Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM A-mount lens reviews
reviews found: 23
 Phil Wood#47070 date: Mar-25-2025 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma - 12-24 F4.5-5.6 II DG HSM Sigma - 12-24 F4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG |
| price paid: | 110 GBP |
| positive: | Range, range, range Size & weight |
| negative: | I guess the real negative is lack of choice - there is no alternative in APS-C. Filter use is very limited. |
| comment: | This is a one-off for A-mount APS-C, no other lens goes as wide. In full frame you have the equivalent 12-24mm range from two Sigma offerings, one of which I have (HSM) and one I dropped onto a stone cathedral floor (RIP). I bought the 8-16 because the 12-24 is larger than I like to carry just in case it could come in handy. I always pack it if I know I am visiting a cathedral or some other grand interior, but it usually gets left at home. Perhaps a smaller version will be with me more often? Only time will tell. The strength of this lens is the range and its remarkably good rectilinear correction. My only other 8mm lens is a fairly extreme fisheye, this one presents near straight lines, not perfect, but very good. A notable disadvantage is with filters, there is no filter thread on the lens, which is very convex. Instead there is a collar that slides over the fixed petal hood; the collar has a filter thread (also used for a snap-on filter). So filters can be mounted - but only with extreme vignetting. Adapted on an E-mount body you can, of course, use snap-in filters in the camera. Sharpness is mixed, unsurprisingly the corners are way worse than the centre, but the centre is very good. Colour rating is not something I pay much attention to, it isn't 'Minolta', perhaps a bit too vibrant? Build is good, the HSM motor is quiet and AF is good. Distortion - I give it 5 because of the impressive job it does at correnting the extreme distortion one expects at this focal length. Flare control is good, quite impressive - an image I captured shooting into the sun seemed to have a lot of veiling viewed in my A77 viewfinder, but was much better when I viewed it on my PC. CA - Impressive - I took the hackneyed (but nice) shot up through the tree tops and couldn't see any CA on the bare brances/twigs. Conclusion - an impressive lens, if somewhat specialised, how often do you really need to go this wide? |
| Pascalll#39912 date: Aug-9-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 10-20 |
| price paid: | 500EUR |
| positive: | - extreme wide angle - good price - ideal for architecture |
| negative: | - picturing townsquares give weird results, in the side everything is bending to the center |
| comment: | I had the Sigma 10-20 before, but sold it because the results with it were quite average... but the possiblities of this lens are so great. |
| SineQuaNon#38898 date: Jul-10-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL1650 |
| price paid: | 700 USD (new) |
| positive: | - Extreme wide-angle, widest available on APS-C - Rectilinear - Reasonably priced, even when new - Fairly sturdy build |
| negative: | - Not able to use filters natively, due to lens shape/design - Out-of-focus areas look pretty nasty - Significant distortion, though generally only apparent in architectural images - Lens flare can be a problem |
| comment: | Even though this lens has some significant disadvantages, the extreme width and unique perspective this lens can offer more than made up for the negatives. I've been able to create some images that I just simply wouldn't have been able to with any other piece of glass. If you rock an APS-C camera, and truly have a need for ridiculously wide angles, this is the lens for you. I've uploaded some sample images in the image thread to give you an idea of how I've been able to use this lens. |
| wus#13230 date: Apr-14-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 14mm f3.5; Sony Zeiss 16-80 @ 16mm; the 8-16mm is much better than the old 14mm f3.5, but not as good as the Sony Zeiss |
| price paid: | 500 EUR, almost new |
| positive: | very good overall image quality for a zoom with this focal range; fast, silent HSM autofocus; close focussing to 24 cm (10 in), or 10 cm (4 in) from lens front; does not need much stopping down; 2 part lens cover can be taken apart, if only the front cap is removed, the part remaining on the lens renders a near-circular picture @ 8mm resembling circular fisheye picture; good build quality |
| negative: | rather slow, maximum aperture only f4.5 to 5.6; lens hood not detachable; mounting ("normal", screw-on) filters is not possible, there no filter insert at rear either; lens cover attachment with felt inside the cover, not a very durable solution, starts coming off already and gets in the way |
| comment: | Coming from my old Sigma 14mm f3.5 I was delighted by the 8-16mm's optical quality. When I bought it I had only my a55 where it produces great pictures, with good sharpness and contrast. Later when I bought my first A77 I noticed that when I zoom in to pixel level it gets a little blurry, specifically at the wide end in the corners. However it is still very good at normal viewing sizes. I love the extreme focal range that this lens offers, together with good optical properties. It allows to take pictures that were not possible before. In architectural photopgraphy I "abuse" it also as a shift lens to avoid converging vertical lines, by holding the cameras (nearly) level and later cropping the picture. |
| jvsanchez#12124 date: Feb-6-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | I don't really have anything else this wide that I can compare it to, other than the Sigma 4.5/2.8 Fish |
| price paid: | 500 USD (KEH - LN-) |
| positive: | - great build - ultra wide - HSM - plenty of metal bits |
| negative: | - integrated hood -> no filters - weird lens cap design (like the Sigma 4.5/2.8 Fish) |
| comment: | Sharpness: The DOF is huge, and the final image is plenty sharp. Color: Typical sigma colors. I boost them a little in PP to make them pop like the colors from Sony/Minolta lenses. FAR less purple fringing than the 4.5/2.8 at the frame edges. Build: Very nice. Strangely this lens isn't EX - though when it was first released I believe it was - but its definitely built like one of Sigma's top level lenses. It's heavy, solid, and has metal hood petals. The front element is gigantic, and retracts into the lens as the focal length increases. The weird lens cap design is something that's also on the 4.5 Fish, and I hate it. I don't understand why the lens cap is actually separate from the adapter ring; it should all just be one piece that slips on and off. YMMV. Distortion: Excellent for a lens with such a wide FOV. I've only gotten it to show at 8mm by moving the lens around and/or framing a certain way. Flare: I've had some veiling flare and sunspots at 8mm, which is to be expected considering the size of the front element. Overall though, it's well controlled. TL;DR - Overall If you're going wide on APS-C, you might as well go all the way. If you don't need a fast 2.8 aperture, skip the Tokina 11-16, and if you don't need the ultra fast 1.8 aperture, skip the Sigma 18-35. The FOV of this lens at 8mm with the right scene, light, and composition will blow your mind. Definitely worth the cost. |
| keith_h#11289 date: Aug-3-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-105 (only at 16mm) |
| price paid: | 650 aud new |
| positive: | Wide, sharp, not too big/heavy, well made. |
| negative: | Cost of filters/filter holder. http://www.stockholmviews.com/sigma_8-16/sigma-8-16mm-filters.html The Lucroit holder is pricy but superb. |
| comment: | A solid lens that works as expected. No build quibbles from me. On the hood/lens cap arrangement my view is that it works fine. I'm unsure why anyone would want to use screw in filters on a lens this wide anyway. ND grads in holders might be another thing though, I am yet to check that out. I have compared it to my 16-105 which vignettes at 16mm. No such issues with the Sigma even down to 8mm which is exactly what you expect. I have selected 4 for colour. I am still working on this aspect of the lens. Its not the same as my Sony/Minolta lenses and it's quite acceptable - just slightly different. I think so anyway. I'll provide an update when I have had further experience in the use of this lens. UPDATE: March 2015 Well I still have this lens and use it a lot. My initial impressions remain and it still produces fine images. Its not much of an update but it does confirm the initial impressions. If you are in the market for an ultrawide zoon, definately check this lens out. |
| lupponne#10794 date: Dec-21-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | sony 11-18, sigma 10-20 , tokina 11-16 |
| price paid: | 765 USD NEW |
| positive: | Wide, fun, solid build |
| negative: | Distortion but normal for this kind of lens |
| comment: | This is my first impression from picture made inside! i will update! I made micro adjustment , -2, on a77, still not so sharp, i can say is far from what i want. Nice fit with A77. Update: I did microadjustment , -2,and now is better. Still big wide angle :) update ##: i went to calibrate my copy with a77..now is very fast and SHARP :) |
| slawrencephoto#10646 date: Nov-3-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Not compared to any other lens |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Excellent indoor lens Excellent candid lens for all types of photography Fun to use Excellent IQ Very sharp between F8 and F11 |
| negative: | Cannot fit a CP |
| comment: | I have had a lot of fun with this lens and it has spent most of its time attached to my A77. It is a shame that I am having to let it go as I am going full frame. Si |
| CharlesMorrison#10611 date: Oct-21-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 28mm prime Kit lenses to 18mm |
| price paid: | 579 USD (used) |
| positive: | If you want to go wider, this is the lens to get. |
| negative: | Will Flare - Watch for it |
| comment: | This a rectilinear wide angle lens, but distortion is still prevalent and that is expected. Creates beautiful landscapes once you learn to see in the way that the lens sees the world. Put a subject in the foreground and you'll have a winning composition! Will not focus in the pre-dawn light, so be sure to know where infinity focus is. Expect soft background until you close the aperture down to F16 or F22 when focusing on your foreground subject. Filters: Utilize a Cokin X-Pro system with a 77mm adapter slipped over the hood or "GO ALL IN" and get a Lucroit / HiTech 165mm system ! You could use 100mm filter system too, if you do not use 8mm, 9mm, 10mm or 11mm. Hand-holding a filter in front of the lens may give poor results with light reflecting back past the petal hood. If you want W_I_D_E, this lens delivers! |
| jovoorthan#10408 date: Jul-26-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | minolta 11-18 (really overrules this one in all aspects) sony 18-250 sony 18-55 sony 18-70 |
| price paid: | 600 euro's (new) |
| positive: | - Ultra wide - Good overall sharpness - Distortion is very acceptable, it's ultra wide so of course it will deliver distorted images - build quality is great - focus speed is excellent |
| negative: | - strange lens hood - no screwable filters possible - quite heavy |
| comment: | Excellent lens for creative shots. I've owned minolta's 11-18 for some years, and this one is a superb successor for the old minolta. Really happy with it. |
| profhankd#10227 date: May-20-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Many; most similar is Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 (which is perhaps better for casual users) |
| price paid: | 675 USD (new) |
| positive: | Rectilinears do not get any wider (no real competitors); very sharp center from wide open; HSM focus |
| negative: | Autofocus fails on NEX-7+LA-EA1 and is unreliable in general; physically long; distortion visible near 8mm; awkward cap; a lens that is hard to use well, but well worth learning to use |
| comment: | Another outstanding ultrawide zoom from Sigma. Overall, unlike the 10-20mm, one needs to learn how to use this lens to get the most from it. If you just set it to 8mm and shoot like you would with any other lens, you will get shots that look like the subject was too far away. You need to actively seek-out unusual perspectives, and the rear LCD comes in handy for letting you see what the camera sees when your face cannot get there. This lens does give a much more ordinary perspective around 16mm, but I think the 10-20mm will give most casual photographers a higher keeper rate. That said, the center sharpness of the 8-16mm would allow significant cropping to save many too-distant shots, especially with a 24MP sensor. Unlike the 10-20mm, which needs to be stopped down a little, this lens is very sharp in the center wide open. Stopping down helps edges and hurts the center. The corners never quite catch up to the center at 8mm, but everything is more than acceptably sharp by around f/8. I've found myself often using this lens at f/14-f/22 to get even sharpness on everything across the frame at all distances -- but your sensor and the lens front (yes, things on the lens front are nearly in focus!) need to be absolutely spotless to get away with that and not have to go removing little dust shadows in post processing... a little unsharp masking is also useful to restore the sharpness that diffraction took away. Depth of field (DoF) seems less as you move away from the center at 8mm... not an effect that I saw on any other lens. Colors seem very intense, but ultrawides do that. Build is usual Sigma, lightweight yet solid. I do not care that it cannot take a filter, but the curvature and the fixed hood do make it harder to get a lenspen to the edges. The cap assembly needs to be aligned just right to put it back on the lens, which is a little annoying. The built-in hood does keep you from accidentally pushing the lens into objects you are photographing. ;) Distortion is about 3% at 8mm, which is good for everything but architecture and really impressive for such a wide lens. Distortion is negligible between 12-16mm. It is hard to get the lens to flare, but when it does you can get brightly colored dots. They are easy to edit out, but disturbing when present. I've also gotten a bit of a ring around the sun in a few photos, but flare is really well controlled. Despite the short focal length, focus does indeed matter. On my A55, the HSM is very smooth and quiet, but no faster to focus than screw-driven lenses like the 10-20mm. Manual focus with peaking works well on both my NEX-5 and NEX-7. It will autofocus s-l-o-w-l-y using an LA-EA1 on my NEX-5; it tried and failed on my NEX-7, capturing consistently out-of-focus images. Sigma immediately said it is Sony's fault, Sony took a week to essentially say this lens is not on the supported list (which only lists Sony lenses). Incidentally, my lens was marked as the latest A77 compatible. I said I'd be updating this review when the focus issue is resolved... well, it still is not. After using this lens a lot, I've found that it sometimes fails to autofocus at all on the A55, but starts working again after resetting the lens and body to autofocus. It also no longer seems to even attempt autofocus on the NEX-7. It is not a reliable lens for autofocus, and thus I've dropped the build rating to 4. It is also worth noting that the focus scale distances disagree significantly at different focal lengths when focusing at the exact same point, which seems suspicious. There is also a bit of drift relative to the focus scale, probably related to lens temperature (I've now shot with it in ambient temperatures from roughly 20F to 110F). One last comment: I just completed a 6,500-mile driving tour of the USA west, and this lens was used for more than 1/3 of the photos I took... easily my favorite lens for the trip. It is hard to use well -- you really need to be very careful about getting close, searching-out good angles, and watching what sneaks into the edges of the frame, but it allows me to make photos that none of my 100+ other lenses can. With very careful composition, you really can capture the feel of expansive western landscapes that less-wide lenses cannot. I had a fisheye along with me too, but the ability to zoom a little on this Sigma, combined with the lack of guessing about how de-fishing will leave things, makes for much more accurate composition and thus consistently superior photos. Ok, one more update: From about 14-16mm, this lens can acceptably cover my A7's FF sensor. Corners are not great, but hey, 16mm is a darn wide FF rectilinear. |
| snap#10173 date: May-4-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 16-50 SSM |
| price paid: | 500 Euro (used) |
| positive: | - fun with the focal length - sharpness - ability to handhold till about 1/2 second |
| negative: | - the bulby lens. be sure to carry a lenspen with you as dirt and dust is very visible at photos from this kind of lenses. - lens hood |
| comment: | If you buy this lens it will be for one main reason: fun! At least that's what it was for me. it is great for city trips as this lens is great at catching large buildings and places. if you think this lens is too slow consider the two following facts: 1. at 8mm you can handhold this lens for about 1/2 second. even in very dark places this allows you to shoot at iso 800 or less. 2. out of focus areas look somewhat weird with this lens and want to be avoided. as you often want to compose your picture with a near foreground and a background you will want to have everything in focus which will let you stop down and use a close hyperfocal distance. in such situations a tokina 11-16 doesn't provide any advantage. the hood is not practical to me. there is the lens cap and a collar. if you want to shoot below 16mm you have to remove both. So you will always remove both. but the construction will let you lose the cap sometimes accidently. this lens doesn't need the cap at all which should have been accounted. concerning sharpness this lens is very good for me. it's not match to a prime like the 85/1,4 Zeiss but it is not supposed to. it is not worse to the very good 16-50 SSM in my feeling, but I didn't do directs comparisons. My pictures with the 8-16 at Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixiepeeper/sets/72157629873972606/ |
| Hols52#10027 date: Mar-14-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 11-18 Sony 16-50 |
| price paid: | £540 |
| positive: | Everything so far |
| negative: | Nothing so far |
| comment: | I was torn between the sigma 8-16 and the tokina 11-18. The sigma with its wider range and 8mm versus the tokina with fixed F2.8. I tested the tokina and sigma (courtesy of London camera Exchange) alongside my sony 16-50 which I used as a sort of benchmark. At 16mm outside no CA with either the sigma or the sony but noticeable amounts with the tokina, particularly around windows, skylines and hanging shop signs. Also the image sharpness was higher with the sigma than the tokina. The brick work on the building was very sharp with the sigma and sony but with the tokina - when I looked at the full size image on the pc the bricks were merging into the mortar somewhat. At 11mm with the tokina I did not really see any big change in CA or image sharpness compared to 16mm. With the sigma looking at CA and sharpness I could make out no real difference between 8 and 16mm. Inside the shop I found no CA with the sony or sigma and both delivered very sharp images. With the tokina only slight CA on the edges of white displays and notices in the shop, again image sharpness was not as good as the sony or sigma. These results were replicated across all focal lengths. On the strength of these results I bought the sigma and have used it a few times since. All my observations from those first tests have been confirmed and duplicated regarding sharpness, CA and also very pleased with speed of focusing. On only two occasions have I encountered any flare - both relatively minor. That will be more fully tested I guess later in the year when the sun may be more of an issue. Build quality - very sturdy. I also like the way the lens cap has its own tube which you slide on and off. So far have had no issue with the "bulbous" front lens. It is a lovely fit to the A77 and the two feel very similar to when I have the sony 16-50 attached. I think the IQ and use of the 16-50 is excellent and the biggest complement I can give this lens is that it is on a par with the sony. I love it. Graham |
| balacau#9950 date: Feb-19-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 DC UWA zoom Tamron 14mm F2.8 prime Sigma 10mm F2.8 fisheye |
| price paid: | 540GBP (new) |
| positive: | Wide! Not as heavy as it looks. Pretty resistant to flaring. Sharp wide open (in daylight) Good solid build. |
| negative: | Unable to mount filters. Lens front element is not well protected during use. Awkward lens cap/collar design. |
| comment: | There has been quite a few situations where even the 104 degree coverage of the Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 DC UWA zoom lens just hasn't been sufficient. These shots were most often something where a warped fisheye effect just wasn't going to cut it either. After much deliberation I finally decided on getting the Sigma 8-16mm UWA zoom lens and so far it has paid off dividends. The first time this lens saw major use was on a cold January morning when the sky was clear and the sun was very harsh indeed. I was taking some river view shots from a high elevated viewpoint and the pictures produced were impressive with little flaring. The Sigma 10-20mm zoom produced a fair amount of flare during similar weather & lighting conditions although this isn't made any better by the use of a protecting filter. Even so, for the sheer coverage that you get with the 8-16mm, it produces sharp and clear images. I picked a 4 for flare control as it appears all UWA zooms suffer from this and the 8-16mm does to some degree but it is very well controlled; at least in daylight conditions. I have yet to try this lens out in low light conditions. I am a little apprehensive about doing so. The bulbous front element design is very similar externally to the Tamron 14mm prime and this flares quite badly when street lighting is caught in the image frame. So we will see how that goes and I will update this review accordingly when a night time photoshoot opportunity arises. All in all, I am extremely happy with this lens purchase. I am not knocking the performance or capability of the 10-20mm lens in any way but at times it just was not wide enough for my needs. The 8-16mm does appear somewhat sharper even though it is not classed as one of Sigma's EX-series of professional grade lenses. This is quite a surprise as both the build and optical quality are very good indeed. Due to its somewhat different construction, you cannot use normal screw-on filters for this lens. Therefore during use, you must be careful because the front glass is somewhat exposed. The front lens cap and lens collar to which it attaches are very Sigma fisheye-like in style and this can be tricky when handling additional lenses and other gear in the field. I'd suggest keeping the lens cap on when its not in use! At the moment, this is the widest you can get for aps-c cameras (fisheye lenses not included) and for me this was the deal clincher. It is a real workhorse and I can't wait to get out there to use it again. *************************************************** I've had several changes to test this lens out in low-light conditions now and using a tripod, on-camera timer and it really can produce the goods. It still doesn't flare much when street lights are in the image which is a huge bonus! Very impressed, certainly one of my favourite lenses. |
| falconsusi#9911 date: Feb-10-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 10-20 f4.5/5.6 Sigma 10mm fisheye |
| price paid: | 599 (was demo lens) |
| positive: | Sharp Fast and quiet Extreme width |
| negative: | Price Weight Some CA Bulbous front |
| comment: | Compared to the Sigma 10-20 f4.5/5.6 - The 8-16 is much wider. It seems sharper near corners. Flare control is better (although I love flare). Color seems the same. I find the build to feel more compact/strong on the 8-16 so for me I like it better than the 10-20. Compared to the Sigma 10mm fisheye - I was suprised by the amount of distortion when up close to a subjec altough I should have expected that due to the bulbous front element. The 8-16 takes on a fisheye like quality for close and still remains ultrawide not fishy for the background. Almost makes a fisheye and ultra wide lens in one lens. However I like having both the 8-16 and the 10mm fisheye. Both lenses have a bulbous front element so I was prepared for this already. I just keep the lens hood on until I take a photo. I love the distortion of an ultra wide lens. Although it can be a bit much with small buildings. At certain angles the buildings take on a really not so nice falling apart look - kinda like the building is leaning way too much. |
| pureaxis#9818 date: Jan-19-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Carl Zeiss 16-80mm |
| price paid: | 699 (new) |
| positive: | -Silent focusing -Good build quality -Wide |
| negative: | -flare that appear as small blobs, but generally well controlled -price a bit high |
| comment: | Overall great lens, very sharp with extremely wide angle of view, although I'm thinking of replacing it with a fisheye. |
| mrpalmeras#9686 date: Dec-11-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Carl Zeiss 16-80mm 3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 420€ (used) |
| positive: | Wide!!!; compact; Sharp; HSM; |
| negative: | cannot attach filter |
| comment: | The best wide lens for Minolta/Sony Aps-c!!! |
| PowerUp#9074 date: Jun-2-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 679 EUR (new) |
| positive: | - Sharp - HSM provides silent and fast focus - Solid build - Incredible range - Little CA |
| negative: | - Prone to flare in some conditions - Does not take filters - Higher price than competition |
| comment: | The lens has a nice solid build. The integrated lens hood is made from metal, as well as the mount. HSM works fine, it's fast and silent. Wide open it is already very sharp in the centre, the corners need some stopping down to f/8 to become very sharp. CA is limited, it's there sometimes but not disturbing. When the sun is in the corners flare can occur, I haven't seen it when the sun is in the middle or just out the frame. The price is a bit high, but you get a very fine lens in return. And 8 mm is incredibly wide of course. |
| Stinus#9054 date: May-25-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Carl Zeiss 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 649 EUR (new) |
| positive: | Sharpness Colours Build quality Low distortion (for this type of lens) Autofocus |
| negative: | Curved front element seems vulnerable |
| comment: | Despite not being designated as an 'EX' lens, the build quality is excellent. I'm a bit concerned about the curved front element though, because the built-in hood isn't very deep. The lens is quite sharp, except for the extreme corners. Colours are also great, and the distortion is a lot less than I expected for such an extreme wideangle. The autofocus is silent and fast, but flare can be a minor issue. |
| JohnJ#8973 date: Apr-29-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 12-24 on FF |
| price paid: | £500.00 |
| positive: | Compact, sharp with decent colour rendition. |
| negative: | none for me |
| comment: | A nice little package giving me the 12-24 equivalent I enjoyed on FF. IMHO excellent image quality for the price - bought new. I had a superb copy of the 12-24 - and I am equally pleased with this little gem. |
| tengdoy#8966 date: Apr-28-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | DT 18-70 f3.5-5.6 sigma 18-50 EX DC f2.8 |
| price paid: | 600 USD |
| positive: | nice distortion light weight wideeeeeeeeeeee ^^ |
| negative: | ghosting build on body cannot attach filter |
| comment: | i love this amazing lens..sooo wideeee !! though it have ghosting somehow.. I tried to pair this lens on full frame cameras, it works well in the 16mm focal length. black frame will be seen below 16mm |
| lifeodyssey#7827 date: Aug-18-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 16mm f2.8 Minolta 24mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 550 USD 2nd hand |
| positive: | Well built. Sharp at center in all range, corner accepted with stop down to f:8 |
| negative: | cannot attach filter |
| comment: | I got this len as a second hand one with only been used for about a month by the former owner. A well built len, sharp in centre nearly at all range from 8mm - 16mm. corner sharpness need one or two stops close down in apeture. The best apeture range fall btw f5.6 to f8.0. Colour is good and contrast just right. AF is accurate as a whole. Distortion is acceptable even at 8mm and nearly no distortion at 16mm. My Minolta 16mm f2.8 has much more distortion for my Sony A550 than this Sigma at 8mm. On 100% see on monitor, Minolta 16mm is sharper than this len at 16mm both at f5.6 and f8. As a whole this Sigma len is sharp and well built. May be I am lucky to get a good copy of it, nevertheless this is the widest wide angle len that is avavialbe to APS - C size camera that is non fisheye circular vision. |
| Fecuska#7585 date: Jun-18-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 4-5.6/10-20mm |
| price paid: | ~780 EUR (new) |
| positive: | WWIIDDEE HSM = Much quicker and more accurate AF than 10-20 Compact build |
| negative: | nothing so far |
| comment: | I got it 2 days ago, therefore these are just my first impressions (will be revised later...). The new AF system is a huge step forward (actualy, this is my first Sigma lens that seems to be more or less accurate!); Regarding max aperture (8-10mm: F4.5; 11-13mm: F5.0), it is not substantially worse than the 10-20; Not as sharp as a macro lens, of course, but absolutely usable (more or less the same as the 10-20); And yes, there is some distortion, but who cares: it gives you a phantastic perspective in return :-) EDIT: after spending a vacation in France with this lens and carefully evaluating the pictures - no flaws turned out :-) Its AF is really accurate, even in dark scenarios (e.g. inside cathedrals). It is not as sharp as my 17-50 Tammy, but the pictures are absolutely usable. Flare control is much better than on Sigma 10-20. If you like wide lenses, this one is recommended w/o reservations. |
reviews found: 23
rating summary
- total reviews: 23
- sharpness: 4.46
- color: 4.39
- build: 4.65
- distortion: 4.35
- flare control: 4.13
- overall: 4.40
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login