First images taken with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens are out

By [NR] admin | Published: April 19, 2013

The Korean website lcap.tistory.com published many sample images taken with the just announced Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens. The post also contains distortion, light fall-off and "starring" samples. The photos are taken with a Canon camera, but you can get an idea about the performance of the lens. Another post shows the lens coverage when used on a full frame camera (Canon 5D Mark II).

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged Sigma, Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

Crusty

Isn’t it nice
Peter

Wow, looks killer — makes me almost wish I didn’t jump to FX.
- Barron Roth
  
  I’m sure we’ll have a 24-70 version soon enough!
  - Noah Fence
    
    No, we definitely wont. The front element would be 100mm in diameter and it would weigh 5lbs. And that would just be for an FX 18-35, to say nothing of the monster that would be a 24-70.
    - Barron Roth
      
      I’m curious, how do you determine that?
  - rkas
    
    You already have lots of 24-70 versions for FX.
    - Kim
      
      He meant a 24-70mm f/1.8 of coarse!
      (Which would be GIGANTIC!)
      - rkas
        
        A DX 18-35/1.8 is equivalent to a 27-50/2.8 on FX.
        
        preston
        
        Equivalent in field of view and depth of field, but NOT exposure. So if you’re shooting moving subjects in low light the extra stop and a third of light will let you shoot with a faster shutter speed that could be critical in getting an acceptably small amount of subject motion blur.
        
        s1Lma
        
        Actually quite equivalent (27-52.5/2.7 to be accurate). You don’t take into account light gathering capability of the FF sensor.
- shorebreeze
  
  No need for it. Between the better noise performance at FX and the weight issues and every thing else, something like a 24-70/2.8 on an FX body can be considered directly equivalent to this.
  - Peter
    
    The FX Nikons can take advantage of DX lenses with a simple sensor crop if you are willing to accept the loss of resolution that comes with it. With today’s FF resolutions, you can still take advantage of the FX sensor noise performance with DX lenses and get something out of it that is on a level with what a D300s produces for example in terms of megapixels.
fred

Nikon will have to try hard to up the ante on this lens…or Nikon can ignore DX and the 90% of its DSLR customers.
- Olaf Hoyer
  
  nooo, why? Most of its DX customers are from entry level segment and are happy with the kit lens or the super-duper el cheapo 18-200 Zoom lens from 3rd Party Mfgr like Tamron or Sigma. And even in the prosumer area, not everybody will really need a wide-angle-zoom with f/1.8- especially not when this lens will cost (I have to assume here) say, around 800-1000 $. Yes, in certain areas it can level out some things between highend DX users and save them the jump to FX, as FX does have one stop advantage over similar DX sensor in regards of shallower Depth-of-Field, oder dynamic/Tonal range. So, when you are dealing with lots of low-light stuff, you finally can do nearly the same things as a FX user with his 24-70 f/2,8 (despite being cut off at 50mm Fx-equiv.) I am doing lots of event photography, and for me it possibly will spare me the jump from my D7000 to FX like D600/D700 in combination with an adequate 24-70/2,8 lens. And therefore save me in the whole system easily 1000 bucks that dont have to be financed and can be spent otherwise. For me, such a lens makes very much sense, but for lots of other area of photography, where you will need DOF or do not need zoom lenses like portrait, there are cheaper and better lenses available.
viejopajillas

How much cost this “toy”??
- Nikon Rumors
  
  No info on price yet, Sigma usually announces the price few weeks/months later.
- Mr. Mamiya
  
  You will hope it’s way cheaper than the Olympus 14-35/2.0 Zuiko.
- lorenzo
  
  My bet is around $1,300, let’s see how close I was.
  - Doug
    
    I’d call that wishful thinking. My guess is ~$2300.
    - lorenzo
      
      If they want to beat Nikon and Canon I doubt they will sell it at that price, but you might be right, we’ll see 🙂
      - Remedy
        
        Dude get Your shit straight. Both Nikon and Canon have NOTHING comparable to this lens. This way Sigma can charge for the lens as much as they want.
        
        Second, there are people who are not label hoes and choose better product not “better” label.
        
        Third, Sigma is already destroying Nikon and Canon on so many levels. 8-16mm (for crop), 12-24mm (for FF), 35mm f/1.4 which destroys both Canon and Nikon, 50mm f/1.4, macro 105mm, 150mm and 180mm, 300-800mm zoom, 200-500mm f/2.8 zoom (!!!!!!!!!!).
        
        People like You need to get their head out of their asses and look around a bit.
        
        Pablo Ricasso
        
        You are the one who should get his shit crap before you start labeling other people. More that half of your dribble isn’t correct, yet somehow you seem to preach with such a pomp to others.
        
        JakeB
        
        Well said Pablo, I doubt he even knows shat he’s talking about.
        
        Remedy
        
        Do you refer to yourself in third person? Facepalm.
        
        lorenzo
        
        Pablo, there are some that are not aware of how much psychiatric help they need. We should just ignore them 🙂
        
        Remedy
        
        …like you.
        
        Remedy
        
        Read above imbecile.
        
        genotypewriter
        
        Remedy, time to go back to school. And not just a photography one.
        While you’re there please ask the teacher to brief you on f-stop, then come back and start comparing wide angle Sigmas with Nikons and Canons. Ah, yeah…the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 may be marginally sharper in the corners but next time you hold one if you ever do, compare it’s bokeh wide open with Nikon 35mm f/1.4 you’re comparing it to, as well as put some rubber at the mount before you take it outdoors.
        
        Bozo.
        
        Remedy
        
        You proved so many times before that you are one of those essential idiots who can’t understand basic sentences. Please show me you fking tool an f/1.8 zoom from Canon or Nikon. Fking moron.
        
        Now show me all the ther lenses I WAS TALKING ABOUT IN MY PREVIOUS POST YOU BLIND PHUCK.
        
        Also Sigma 35mm f/1.4 runs circles around 35L or 35 Nikkor in every aspect. ROTFL @ “marginally sharper at the corners”. You are marginally smarter than a shoe. It destroys, DESTROYS in terms of sharpness right from the start everything competition has to offer. At f2 Sigma 35 is sharper than 35L on it’s max!
        
        Now feel free to go back to whereever they can teach you having a brain.
        
        Remedy
        
        You proved so many times before that you are one of those essential idiots who can’t understand basic sentences. Please show me you fking tool an f/1.8 zoom from Canon or Nikon. Fking moron.
        
        Now show me all the ther lenses I WAS TALKING ABOUT IN MY PREVIOUS POST YOU BLIND PHUCK.
        
        Also Sigma 35mm f/1.4 runs circles around 35L or 35 Nikkor in every aspect. ROTFL @ “marginally sharper at the corners”. You are marginally smarter than a shoe. It destroys, DESTROYS in terms of sharpness right from the start everything competition has to offer. At f2 Sigma 35 is sharper than 35L on it’s max!
        
        Now feel free to go back to whereever they can teach you having a brain.
        
        thisguysadickhead
        
        Fuck you dickhead.
        
        stationstall
        
        Hey NR !!! You need to start censoring profane, vulgar, childish responses like the above. The world is uncivilized enough without having to read these small-brains..
        
        Anto de Chav
        
        I know it sounds infantile but it is often entertaining to read these rants… lol
        
        lorenzo
        
        agree with you! We still have these kinda jerks here, just ignore them.
        
        Mykon
        
        People like you should put their head back in the ass again.
        
        Remedy
        
        Poeple like you should stop being useless in life.
Schocker

Shaaaaaarp!!
- Noah Fence
  
  Maybe I’m spoiled by primes but the samples look like mush to me.
  - Micah Goldstein
    
    The not-100% images look like mush to you? Seriously?
Marcelo Borges Tezza Pereira

Very sharp!
Nikonnut

Looks great!
800mm f/2.8 DX VR

How many people think that is very good? I think that is better than my 50mm f/1.8 D.
- MyrddinWilt
  
  Why would a 800mm tele be DX? Coverage is no problem on a tele, comes for free. The hard part is throwing light away, not keeping it.
  
  I can’t see why admin thinks this lens is so special. It is just a DX version of the 28-70 f/2.8 which is a very commonplace lens design. There is no question Nikon could do that if they thought there was demand. But most of us would not pay the $2000 Nikon would charge for that lens.
  
  The only difference is that the rear elements converge the light on a smaller sensor area. The front elements would be identical.
  - jack yell
    
    Did you miss the 1.8 part?
  - Swade
    
    That one stop of light allows for a faster shutter speed. You may get the DOF equivalent of a 28 f/2.7 or something like that, but your shutter speed would still be faster.
Isaac Alonzo

anyways we are all still waiting for pricing
- fred
  
  Now that we know lens is real, the speculation now is on price tag.
  
  Will Sigma ask lofty premium price… or want to sell MORE lens at a lower price? , gets a Sigma in every camera bag.
  
  I owned a sigma lens lens in the 90’s, aperture sticking, almost always overexposed, bad surprise on film, (from what I read only) quality is much better now.
  
  I maybe buy Sigma 35mm f1.4 (890+) but if this zoom is almost same price, maybe not, get more practical 1.8 zoom instead.
Laurentiu Ilie

The images look great, event at f/1.8-f/2.2!
Shawn

I just wonder what use it would be for me??? I already have their 17-50mm F2.8 and am not sure what use the extra stop would be useful for with less zoom coverage. These pics do look good however and somehow seem to have better DOF that mine does at 2.8. I can only think it would have to be at least $1k.
- Spy Black
  
  Does the 17-50 have stabilization? If so don’t worry about this lens.
  - Shawn
    
    Yes it does. The only thing I can see that might be nice is that it looks sharper and would likely be able to soften the background a bit more. It looks to likely make the 1.8 35mm primes redundant with the added benefit of some zoom. I am sure price is going to make the biggest difference to its success.
    - Spy Black
      
      >>It looks to likely make the 1.8 35mm primes redundant…<<
      No way. Never delude yourself into believing a zoom will outperform a prime. Ever. That's just marketing hype.
      - fred
        
        A zoom may not always OUTPERFORM a prime but it can at least EQUAL it. The Nikon 14-24mm comes to mind.
        
        Spy Black
        
        Nope. The 14-24 hype is sales pitch. Excellent lens for what it is, but no equal to a prime.
        
        Swade
        
        Not to mention the price tag?
Spy Black

Center sharpness looks decent. No edge images at 100% tho. You can see some softness in the tree shots at 100% wide open, yet the kid shots look pretty good center. Not sure why that is.
lorenzo

I don’t know exactly who these Korean people are but the showed us lot of very good pictures, contrarily to the “Ipse Dixit” from DXO 🙂
Nikon

Since when here become Sigma rumors?!
- lorenzo
  
  Didn’t see your complain on Zeiss, instead, why? 🙂
- Calibrator
  
  There was a name change earlier this week.
  Before that it was called underwater-housings-rumors.com…
Rob Ueberfeldt

Now they have done the hard stuff how about a dirt cheap ultrawide prime 12mm or less, F4 or less, $300 or…

Nikon could do this first.
- neversink
  
  But Nikon did not do it first. I am not interested because it is Dx. Although it seems to be sharp, not thrilled with the look of the bokeh in some of the shots. It seems to be more angular bokeh than I like, rather than creamy. But then again, that is what I experienced on my pos sigma 150-500. Hard, ugly angular bokeh.
  - captainobvious
    
    This lens is more of a niche technical achievement than anything. Nobody should expect it be a Zeiss prime. Also, I don’t see enough evidence of shitty bokeh here to give your opinions much consideration. Sure, it’s not Zeiss-level, but it looks more than passable to me, though the available examples don’t offer much in terms of bokeh. You’re just speculating.
    - neversink
      
      I took a second look and now find contradictory out of focus results. Actually — If you take a look at the DX sample photos you will find some interesting bokeh. Some soft and some hard. The photo of the cherry tree immediately following the white flowers against the off white sky has some very hard bokeh. Yet, the photo of the young girl in orange further below has much more pleasing elements to the out-of-focus areas.
- Rob Ueberfeldt
  
  FX and DX…
  - neversink
    
    I stand corrected… thought it was just dx
    - Rob Ueberfeldt
      
      That’s for my hypothetical lens, the 18-35 is for APS as far as I know.
      - neversink
        
        I stand corrected again.
- David
  
  NZ$300 right? 😉
  - Rob Ueberfeldt
    
    I was being easy on Sigma/Nikon and suggesting US$300 though in reality they should be able to get it closer to the price of a 50mm 1.8. Maybe around the $200 (US) mark.
- Michaelius
  
  Something i realy wanted for years 🙂 Altrough in the end sigma 10,5 fish and Nikkor 16-85 cover my needs for now.
  - Rob Ueberfeldt
    
    I had the 10-20 Sigma, nice lens. I didn’t need the zoom I always had it at 10mm. Drop the zoom, size, price etc and I think at LOT of enthusiasts would grab it. Make it FX compatible and you could capture two markets. Anything below 12mm is dam useful in either format.
SleeperSmith

Am I the only person who have a strange feeling Sigma might have shot them selves in a foot, a bit?

Look at the 18-35/1.8 on 5D2. It’s 35mm only has slight vignetting. Maybe the image circle will shrink in as the aperture closes down. But if not, might as well buy this and stick it on a FF instead of getting 35/1.4?
- 800mm f/2.8 DX VR
  
  No way. 35mm f/1.4 is razor sharp corner to corner.
- san
  
  No, but from 24mm and on it could work well for casual party shots in the dark. Still not compelling enough a reason if you don’t already have a DX body though.
Nikon69

I wish they tried that lens on Nikon D800 on DX mode, not a crappy 5d….
- 800mm f/2.8 DX VR
  
  D7100 would have been better
- rkas
  
  Why would they do that? They already shot lots of pictures with a crop camera?
- Kim
  
  Or a D3200, which would give even more resolution than D800 on the DX-area…
  - neversink
    
    I wish they tried that on the D700 replacement or the D400 — Just joking folks, just joking ;–}
Drazen B

Sweet and sharp looking photos, indeed. This Art series is sure to make few of the executives in those more established lens brands scratch their heads.

My bet is US$1099, on the announcement date.
- Pablo Ricasso
  
  Yeah, I believe around or just over a $1K mark, not much more.
Alex Gordon

It’s been said before, but I’ll say it again. This is not the most useful range. I really think if it had been F2 (or even F2.8) but a 16-50 we’d really have something to talk about..
- Rick
  
  the zoom range is the compromise. It’s the constant f/1.8. 1 stop of speed, shallower DOF and possibly improved optics and built quality of the A series
  - Swade
    
    I don’t think he is talking about the DOF of having a 50mm, but the compression. There is more to a lens than DOF.
- Mauro Campanelli
  
  I totally agree with you. 18mm is not enough wide, 16mm would be better and 35mm is too wide for portraits because from 50mm on faces look better. Told that, I think that a 16-50 f/1.8 would have set a new standard!
  - NoName
    
    35 * 1.5 = 52.5.. so it’s okay enough for portrait.
Fred Flintstone

Aah makes me miss Korea, Seoul can be lovely to walk around and photograph, from busy markets to quiet nature area
- 800mm f/2.8 DX VR
  
  Might not be a lovely place to walk around for very much longer.
Rick

Wow..looks very clean and sharp, for DX @f/1.8!
Mauro Campanelli

ehm … it is H U G E !!!!!!!
- Phil McCrevasse
  
  …as the actress said to the Bishop….
Eric Calabos

Best 18mm ever, but its too big for my D5100
Nikon, give me a prime 18mm f/1.8 please… you hear me?
- Kelvin K
  
  You mean 27mm…there are many lenses already sharp at that angle.
  
  As far as the 18mm on a DX, check the infamous Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 DX lens, hard to beat that one on a crop sensor camera.
  - babola
    
    True dat….17-55 DX is hard to beat…shame it’s the last ever pro-level glass made by Nikon for DX cameras, before the FX mania took over…
    - jhvcgxfz
      
      fx mania? It seems as if the fx maniacs feel that DX lenses keep getting released. we just can’t win 😉
  - preston
    
    Eric asked for a prime. Any f/1.8 prime in the 17-55 range is going to be less than half the size and weight of the 17-55 f/2.8 zoom (judging by the size of the 50 f/1.8 and the 35 f/1.8). Nikon has no DX primes wider than 35mm and it’s not unrealistic to ask for since they make a 28 f/1.8 for FX and an equiv for CX (the 10mm prime) but not for DX. And having a fixed lens DX camera with the focal length we want doesn’t count! 😉
    - Libby
      
      Eric stated “best 18mm ever”….which isn’t quite correct.
- Micah Goldstein
  
  The closest you can get is the 20mm/1.8 Sigma. It is much maligned, but if you get a good copy, it’s plenty sharp. It’s a bit bulky too. Keep in mind, 1.8 is quite shallow, even at 20mm and wider.
  
  EDIT: here it is on full frame. This is only a couple feet from the subject, to the shallow DOF wide open is accentuated. It’s a little deeper for landscapes: http://h.micahmedia.com/MG1_4231.jpg
  
  It does suffer coma with point lights wide open. Otherwise, it is very sharp. Again, this is a good copy, YMMV.
winter007

Wonder how will this DC lens look on FF 🙂 with a little cropping if its anything like Nikkkor DX, you are left with a 30Mpix 5:4 image on D800.
- san
  
  I think you’ll be mostly fine with 5:4 from 24mm onward, except for shots where the corners are critical.
  On the last link you can see how it fares on FF (using 5D II).
  You’re welcome. 😉
  - winter007
    
    Thanks! Missed the last part of the post… these things happen if I read before my morning coffee 🙂
  - neversink
    
    Every shot for me is critical. Why put this on an FX if it cuts off the corners….??????? How can I give that to a client???
Carsten Saager

Looks they have a winner here, pretty sharp, well controlled fall-off and distortion and a good bokeh – even for >$1200 – it will remove the need for many DX shooters as they can get roughly the same DoF and noise performance as with a FX – for less
MK

if nikon doesn’t step up, i may as well buy sigma lenses in the future. 24, 35 and 85 1,4 are all over priced PLASTIC gold ring. Now, there are even more plastic gold ring, they charge consumers premium price but can’t gave us better built. The latest Sigma lenses have superior metal built, superior IQ. Why do i still need to buy tat stupid plastics?
- the real Pablo Ricasso
  
  MK, please get your facts right before you post next time. All of those 3 pro Nikon primes come with full internal magnesium alloy construction with plastic externals, just like the new sigma art series lenses. Oh and btw, comparing pro Nikon primes with sigma zooms is just silly.
Dreams&Visions

Doesn’t look that great sry. My nikon primes are way sharper.
Green Life

A serious contender. Though I’m afraid the price point will reflect the fact that this lens is unprecedented and has no competition.

If you are not for ultimate sharpness (which is pointless most of the time, tbh) this lens is the perfect companion for low-light sessions.
Byron

Have been considering both the 35mm & 50mm primes for D800. Now I wonder if I should get this to use on DX (15MP) instead for greater flexibility?
Smudger

“Another post shows the lens coverage when used on a full frame camera (Canon 5D Mark II).”

Users of 1.4 AFS optics will be familliar with this level of vignetting!!!
RonsterWVU

I wouldn’t buy this lens, because it blurs everyone face out.
How can I properly do my street photography!!!

Try again Sigma!
- RC
  
  You’re kidding right?
Alfonso FotoNovedades

Best 18mm ever, but its too big for my D5100
Nikon, give me a prime 35mm f/1.2 please!!
Chi

Where are the images taken WITH the lens? 😕
Jasper Bronkhorst

Check out this video (English subtitled!) as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhLMGKnduQU
Roberto Rodriguez Meza

Is this lens compatible with the Nikon D5100??
- Nikon Rumors
  
  yes

First images taken with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens are out

Search NikonRumors.com

Categories

Addicts Websites

Archives

More NikonRumors Stories

First images taken with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens are out

Search NikonRumors.com

Categories

Addicts Websites

Archives

More NikonRumors Stories

Tags