Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 DG HSM II - Feedback

[DCR62]

I am thinking of getting one of these to take to Everest with me. Has anyone used one before and thoughts on it. Camera is a Canon 5D Mk 3

[ricktas]

I have one, the Nikon version. It is a great full frame widey at a very reasonable price. Like most of these lenses it has a very bulbous front element and therefore using filters with it is basically an impossibility, unless you want to spend a small fortune on a filter system specifically for the lens.

Also as with many other widey's of this ik, it suffers from lens flare if the bright light source (the sun) is in the shot. But thankfully it is often visible in the viewfinder when this occurs so you can recompose to eliminate or minimise it. I am a believer that lens flare can add to a photo in the right circumstances.

It probably is not as sharp as some of the brand name widey's that also run often to a lot more $$.

Am I happy with mine..hell yes.. is it perfect..no. But its a damn good lens and I have no issue recommending it.

[DCR62]

Thanks Rick. Thats what I was hoping for. It will really be a "one off" use lens as I am not much into that type of photography but dont want to "not" have one at Everest. Obviously couldnt justify the canon equivalent. I have the Tonkina 11-16mm but is only good on my Crop Sensor 60D

[arthurking83]

For the $s, I reckon it's unbeatable!

It's not the best UWA lens out there, but it's plenty good enough.

It's much much smaller and more transportable that any of the other UWA's out there for full frame(which is obviously so considering the aperture range!!)

Super duper sharp in the middle, and really just a bit mushy at the very far corners unless you're used to f/16. Even at f/16, it's still not what many consider to be super sharp.
But taking into consideration what you are taking images of with a UWA lens, do you really need to render every blade of grass, or every leaf in the trees sharply?
My theory is that if you need that, then you're not looking at the image so much as looking at each pixel's sharpness!

anyhow ..

.... Like most of these lenses it has a very bulbous front element and therefore using filters with it is basically an impossibility, unless you want to spend a small fortune on a filter system specifically for the lens.

....

You can do filters on the (relatively)cheap for this lens(unlike any other FF UWA lens!)
The filters themselves can cost a lot more than a pretty penny, over $150 at the least for Hitechs more for more expensive branded types. But you can get these cheap too if you look hard enough(for cheapo Chinese brands).

But the filter holder, you can (and I do) use the Samyang 14/2.8 filter holder on the Sigma.
It's a very slightly loose fitting fitment, but workable.
I got mine for about $40.

Natively, the Samyang filter holder uses some obscure 163mm Cokin filter width(which is limited in availability and type of filter).
Dunno about now, but back then there wasn't much out there in terms of filters.
With a very simple mod, using two strips of aluminium, I made it work with the much more common 150mm wide filter sets.
If you can use a drill to make holes, and to tap some screws into the (soft) aluminium .. it's an easy few minutes work. The only hard part is the exactness of the hole centres.

I have a set of two grad filters that I have a preference for for this type of lens .. they generally work well.

I'm hoping(maybe) to update to the f/4 Art version of this lens some time this year, just for the hell of it( actually mainly because my preference is for this type of photograph tho).
If I do that, I'd still keep the 12-24II lens too .. I find it hard to part with stuff that works well.