Reviews and Problems with Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL /HSM
Showing 1-4 of 4
NO FILTERS ALLOWED........
5 March 2013
Summary: I have never bought a lens that wouldn't allow the use of at least a UV/Haze filter. This lens doesn't have the capability of allowing any filters. Going back tomorrow. Don't care how much more Nikon's lens is but this is just stupid.
Summary: I ordered one of this despite that I know Sigma QA problem. This is just a deal I can't pass. I have a Canon 16-35L but at 16mm, the distortion was not acceptable for video. I studied the distortion chart carefully and at 17mm this lens is as good as my 16-35L at 21mm which both have little distortion. I need a wider angle view than 21mm since my company uses it for aerial video demo.
Conclusion: Agai, lack of Sigma's QC: i bought one second hand, but this lens is a lemon, you can throw it away. The lens was soft overall no matter what i used, really bad till f7.1, from f8 till f22 was overall soft. I think HSM doesn't exists in this lens because the 15-30EX without HSM was faster than this copy of mine. What i can say if you don't need a full frame lens you better buy the Sigma 10-20DC lens...
Cons: lack of Sigma's QC, lens is soft overall, slow AF
fotographer "It is not soft, it is hyperfocal", Amazon
6 May 2009
Summary: This is my story of Sigma 12-24 lens for Canon. How come I always end up shooting on the wide or long end of my 28-70 zoom? I also wanted to go wider than my Canon EF 20mm f/2.8 USM Wide Angle Lens for Canon SLR Cameras . Corners on Canon's 20mm were all smeared on until you stopped down to f16, which is the only usable aperture if you want edge to edge sharpness. So after lots of research I ordered Sigma. I was hoping to hit a jackpot and have a good sample.