BMFin 0 #1 February 26, 2010 Sigma announced some new lenses a few days ago. One of them was 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC The focal lenght seems ideal for a basic zoom for skydiving for APS-C. Will be interesting so see how it performs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markovwgti 0 #2 February 26, 2010 Looks like nice lens! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lilchief 0 #3 February 26, 2010 I've got to be honest...I'd rather buy a 8mm f3.5 and a 15mm f2.8 then the 8-16mm f3.5-5.6. But that's because: 1) I like to have my stuff working at low light conditions and 5.6 vs 2.8 is 2 full stops of light difference 2) The lens will be mostly used on either 8 og 16mm anyways 3) Prime's have better optical performance compares to zoom lenses ....buuuut..looking from a fun perspective and considering that the photard want one lens for all purposes, takes pictures only when there's a lot of light and got a camera with good ISO performance...why not "Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you long to return." - Da Vinci www.lilchief.no Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #4 February 26, 2010 Agreed. I actually bought the Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM and I wish like hell I hadn't. It's slow both in AF and in low light situations, it's big and heavy and I really like my 16mm and 10.5mm f/2.8 nikons waaaaay better. So if this lens is anything like this 10-20, I'm not buying it Mostly, once you're used to fixed (or even zoom) f2.8 or better lenses, it's quite hard to go back to something like this even though it may seem like a handy lens to have ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #5 February 26, 2010 Quote I've got to be honest...I'd rather buy a 8mm f3.5 and a 15mm f2.8 then the 8-16mm f3.5-5.6. But that's because: 1) I like to have my stuff working at low light conditions and 5.6 vs 2.8 is 2 full stops of light difference I agree, this lens isnt the best option for low light situations. Personally I dont see my self giving up the canon 10-22 since I think it is the best lens in its class hands down. Im most likely getting my self an 8mm prime to go with it. Quote 3) Prime's have better optical performance compares to zoom lenses Well it depends on which prime we are talking about. You shouldnt expect very good optical performance from a fisheye lens such as the canon 15mm. For example, Canon 10-22 outperforms the Canon 15mm according to the MTF charts. ( see pics) In this case the zoom lens is noticably sharper. Besides, the 15mm fisheye isnt really what its supposed to be on APS-C sensor.. The projection image of the fisheye is incomplete. On FF or APS-H it is much more usable though. Also it has slower autofocus too when compared to the 10-22 for example.. Still, merely in terms of the focal lenght, this new stigma seems very interesting. Theres no competitors in this class. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lilchief 0 #6 February 26, 2010 Quote Quote 3) Prime's have better optical performance compares to zoom lenses Well it depends on which prime we are talking about... . Yes, I knew I was stepping into a mindfield when saying that. I haven't checked small details like the MTF charts on many lenses, so my statement was made with a generalisation. "Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you long to return." - Da Vinci www.lilchief.no Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
