Photoclubalpha

Look what just arrived in the mail. My new-to-me Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens. I found it on ebay and the seller said he had only had it a couple of months. He was switching systems and no longer could use the lens. It appears to have had almost no use. So overall, I think I got a good deal on it.

Congrats! Should be a sweet lens

Thanks. I'm looking forward to using it.

I took a couple of sample shots and compared to my Sony 16-80mm Zeiss. I'll try and get them uploaded when I get off work in the morning. I think I'm really going to enjoy this lens.

I took a picture of a deer hide with both the Sigma 18-35mm and the Sony Zeiss 16-80mm lenses. This is not a very professional test sample but it is what it is. I used a tripod and manual focus via live focus check. The shots were at 35mm f/8 and 200 iso. When changing the lens I must have moved the tripod a little because the framing was off slightly. That is why the crops aren't exactly identical in what is viewed. Here's the test shot with 100% crops near the center (Sony first then Sigma). Also, these are from the raw files with no pp.

Here's the 100% corner crop. Sony first then the Sigma.

Looks impressive on the corners. I have been a little disappointed with the Zeiss peripheral performance.

Mike

The Zeiss has been a good lens for me. It was my first upgrade from the kit lens. That being said, I agree about the disappointing peripheral performance. But I love what I see in the Sigma edges.

Sigma seems to be better all around....

Sury

Nothing to complain about for the Sigma there. I have always really liked the 16-80, so the sigma would be stunning. I do like the range for a walk around in the CZ though.

16-80 is definitely a good range and the CZ is still a good lens. The Sigma struggles with af at the wider apertures. If I take two pictures back to back, there's a good chance one will be in focus and one will be out of focus. Stopping down seems to get rid of the issue.

The Zeiss 16-80 is an excellent lens but I don't think its worth the money considering its build quality. The Sony 18-135 has a better build quality in my view. Mind you there are worse in the Sony range. When you consider that its probably made by Tamron as are a couple of other A mount lenses, the Tamron 17-50 with a very similar performance looks like better value.

Another thing about this Sigma lens is the mount. It is slightly more difficult to get positioned for attachment than any of my other lenses, but once positioned it turns and locks very smoothly.

Frankly speaking I prefer Sony 16-105 over CZ 16-80. IMO their performance is VERY CLOSE, yet 16-105 is cheaper and has a wider FL.