D though. However if the 7D2 (or whatever they release) is decent and I pick one up, this lens will be first on my list. For me it would be a fantastic walk about lens in an urban environment. Out in wider spaces I'd pair it with a longer zoom.
 
For me I'd have this lens with a 60mm f/2 macro for portraits and macro (duh) plus a 70-200 f2.8. That would cover 99% of what I do and it's all suited to quite low light.

Beats having f2.8 through the whole range or loads of primes in terms of usability.
 
D.P. said:
It definitely doesn't make a walk about lens, for that lenses like the Nikon 1685, Canon 15-85 have their purpose. This is more of an event camera, e.g. a wedding tog has this 18-35mm f/1.8 on a D7100 and 50/85mm prime on another.


i would prefer if it started at 16mm or even 15mm and it would be a big step back to go to 18mm for me (the 16mm end of my 16-85 is what makes the lens for me). but 35mm is certainly long enough. I rarely go that far as it is. The Nikon 35mm f/1.8 is popular for a reason against the 50mm f/1.8.




You also have to consider that selling point is the aperture. This lens is equivalent to owning an 18mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.8, 24mm f/1.8, 28mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/1.8 all in one single lens. All of those focal lengths are sold as prime lenses at those apertures except at the wide end you have to make do with f/2.8 typically.


As I said, the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 is incredibly popular, throw in a 24mm f/1.8 and 18mm f/1.8 for a reasonable some of money and this lens is a bargain AND offers something unique - fast and wide which is completely absent on all camera systems for crop sensors.
R



B
With any luck in the future they can find a way to stretch to a 16-35mm lens.
Click to expand...


Yeah it is "like" having those lenses but how often do we see a zoom lens without compromise that is on par with equivalent primes throughout its range? Hardly ever because it's practically impossible to do. Maybe though, this lens could be sweet IQ wise.
 
jaybee said:
Yeah it is "like" having those lenses but how often do we see a zoom lens without compromise that is on par with equivalent primes throughout its range? Hardly ever because it's practically impossible to do. Maybe though, this lens could be sweet IQ wise.
Click to expand...

10 years ago I would agree with you but these days zooms are just as sharp if not sharper than most primes, e.g. the Nikon 14-24 is sharper than pretty much every prime over that focal length (except at 24mm).

The reviews of the 18-35 f/1.8 are showing it to be just as sharp as any prime lens.

You don't buy a prime lens because of IQ issues with zoom lens, you buy a prime lens in order to get a faster aperture -until now.
 
D.P. said:
10 years ago I would agree with you but these days zooms are just as sharp if not sharper than most primes, e.g. the Nikon 14-24 is sharper than pretty much every prime over that focal length (except at 24mm).

The reviews of the 18-35 f/1.8 are showing it to be just as sharp as any prime lens.

You don't buy a prime lens because of IQ issues with zoom lens, you buy a prime lens in order to get a faster aperture -until now.
Click to expand...

Well also size. Prime lenses tend to be lighter and less long than the equivalent zoom giving a more compact setup. I bet the Sigma 30mm prime is sharper than the 18-35mm @ 30mm. In fact, it's almost a given.
 
Last edited:
jaybee said:
Hmm. I'm going to be brutally honest... I can't see that big a market for it. 15-20mm shorter at the long end than popular walk about crop lenses, and no wider at the wide end either. OK so it's constant f/1.8 but I can't see that being enough.

It's too limiting unless your specific shots are always in this focal range. If they are, then wow what a lens for you. But I don't think many people would buy this as it's a fair amount of cash for a limited focal range. With this lens in a lot of people's bag, they would still want another lens for wider shots, and another one for longer general walk about, and then a telephoto zoom or longer prime as well. It overlaps too much. If they could have made it 12-35, or 14-35, or even 18-40 it would have been so much more desirable to crop DSLR users. I can't see it stealing sales from any other lenses because it doesn't really compete with anything else out there. This will be however why some buy it...unique. The only constant aperture f/1.8 zoom out there.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I disagree- I've been wanting an affordable wide-aperture lens around 18-24mm range, as far as I can see there isn't anything with AF, prime or otherwise (edit- for Canon). To get 18 and 35mm at f1.8 in one lens is extremely desirable. I think there's going to be massive demand.

Hopefully the retail copies are going to live up to the couple of review samples we've seen so far.
 
Last edited:
jaybee said:
Hmm. I'm going to be brutally honest... I can't see that big a market for it. 15-20mm shorter at the long end than popular walk about crop lenses, and no wider at the wide end either. OK so it's constant f/1.8 but I can't see that being enough.

It's too limiting unless your specific shots are always in this focal range. If they are, then wow what a lens for you. But I don't think many people would buy this as it's a fair amount of cash for a limited focal range. With this lens in a lot of people's bag, they would still want another lens for wider shots, and another one for longer general walk about, and then a telephoto zoom or longer prime as well. It overlaps too much. If they could have made it 12-35, or 14-35, or even 18-40 it would have been so much more desirable to crop DSLR users. I can't see it stealing sales from any other lenses because it doesn't really compete with anything else out there. This will be however why some buy it...unique. The only constant aperture f/1.8 zoom out there.
Click to expand...

This lens would be on the top of my list if I were interested in a crop body (or if a hypothetical "what would you buy if you had to start again with what you know" situation arose). 28mm to 50mm equiv. is 2/3rds of a classic 28/50/90mm setup (Sebastiao Salagado used a very similar 28/60/90 setup for most of his work prior to Genesis), and since it's a zoom you can also mimic many other prime pairings that have served photographers well over the years like 35/50 and 28/40. Myself, I find that 35mm by itself is just about perfect for general photography, and the 18/2 + 35/1.4 setup I've been using on my XPro 1 is very versatile. Simply looking at the zoom range tells me that it would be a good general-purpose lens for making photographs that look close to human vision, and then you take into account that it's a constant and usable f/1.8 - over a stop faster than the previous 'fast' 17-50/55s. A Tokina 11-16, this lens, and say a 70-200/2.8 or f/4 would cover 16-50/105-300mm equiv. while having f/2.8 at all points (or f/4.0), and as someone that's totally used to primes by this point, that focal range and aperture size is just amazing. The only downsides I see about this lens are that it's quite big/heavy and that it flares when working against the light.
 
jaybee said:
Well also size. Prime lenses tend to be lighter and less long than the equivalent zoom giving a more compact setup. I bet the Sigma 30mm prime is sharper than the 18-35mm @ 30mm. In fact, it's almost a given.
Click to expand...

Well, according to lenstip you are completely wrong.


http://www.lenstip.com/374.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_18-35_mm_f_1.8_DC_HSM__Image_resolution.html

http://www.lenstip.com/370.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_30_mm_f_1.4_DC_HSM_Image_resolution.html

Co paring image center, the 18-35mm at f/1.8 gets 45-53llpm at 35mm, 48-55llpm in the shorter range. Stopping down to f4.0 increases resolution to the 55llpm level at all focal lengths, a record on lenstips.

the 35mm f/1.4 wide open only get 35llpm which is not great reall, will hit 51llpm when stopped down.

Looking at the edges, the 18-35llpm goes from 36llpm wide open to 44llpm. The 35mm f1.4 is a very poor and unacceptable wide open, 24llpm, but gets to 47llpm at f5.6.


Soon, the 18-35 is clearly significantly sharper at all focal lengths at all apertures cross the entire frame.
 
Considerably more convenient than carrying three primes around and swapping lenses every five minutes too. Looking forward to getting one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom