Railfan Technology > Are Sigma Lenses good ?

I'm thinking about  buying a Sigma Lense , was wondering if they are a good choice for the money ?

TIA Tom

The Art and Sport lines of lenses are high quality and are priced accordingly.

Other lower priced zooms are not as rugged or optically refined. They are good value for the money you will spend.

Posted from iPhone

I got the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 Contemporary lens about three weeks ago and I love it.  I'm using it on a Canon 70D with the cropped sensor.  It's just under a kilobuck at B&H including sfree shipping.  There is a Sports model for about twice the price that is waterproof.  My other glass isn't waterproof so I just figured that if it's going to rain, I'm going home.  If you shoot sports like football or whilelife in the rain it might be worth the extra money.  The lens seems to be built pretty well, everything operates rather smooth.  The autofocus is probably about average.  It has three ranges for autofocus, 2.8-10M, 10-infinity, and 2.8-infinity.  If you select the proper range it will focus a little faster.  The lens weighs about 6 pounds and when fully zoomed, you need nerves of steel or a tripod.  The zoom control has a rotation range of about 135 degrees.  With the hood on it the length is about 18"

This picture is not train related but it shows some of the capabilities.  The first picture is a fellow on the roof of a building about 400-500' away.  This is full frame, no cropped at all.  I cropped the part with the camera for the second file.  I'm not sure how sharp it will show up here on TO.com but I can read the name on the Canon 70D camera.  I can't read the letters and numbers on his lens but I can see the writing.  Not really bad for the distance.

Good light is your friend.  It allow a fast shutter and with that much zoom, you need it.  The image stabilization can only do so much when it's fully extended.  I was a bit disapointed with the first few shots.  I got the nose of a Diesel about a quarter mile away and it wasn't really sharp.  Tow days later I went out again.  I went to the riverfront where I could see a railroad bridge.  While waiting for the train I shot some pictures of odds and ends in town.  A barge tow came down the river and into the locks.  Finally, I got a train crossing the bridge.  What I noticed was that the pictures into town (about a block away) were not sharp but the ones over the river were.  Looking at the shots of the town and the locomotive shots from the first day I discovered that I was getting some distortion from heat waves.  When I shot th barge about 4/3 mile away and the locomotive on the bridge, they were pretty sharp and there was no sign of heat waves.

There is a regional photographer here in Kentucky that shoots Kentucky and the surrounding states and he uses the Sigma 150-600 zoom on a Nikon.  Jim Pearson Photography.  Not only does he do some real nice stuff, most of it is steel wheels on steel rails.  Most of the time he notes the exposure, equipment, and lens used for each photo.  I think you might just enjoy looking at his website.

Hope this helps a bit.

John 

---

---

I didn't set the tripod up level so the world isn't falling off the globe.  The barge is about 6800' away and the train that is going down hill is about 5700'  I used the measure tool on Google Earth to calculate the distance.  I was probably 50-75' from the robin.  It had been raining and it was starting to rain again.  This was the only thing that was moving on the rail at the time.  Since the Contemporary isn't waterproof, I went home.  It was a cold rainy day anyway.

John

---

---

---

I bought a Sigma 18-250mm zoom figuring that its small size and lightweight would make it the perfect "one-lens" for travelling by air overseas.  It was sharp and the colours very good.  But it had more distortion than any lens I've ever used.  The distortion was so bad that I wouldn't use it to photograph trains.  Telephone poles at the edge of the frame appeared bent like bananas.  When shooting a yard shot of a locomotive broadside the rails in the foreground weren't just curved they were bent into waves.  I found that degree of distortion unacceptable.  While it is true that good photo software such as Lightroom or Photoshop can automatically correct lens distortion I didn't want to have to process every image that way.  I do not use the lens and do not recommend it.

KG

I have the Sigma 17-70 2.8 lens, LOVE IT !! great low light lens. Great everyday range and a macro to boot around 500$
I have to admit I had my doubts for 500$ but no doubts now.
Alan



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/16 06:33 by agrafton.

Try dpreview.com for lens reviews of some lenses and the third party forum to read the discussions and ask questions.

I think that the newest photo-editing programs are including 'lens correction' for each of many lenses used, you can correct all those 'distorted' photos that the 28-250 gave you.

Ed

 I have used the Sigma 18-200,  around the edges there's been some sharpness isssues but for a over all lense it was great, in fact since finally being able to upgrade to L series lenses I still use this lenses for video and for rugged use where it performs excellently  

The 35mm1.4 art lens is awesome! It's heavy but flare free and sharp wide open. CJ

Posted from iPhone

I agree with CJ about the Sigma 35mm Art lens. I bought one for low light use and to replace a Nikon 35mm f 2.8 which just never seemed sharp. The Sigma has good user reviews and lives up to what others say. It costs close to what a Nikon of the same specs does on rebate.

Based on my experience with the Art series Sigma I bought the Sigma Sport 150mm-600mm f5.6 zoom and find it's build quality to be top quality. Images are sharp with good colors. This costs thousands of dollars less than an equivalent Nikon.

it is interesting to note if you want a lens built in Japan buy a Sigma. Canon and and Nikon might provide quality glass from China or Thailand.

I bought a Sigma Sport 150 - 600mm lens a couple of months ago. As John noted, it's heavy but I've been very pleased with the results so far. I'm shooting on a 5D Mk II body. I do notice some vignetting but by cropping it's not an issue for me.

Photo #1- A visiting B-17 on Friday at an airport in the south Denver area. This was out to 600 mm as the plane was about 1/4 mile west of me. It did bring in the mountains in the background nicely...

Photo #2- Amtrak #5 races past a parked ballast train at Tonville siding on the BNSF Brush Sub, about 30 miles east of Denver.

In both cases I kicked up the ISO to 400 or 800 to allow me to use higher shutter speeds. I also used the noise filter when I processed the images. I'm also seriously thinking about a monopod to help support this lens because of the weight. If nothing else I should build some upper body strength if I shoot this lens very often.

Additionally, I bought the docking collar to hook the lens up to a computer for firmware updates for this lens. I've not seen any other lens manufacturers do this to allow firmware updates for a lens.  I'd also second the suggestion to look at www.dpreview.com for comparisons that might help you make a suggestion. Good luck!

James Nelson
Thornton, CO
www.flickr.com/mojaveflyer

---

---

Sigma just announced an 85 1.4 art lens for late 2016. CJ

Posted from iPhone

The Sigma ART lens is not your fathers Sigma lens. 
I have only used the Sigma ART 35mm once in a brief test. It was sensational.  It had mind blowing sharpness that none-the-less looked smooth and natural.
Yes, it is expensive, big, and heavy. But if you want the best image quality possible, these are issues you deal with.
BTW, all three of my Canon L lenses boldly state "Made in Japan."
I have no doubt however, the entry level Canon lenses are indeed made where ever it is the most economical to do so.

Dennis Livesey
New York, NY

kgmontreal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I bought a Sigma 18-250mm zoom figuring that its
> small size and lightweight would make it the
> perfect "one-lens" for travelling by air
> overseas.  It was sharp and the colours very
> good.  But it had more distortion than any lens
> I've ever used.  The distortion was so bad that I
> wouldn't use it to photograph trains.  Telephone
> poles at the edge of the frame appeared bent like
> bananas.  When shooting a yard shot of a
> locomotive broadside the rails in the foreground
> weren't just curved they were bent into waves.  I
> found that degree of distortion unacceptable. 
> While it is true that good photo software such as
> Lightroom or Photoshop can automatically correct
> lens distortion I didn't want to have to process
> every image that way.  I do not use the lens and
> do not recommend it.
>
> KG

I have a Sigma 18-200mm zoom lens which takes great photos.....great for railfanning and general photography.
Maybe the 18-250mm is made different than the 18-200.  No distortion with mine.  "don't leave home without it"!