sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM for Nikon

A place for us to talk about Nikon related camera gear.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM for Nikon

Postby blacknstormy on Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:30 pm

Ok - I know sorry, but I have to ask ....

I've been eyeing off wide lenses for a while, and this one is currently on ebay (finishes in 3 hours) .....

at the moment , it is $355 ....

Now the hard part - Damian is asleep (we worked bloody hard this morning ) ..... do I bid :? :), or is it a load of shit ???????

Hugs
Rel

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll ... &rd=1&rd=1
Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams

http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
User avatar
blacknstormy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2745
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:33 pm
Location: Ipswich Qld

Postby gstark on Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:36 pm

Rel,

At that price, it should be a good deal.

The problem is that, being on ebay, will it remain at that price?

I wouldn't want to be be paying too much more than that for a pre-owned unit, given the new price here is under PP800.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby johnd on Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:40 pm

Rel, if you can get if for $355 then it sounds like a good deal. The Sigma 12-24, Tokina 12-24, Nikon 12-24 all seemed to be regarded as similar quality wise but the Nikon is substantially more than the Sigma and Tokina. There's heaps of comparitive reviews around. Some people hold the opinion that if it's not Nikon it's not as good. I've just purchased a Tokina but it was a toss up between that and a Sigma. Poon's price is $780, but that's new with warranty etc, but if you want to take the 2nd hand/warranty risk it sounds like you may get it for half new price. Although ebay stuff tends to go ballistic in the last few minutes.

Good luck if you decide to bid.

Cheers
John
D3, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 80-400VR, 18-200VR, 105/2.8 VR macro, Sigma 150/2.8 macro
http://www.johndarguephotography.com/
User avatar
johnd
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Sandy Bay, Tas.

Postby glamy on Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:01 pm

Make sure you do want a 10-20 to be able to use a filter :wink:
User avatar
glamy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1112
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 8:38 pm
Location: S/W Sydney- D70+D2X

Postby johnd on Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:15 pm

glamy wrote:Make sure you do want a 10-20 to be able to use a filter :wink:


Good point Glamy.
Rel, I just checked Ken Rockwell's review. The Sigma 12-24 doesnt have a front filter thread as the front element bows a long way out. The Sigma 10-20 can take a filter but not the 12-24. Rockwell isn't too flattering about the 12-24, it's the 10-20 that he likes better (and the Tokina and Nikon). So I'm not sure why the seller is including a 82mm filter unless there is some way of attaching it to the front of the lens hood.

Might be worth asking the seller.

Might be worth a quick read of Rockwell's review:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm

Cheers
John
D3, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 85/1.4, 80-400VR, 18-200VR, 105/2.8 VR macro, Sigma 150/2.8 macro
http://www.johndarguephotography.com/
User avatar
johnd
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:14 pm
Location: Sandy Bay, Tas.

Postby blacknstormy on Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:27 pm

Thanks everyone - and yep, emailed the seller to see what the go is with the filter :)

I'll just sit tight, and see where it goes ......
and Gary, you're right, ebay usually goes apesh*t just before the finish :)

hugs
Rel
Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams

http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
User avatar
blacknstormy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2745
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:33 pm
Location: Ipswich Qld

Postby Oz_Beachside on Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:56 pm

interesting answer. I wonder if the 10.5FE has a similar solution?

Thanks for you question, The fliter attatchment (see photo) slides over the front of the lens and is a genuine Sigma part that came with the lens - no modifications have been made to this item.
User avatar
Oz_Beachside
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Rock, Victoria. D200

Postby digitor on Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:00 pm

I see your answer re the filter is already posted up!

One of these in similar condition finished the other day at $468 - http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=012&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=220071221502&rd=1&rd=1

Cheers
What's another word for "thesaurus"?
User avatar
digitor
Senior Member
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: Tea Tree Gully, South Australia

Postby stubbsy on Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:16 pm

Oz_Beachside wrote:interesting answer. I wonder if the 10.5FE has a similar solution?

Thanks for you question, The fliter attatchment (see photo) slides over the front of the lens and is a genuine Sigma part that came with the lens - no modifications have been made to this item.

The 10.5 Nikkor fisheye takes a REAR filter (but I've never seen one). Anything in front of the lens would be at great risk of coming into view or at least causing vignetting.

Rel - good luck
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby Glen on Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:23 pm

Rel, I have this lens, good value under $450 or so, no chance of effectively using filters, large but nice straightish lines at the wide end
User avatar
Glen
Moderator
 
Posts: 11819
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Sydney - Neutral Bay - Nikon

Postby gstark on Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:34 pm

stubbsy wrote:The 10.5 Nikkor fisheye takes a REAR filter (but I've never seen one). Anything in front of the lens would be at great risk of coming into view or at least causing vignetting.


Our 300mm also takes a rear filter: a 39mm that is a part of the optical path. It fits into a drawer towards the rear of the lens. Remind me to show you next time we catch up.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby sirhc55 on Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:52 pm

The Sigma 12-24mm lens hood is threaded to take a filter but not recommended below 15mm.

Gary try the focus test with your 300mm with the filter in and out - there is a difference :wink:
Chris
--------------------------------
I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
User avatar
sirhc55
Key Member
 
Posts: 12930
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: Port Macquarie - Olympus EM-10

Postby Killakoala on Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:53 pm

My 500mm takes rear filters too and nicely comes with three in the case.

I have the Sigma 12-24 but the main reason i bought it was that i still shoot on film and this is the only super-wide angle lens that is not a DX style lens. I does still work fine on an APC CCD camera.

The lens does bulge a bit but the attached lens hood should stop you getting too close to any subject to scratch the end of the lens.

The price is excellent. BTW, the filter DOES NOT fit behind the lens on this kit. It fits on an extra lens hood and unless the filter is very thin, it will cause vignetting. The extra lens hood causes vignetting at 12mm, but not much.
Steve.
|D700| D2H | F5 | 70-200VR | 85 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 28-70 | 10.5 | 12-24 | SB800 |
Website-> http://www.stevekilburn.com
Leeds United for promotion in 2014 - Hurrah!!!
User avatar
Killakoala
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5398
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: Southland NZ

Postby gstark on Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:03 pm

sirhc55 wrote:Gary try the focus test with your 300mm with the filter in and out - there is a difference :wink:


Exactly what I would expect.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby digitor on Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:06 pm

Killakoala wrote: BTW, the filter DOES NOT fit behind the lens on this kit. It fits on an extra lens hood and unless the filter is very thin, it will cause vignetting. The extra lens hood causes vignetting at 12mm, but not much.


Well, yes and no - the Sigma has a filter holder behind the rear element - not like the slide-in ones on big teles though, you've got to take the lens off to change it. It takes a gel filter, and the lens comes with a metal template so you can cut one out the right size! Not really very useful for much, maybe OK for a yellow or red filter gel for B&W.

Cheers
What's another word for "thesaurus"?
User avatar
digitor
Senior Member
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: Tea Tree Gully, South Australia

Postby Mj on Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:11 pm

Rel,

If the price stays low (it still is right now) I'd grab it.
Filters aren't really an option but at that price you can live without... ask Chris and Glen... they both have that lens and I reckon they rarely if ever regret the lack of filters... as always it depends on what you plan to use it for.

Good luck.
Photography is not a crime, but perhaps my abuse of artistic license is?
User avatar
Mj
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:37 pm
Location: Breakfast Point, Sydney {Australia}

Postby blacknstormy on Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:15 pm

Pipped at the post :(
Oh well, there will always be more ;)

Thanks everyone who helped me out - much appreciated ....
hugs
Rel
Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams

http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
User avatar
blacknstormy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2745
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:33 pm
Location: Ipswich Qld

Postby DeonJ on Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:31 am

Sigma 12-24mm will shine on FF format, not Nikon DX format. IMO my Nikon DX AFS 12-24 is a worth while investment.

cheers.
DeonJ
Newbie
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:00 am
Location: Queens

Postby fishafotos on Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:57 am

Don't use a filter on anything less than 15mm, because of the angles of refraction/reflection it ruins the quality if you do.
Nikon D80, MB-D80, Nikon 50mm f/1.8, Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8, SB-800, Sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3
Various bits of borrowed/stolen glass/speedlights etc. - zero style or taste.

http://harryfisherphotos.smugmug.com
User avatar
fishafotos
Member
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:48 am
Location: East Fremantle, W.A - D80


Return to Nikon

cron