Your thoughts on: Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 ART for Pentax
Hi guys,
One of these lenses came across me and it's a bit pricey (400€) 2nd hand.
I have always thought that this is a good lens that could replace my workhorse Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 hsm and yet the Sigma is a great lens I adore even thought not many seem to consider it as if, or give it the credit it deserves.
My Sigma is (sorry my 17-50mm) is getting "old", which mens has had a lot of use and abuse and works great but you can feel it.
Now, the range 18-35mm will definitely mean for me loosing 1mm extra in the lower end and loose 15mm on the long end.
Now the question is: Is this worthy? Does the ART bring so much more quality to the photos that makes it worthy?
I have read both that AF can be slow or good, and I am confused.
I must admit I do have too the DA 35mm f2.4 and the Limited 21mm f3.2 which I like or love (I have been in South Corea and most likely every photo was taken with this lens because it's handy) but maybe for sports it's a bit of a mess. I can do with it, no problems, and yet I feel a bit that don't.
Sorry, it's just one of those things, right? xD
So, have you ever had a copy of the ART Sigma 18-35mm lens? What are your thought about it? Love it? Hate it? Do you have any reasons why?
Thanks !!!
I've owned that lens for a while now. It is still to this day the most I've paid for a lens, 580EUR new about 5yrs ago now. I've never really liked this lens mainly because it was probably over hyped somewhat, my expectations were raised to near giddy heights. The fact is it's a good sharp lens used properly, but unless you're shooting astro (which it apparently is great at due to how it handles coma) anything below F2.5/2.8 could be a let down. I've personally never liked the bokeh or transition from in focus to out of focus areas, it seemed busy and rough to my eye. It is also a heavy beast. I do like the colours though, some sample pics below using the K-5 and K-70. The lens autofocuses a lot better on the K-70 than the K-5, so I reckon what you've heard of AF depends on the camera or maybe the photographer.
Uploaded files:
Quote from kcphotogeek on September 18, 2023, 4:05 pmI've owned that lens for a while now. It is still to this day the most I've paid for a lens, 580EUR new about 5yrs ago now. I've never really liked this lens mainly because it was probably over hyped somewhat, my expectations were raised to near giddy heights. The fact is it's a good sharp lens used properly, but unless you're shooting astro (which it apparently is great at due to how it handles coma) anything below F2.5/2.8 could be a let down. I've personally never liked the bokeh or transition from in focus to out of focus areas, it seemed busy and rough to my eye. It is also a heavy beast. I do like the colours though, some sample pics below using the K-5 and K-70. The lens autofocuses a lot better on the K-70 than the K-5, so I reckon what you've heard of AF depends on the camera or maybe the photographer.
Thank you very much,
That is a very accurate piece of information I'll keep on mind.
Yes I have heard about the weight, and I am also hyped about the f1.8 and the ART part of the lens, which I should probably not be to be honest.
As said before, it's not going to happen in September as I was on holidays very far away and it's been expensive. So that will give me time for a second thought.
Yet very beautiful set of images 🙂
Quote from kcphotogeek on September 18, 2023, 4:05 pmI've owned that lens for a while now. It is still to this day the most I've paid for a lens, 580EUR new about 5yrs ago now. I've never really liked this lens mainly because it was probably over hyped somewhat, my expectations were raised to near giddy heights. The fact is it's a good sharp lens used properly, but unless you're shooting astro (which it apparently is great at due to how it handles coma) anything below F2.5/2.8 could be a let down. I've personally never liked the bokeh or transition from in focus to out of focus areas, it seemed busy and rough to my eye. It is also a heavy beast. I do like the colours though, some sample pics below using the K-5 and K-70. The lens autofocuses a lot better on the K-70 than the K-5, so I reckon what you've heard of AF depends on the camera or maybe the photographer.
The odd thing is that while you posted a less than favourable mini-review, your sample images make me want to buy one! haha
Quote from grover on September 18, 2023, 8:31 pmQuote from kcphotogeek on September 18, 2023, 4:05 pmI've owned that lens for a while now. It is still to this day the most I've paid for a lens, 580EUR new about 5yrs ago now. I've never really liked this lens mainly because it was probably over hyped somewhat, my expectations were raised to near giddy heights. The fact is it's a good sharp lens used properly, but unless you're shooting astro (which it apparently is great at due to how it handles coma) anything below F2.5/2.8 could be a let down. I've personally never liked the bokeh or transition from in focus to out of focus areas, it seemed busy and rough to my eye. It is also a heavy beast. I do like the colours though, some sample pics below using the K-5 and K-70. The lens autofocuses a lot better on the K-70 than the K-5, so I reckon what you've heard of AF depends on the camera or maybe the photographer.
The odd thing is that while you posted a less than favourable mini-review, your sample images make me want to buy one! haha
Yeah right? I thought the same 🙂
I think there's a lot of positives about the lens I mentioned that it's sharp and has good colour. Question is do you get value out of the constant F1.8 vs the lighter more versatile 17-50mm F2.8. I think the pics I shared show nice colour and sharpness. The picture of the car headlight show the bokeh and focus transition I don't like, but that's obviously subjective.
The pics above were taken on the same weekend. I took my K-70 w/Sigma 18-35mm and the Lumix G7 w/14-42mm F3.5-5.6 for a cliff walk and stumbled upon a vintage car show in the town nearby. When reviewing the pics from the weekend I found it hard distinguish between the 2 combos. Considering my Lumix with kit lens brand new cost 5EUR less than the Sigma lens only the week before it was a stark revelation.
I agree the bokeh doesn't look great in the headlight or tail light photo. I wasn't sure if the very bright backgrounds partly caused that? Does the bokeh ever look OK from that lens?
I really like my Sigma 17-50 f2.8. I wish there was an equivalent lens ( price/performance ) for full frame.
