Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC MACRO Lens

  • 14-08-2009 12:04pm
    #1
    DadaKopf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,731 ✭✭✭


    Thinking of buying this as an alternative to the much more expensive Canon 17-55 EF-S Ultrasonic.

    Any experiences of this lens?

    I'm also looking for a wider prime.


Comments

  • #2
    pete4130
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,944 ✭✭✭pete4130


    I had that lens a few years ago on my Nikon D200 and it was and is one ofthe best lenses I owned. It did everything I asked of it and more. 2.8 all the way thourhg, sharp at all focal lengths and at 2.8, close focusing with the macro capabilities (although not a true macro lens as it is a bit too wide but the close focusing ability of the lens allows you to get some nice angles and veiwpoints from being able to focus so close!). I'd totally recommend it if it's within your budget.

    Maybe consider the Canon 17-40 f/4? I know its a stop slower but it is a brilliant lens. A guy I work with has one and it's great. I'm not sure of the price difference with the Sigma though? The 17-40 f/4 is also a full frame lens so if/when you upgrade i the future to a full frame camera you'll be future proof'd!??!?


  • #3
    DadaKopf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,731 ✭✭✭DadaKopf


    Yeah, I really want the wider aperture. The lens does get good reviews elsewhere. Shame that it's not 17-55 to compete directly with the Canon EF-S 17-55. The Sigma is within my budget, the Canon isn't, but I suppose I can sell the Sigma and upgrade if needs be.

    My only concern is I mightn't be able to get telephoto enough with it, or just wide enough. I have a 50mm EF, so that can do for my 75mm range, but I might find it's not quite wide enough. Even a wide prime (wide aperture, cheap) for FF or cropped sensor would be fine.


  • #4
    DadaKopf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,731 ✭✭✭DadaKopf


    Also: Are there implications with these lenses in terms of TTL flash metering. My Metz I used for my old EOS film camera doesn't work with it, so presumably I need a digital camera-specific one. I'm also interested in handheld flash, what's the story with that?


  • #5
    pete4130
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,944 ✭✭✭pete4130


    The lens worked fine on my D200 with TTL. I didn't have a flashgun that was compatable with my D200 so I can't say abotu flashguns. I just used to shoot and adjust flash output as needed. It's about a 29mm equiveleant on 35mm format which should be wide enough for most uses.

    I had the sigma 50-150mm 2.8 to accompany the 18-50 and it was a rcacking lens as well although I didn't use it enough.


Advertisement