Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 Reviews

These were the pre-purchase reasons I personally decided to buy this lens:

· It sat well priced with my healthy but balanced hobby budget.

· It had, on paper at least, the ability to capture more images in low light, hand held.

· It cast a full frame image circle (making it more future proof and able to be shared with my film based camera).

· Its 24mm-135mm focal length would be good for 80% of the subjects I shoot, minimising lens changes and therefore dust on the sensor.

· It shared a 77mm filter with other lenses in its relative price and quality range, such as the SIGMA 135mm–400mm APO DG and SIGMA 10mm-20mm DC, suitably complementing a kit covering common focal lengths with no overlap.

· It has a manually selectable aperture ring (backwards compatible with my old SLR).

· It has internal focusing, making it more filter friendly.


Whilst researching this lens, I figured that the poor reports on sharpness and build quality etc. were a result of stepping up in the world of expectations, those above that of kit lenses. I reasoned that a lens of this price and specifications should not logically be compared (as some have) to the likes of “L” series lenses; and with this in mind, would likely see a big improvement on what I had experienced in my photographic infancy.

This position proved to be true of build quality, easily beating my kit lens when it came to the smoothness of zoom travel and general “feel”. Unfortunately I must agree with them on sharpness; people will likely consider purchasing this lens for flash-less-indoor-“party” type use, thanks to its bright f2.8 aperture, but wide-open images are too soft to be anything but “ok” snapshots. If you are on a tight budget and you are specifically looking to shoot in low light, you may consider buying a fast pre-loved prime. That said, if you are able to stop down to around F8 results are more than acceptable.

After 5 months of use, my advice:

· If you can, don't pay retail price for this lens; this should alleviate some expectations.

· If you have the money and image quality is your primary concern, this is probably not the lens for you.

· Compared with “kit” digital only lenses, this is a big and heavy lens.

· Build quality is generally good, zoom is smooth, manual focus ring is OK; but my copy creeps when shooting up, down or carried around.

· Best not to consider this lens for its wide-open abilities, at these apertures it is VERY SOFT.

· If you intend to shoot a lot of portraiture shots, you may be pleased with the soft-feathered affect to edges produced in images, especial from RAW conversions at wider apertures.

· Sharp images can be obtained at all focal lengths if you are able to stop down to around F8.

· Being bright or “fast”, does make for easier manual focus, which is handy because auto focus is poor in anything but the brightest of light on my Pentax *istD.

· It has fairly good “macro” (not strictly correct I know) abilities.

Conclusion

Value for money is not exclusively about absolute quality, nor does it have to be the cheapest price; it is the consideration of these things in balance. Do I like this lens? YES! Would I recommend it? Not specifically, make up your own mind based on your needs.

Reasonable quality, a lens which fits in well with my intended focal line-up, cheap enough to use without fear, wherever I intend to take photos……..

A very good lens from the specification and surprisingly good optical quality obtained when stepping down to f4.5. Small, light weight comparing to big guns.

These 24-135 lenses are getting hard to find. Tamron and Sigma made them for most popular mounts, Nikon made its own 24-120 and Canon made its own 28-135. All AF for film cameras and all good quality. I have the Nikon and have recently bought the Sigma in Pentax fit. Both the Nikon and the Sigma PAF work on older mechanical SLRs which is a plus for me.

On my Samsung GX10 the field of view is 36-202 which is a good all-round range. You can focus as close as 20 inches. Distortions, vignetting and chromatic aberrations are well controlled. Focus is good, though a bit slow on the Samsung. Centre sharpness is excellent even at maximum aperture but you should stop down a bit to ensure corner sharpness. I think it is very similar to the Nikon in performance but perhaps not quite so good in resolution. The Canon 28-135 which I also have beats both.