Page 1 of 2

Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:11 pm
by aramkostanyan
Hi,
At this point I have Sony A55 and Sigma 17-70.
In overall, I am satisfied with that lens, but it has some issues with white balance and colors.
Indoors the auto WB usually goes too warm and the skin colors does not look good even after correcting the white balance in Lr.
So, I was thinking to upgrade the lens. In found two lenses to upgrade to: Sony 16-50 and Zeiss !6-80.
Can you, please, which one of these 3 lenses is good in overall sharpness, contrast and color reproduction. Or maybe you would suggest another one.
Zeiss is a bit out of budget, but if it really worth's the money it can be the choice.


Aram

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:24 pm
by Dr. Harout
There is no big price difference between your mentioned lenses.
The 16-50/2.8 is quite a good lens, but if you don't need the f/2.8 then you should opt for the Zeiss one.
Your lens is a pretty fine lens too, I doubt the problem is related solely to the lens. Do you have a filter in front of it?

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:46 pm
by aramkostanyan
I do not have any filter in front of my lens.
I do not think that it is a problem. More like that every brand has its own color cast.
The prices in amazon.com are:
Sony 16-50 - 700$
Zeiss 16-80 - 850$
Sigma 17-70 - 470$

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:54 pm
by Dr. Harout
Let's hear other members.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:23 am
by aramkostanyan
I agree with you Doc, let's hear others opinions two and who actually had used them.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:12 am
by agorabasta
Modern lenses actually don't have colour casts per se. I checked it many times doing colour profiling of various cameras with different lenses.

Yet some apparent colour casts really do show in actual images. Those apparent colour casts come from the lens haze that is coloured because their glass coatings are strongly coloured in reflected light. So if you use cheaper lenses, you get lower quality coatings that then deliver you that coloured haze which you perceive as colour cast. And this colour cast cannot be completely removed by WB adjustments, as the haze is added into the image rather than multiplied.

So if you don't want any colour casts with Sigma, you better use their EX line.

Of the 16-80 and 16-50, I must say that for the large DoF images when all's in focus, the 16-80 looks better. Otherwise, the 16-50 has a much prettier blur/bokeh. But I prefer the Sigma EX 17-50 HSM for its nicely shaped blur with very low LoCA, uniform sharpness even at f/2.8 and also for its perfectly flat focus plane.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:03 pm
by -----Nod-----
I have the Sigma 17-70 and am pleased with the results. I've started using it as my main vacation lens along with my 50 f1.7. I've even used a 2X TC with it and had no problems. I have many shots with this lens that I've not had to post process (except for cropping) and I'll say it is as sharp as my beercan and even sharper in some instances.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:13 pm
by aramkostanyan
That "problem" I have only indoors with incandescent lighting and creamy colored walls.
However, I am also satisfied with the lens. I wanted to know how well does it behave in against those 2 lenses.
Ps I did try beercan, I like it too. In that case I saw some emphasis in red colors. Which was pleasing for me.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:57 pm
by agorabasta
Aram, what are you using for raw development? If Lr/ACR, what camera profiles?

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:59 pm
by aramkostanyan
Agorbasta, I am using Lr3 and 4 and standard Adobe profiles.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:34 pm
by agorabasta
The standard Adobe profiles are exceptionally bad with incandescent light. You may try the profile I posted here - http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5018

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:52 pm
by aramkostanyan
Thank you. I will do it soon and see.
I hope it will be better.
Do you advice to change the adobe profiles for daylight also?

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 7:25 pm
by agorabasta
Aram, that one is a dual-illuminant profile very scrupulously attuned for best performance in the 2100-7500K range.
That's my custom-tailored default profile.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:13 pm
by aramkostanyan
Thanks for the help agorbasta.
I just did try couple of samples of incandescent lighting and bounce flash samples.
My monitor is a laptop monitor, which is not a good quality one.
I have also downloaded some profiles of that DK mentioned in his post.
My personal ideas are, that the deep profile for the skin tone looks a bit magentish, the standart profile (not adobe standard) looks yellowish and the ungreen profile looks like the deep profile.
Sorry for not scientific and maybe not correct explanation of things, I am new to image processing and I am trying to learn.

Re: Sigma 17-70 vs Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-80

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:56 pm
by aramkostanyan
As I am new to processing, I would like to know your opinion agorbasta and others also.