Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG A-mount lens review by Phil Wood
|Phil Wood#44275 date: May-2-2019|
flare control: 4
|ownership:||I own this lens|
|compared to:||Sigma - 10-20 F4-5.6 EX DC|
Minolta - AF 20mm f2.8 RS
Minolta - AF 24mm f2.8
Sigma - 24 Super Wide II F2.8
Sony - DT 16-50 F2.8 SSM
Tamron - 16-300 F3.5-6.3 Di II PZD MACRO
Sony - AF DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM
Sony - AF DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM II
Minolta - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 D
Sony - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Sony - AF DT 18-250 F3.5-6.3
Minolta - AF 24-50 F4
Minolta - AF 24-85 F3.5-4.5
Minolta - AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 D
|price paid:||135 GBP|
|positive:||Wide! Lack of distortion. Wide.|
|negative:||Soft corners. Can't use filters.|
|comment:||First impressions after one cloudy day:|
This is the widest lens I have - too wide as a walkabout in my comfort zone - but it will prove invaluable in capturing architectural shots in restricted spaces. It is not without its problems, even at f8 the corners are pretty soft at 12mm. Nevertheless I give it 4.5 - the centre is good, and what 12mm lens is perfect in the corners?
On the plus side distortion is well controlled for such a wide lens - even at 12mm the inevitable barrel distortion is both less than I expected and easily corrected in PP. If only those corners were better!
There is some vignetting but, again, this is easily corrected.
I have numerous zooms that overlap at the longer end of this zoom range, but most are either APS 16 or 18mm (no wider or less wide) or FF 24mm none of which do the same job.
The real comparison is the Sigma 10-20mm (APS: 15-30mm 35mm equiv) which goes wide, but that extra 3mm really counts! I feel the need to recheck the 10-20's performance, but my impression is that it is sharper, just not as wide. Both Minolta primes (20 & 24mm) are better - but this zoom is not really about the 20-24mm end.
In summary, this lens is all about the 12-15mm end, given my budget I am very happy with what it provides.