The Sigma 12-24 is currently the widest rectilinear wide-angle for fullframe (35mm format): at 12mm, it gives an amazing angle of view of 122 degrees (by comparison, the widest wideangle of Canon and Nikon offers "just" a 114 degrees view). As if it wasn't enough, it has even the flexibility of being a zoom, and it is much cheaper than Canon and Nikon wideangles. Is it really that good?
Lens Specifications
Focal length: 12-24 mm
Lens construction: 16 elements in 12 groups
Number of Diaphragm Blades: 9 blades
Angle of view: 122.00º - 84.10º (on 35mm camera); 102.80º - 64.18º (on APS-C camera)
Max. Magnification: 1:7.1
Maximum Aperture: f/4.5-5.6
Minimum Aperture: f/22
Image stabilization: No
Autofocus: Inner ultrasonic motor [more info about autofocus]
Full Time Manual Focus: Yes
Closest Focusing Distance: 0.28 meters
Filter size: Rear Type (Gelatin Filter)
Dimensions (Diameter x Length): 83 x 100 mm
Weight: 615 g
Weather sealing: No
Price: $ 690 at B&H
Announced: 2003
Accessories: Rear cap, front cap, lens case.
Description
The 12-24 has the built quality of the best Sigma EX lenses: it feels very sturdy, even tought it is not on par with the most recent Canon L lenses, as the 24-105 L IS. It has the classic black matte finish of Sigma professional lenses - very nice, but not very resistant...with time, it shows clearly the wear, in particular if you use it in adverse conditions as high humidity or rain. My biggest complaint about the built quality is the lack of weather sealing; I always use this lens outdoor and it is a bit bothering to know that rain or dust might enter into the lens body.
The body of the lens is quite big (visibly bigger than Sigma 10-20 or Canon 17-40) and it has a very peculiar front element, that is protected by the fixed lens hood. The ring closer to the camea body is the zoom ring, while the ring closer to the lens hood is the focus ring: they are a little stiff, but that's OK in this kind of lens, the slight stiffness assures that you don't move the zoom or the focus unintentionally. The lens does not extend during zooming: a nice plus, that partially compensates the lack of weather sealing.
Next to the lens mount there is the AF switch. Even though I use almost always this lens in manual focus, it has the excellent Sigma HSM (ultrasonic) AF motor with full time manual focus, that ensures fast and quiet AF. Of course, the lens does not extend durin focussing, nor it rotates the front element: all the focus operation are internal.
On the rear of the lens, it is possible to mount Gelatin-tipy filter - they are more awkward than the classic filter, but the exceptional angle of view and the very convex front element of this lens make impossible to use the standard front-type filters. That said, I am not a fan of filters so this is not a big problem for me.
Similar Lenses (for Canon EOS)
The Sigma 12-24 is an unique lens - is you want a 12mm for fullframe, there aren't other choices. It would be great if Canon annouces a 12-24 L lens with weather sealing and better image quality in the corners, but so far this lens doesn't exist.
The Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM has shorter focal lenghts, but it works only on APS-C cameras, where it gives the same angle of view of a 16-32mm. It is a little sharper than the 12-24 and it has less tendency to flare; it is smaller and cheaper: overall, it is a much better choice if you plan to stay with APS-C cameras.
The Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM and the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM have a better image quality, in particular in the edges, and a slightly better built (they are weather sealed), but they are much less wide than the Sigma 12-24.
The Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 L USM is almost as wide as the Sigma, but it does not matches yet the 12mm focal lenght, it is much more expensive and it is less versatile, since it has a fixed focal lenght.
Image Quality
The image quality of the sigma 12-24 is surprisingly good, even with a FF camera. It as sharp as the 17-40, except in the extreme corners, that are very soft at f/4.5 (remember, I refer to fullframe, non APS-C). It improves by stopping down and it is pretty good from corner to corner at f/16, the aperture that I use for the majority of my landscape photos. The distortion is exceptionally low - much better than the Canon 17-40 L.
The following samples show the image quality of the lens; they are all at 12mm since this is the focal lenght that I use for the 90% of my photos with this lens. For the same reason, the samples are taken at small apertures since I almost always use it at f/11, f/16 or f/22 (I want wide depth of field for landscapes). These photos are not meant as artistic photos, they are just test samples; if you want to see "artistic" photos taken with this lens browse in the galleries. The photos had been taken in RAW format and converted with Photoshop CS2; I processed them to optimize the image quality (contrast, color, sharpness), and I saved them as high-quality JPEG for web display. You can download both the processed JPEG and the original, untouched RAW file.
Click on every image to download the full size JPEG sample, or use the RAW link to download the untouched RAW (large files!). Please respect the copyright! These images can be printed only to evaluate the quality of the lens, for personal purposes. All other usages are prohibited.
Pros
. The widest lens currently available for fullframe (35mm format)
. Versatile zoom range
. Very good AF
. Good built quality
. Extremely low distortion
. Very good image quality even on fullframe, if you stop down a little
Cons
. Lack of weather sealing
. Softness in the corner at the widest apertures (on fullframe)
Conclusion
The unique Sigma 12-24 is not a lens for everyone. If you don't have a fullframe camera and you don't plan to buy one soon, there are better choised for APS-C format: on a 400D or 30D the Sigma 10-20 gives a wider view, less flare and a little more sharpness. If you have a FF camera, the amazing angle of view of the 12-24 makes it very interesting: the Canon offering have a slight edge in terms of sharpness, but they don't even come close to 12mm. I highly recommend this lens to landscape photographers who use a fullframe camera.
Posted by Pablo Yanez on November 10, 2006 at 10:28 AM
Good review, but you forgot to mention the Canon 10-22mm EF-S. As a former very satisfied owner, I can say that this in my opinion is the best lens available for the APS-C bodies. Before buying it I compared it to the Canon 17-40mm (not really very wide on APS-C), the Canon 16-35mm and Sigma 12-24mm. In all respects this lens (in the 10-22mm range) was the superior or equal to the above lenses, and offered much better wide coverage and was a better lens to cary on long hikes.
I've recently switched to Nikon equipment and found (sadly) that there simply is no lens equal for Nikon bodies, either from Nikon or 3rd parties (I tried Nikon, Tokina and Sigma). Found that the Sigma 10-20mm was the closest in performance, but still not as good as the Canon 10-22mm.
Hi Pablo,
there are various super wide zooms for APS-C, I've chosen to mention the Sigma 10-20 because I've tried it and I really liked it, but overall I think that the Sigma 12-24 should be compared only to the other FF lenses, instead of APS-C lenses...If I had to choose a lens for APS-C I'd exclude immediately the Sigma 12-24, the are many better choices; instead, it shines on FF, where it is truly unparalleled.
Of course this is just my personal opinion! ;-)
Posted by Robert Fisher on November 10, 2006 at 10:43 AM
You're maybe one of the lucky ones. I've read numerous accounts of bad copies of this lens and customers having to send them back to Sigma multiple times for adjustments. I was considering this lens, and I'm a Sigma fan, but decided against it because of the number of negative accounts I've seen.
Posted by Basil Greber on November 15, 2006 at 4:59 PM
Hi Juza
Thanks for the review, interesting to read. I think I'll go for a Tokina 12-24, though, since I don't think I'll have the money for any kind of FF camera anytime in the next 10 years.
Basil
Posted by Kent Staubus on January 9, 2007 at 1:12 AM
I've been using the Sigma 10-20mm on a D80 for the past 6 weeks and have been happy with it, It resists flare very well! I'm not afraid to take shots directly into the sun with it.
Discussion
5 repliesThe Sigma 12-24 is currently the widest rectilinear wide-angle for fullframe (35mm format): at 12mm, it gives an amazing angle of view of 122 degrees (by comparison, the widest wideangle of Canon and Nikon offers "just" a 114 degrees view). As if it wasn't enough, it has even the flexibility of being a zoom, and it is much cheaper than Canon and Nikon wideangles. Is it really that good?
Lens Specifications
Focal length: 12-24 mm
Lens construction: 16 elements in 12 groups
Number of Diaphragm Blades: 9 blades
Angle of view: 122.00º - 84.10º (on 35mm camera); 102.80º - 64.18º (on APS-C camera)
Max. Magnification: 1:7.1
Maximum Aperture: f/4.5-5.6
Minimum Aperture: f/22
Image stabilization: No
Autofocus: Inner ultrasonic motor [more info about autofocus]
Full Time Manual Focus: Yes
Closest Focusing Distance: 0.28 meters
Filter size: Rear Type (Gelatin Filter)
Dimensions (Diameter x Length): 83 x 100 mm
Weight: 615 g
Weather sealing: No
Price: $ 690 at B&H
Announced: 2003
Accessories: Rear cap, front cap, lens case.
Description
The 12-24 has the built quality of the best Sigma EX lenses: it feels very sturdy, even tought it is not on par with the most recent Canon L lenses, as the 24-105 L IS. It has the classic black matte finish of Sigma professional lenses - very nice, but not very resistant...with time, it shows clearly the wear, in particular if you use it in adverse conditions as high humidity or rain. My biggest complaint about the built quality is the lack of weather sealing; I always use this lens outdoor and it is a bit bothering to know that rain or dust might enter into the lens body.
The body of the lens is quite big (visibly bigger than Sigma 10-20 or Canon 17-40) and it has a very peculiar front element, that is protected by the fixed lens hood. The ring closer to the camea body is the zoom ring, while the ring closer to the lens hood is the focus ring: they are a little stiff, but that's OK in this kind of lens, the slight stiffness assures that you don't move the zoom or the focus unintentionally. The lens does not extend during zooming: a nice plus, that partially compensates the lack of weather sealing.
Next to the lens mount there is the AF switch. Even though I use almost always this lens in manual focus, it has the excellent Sigma HSM (ultrasonic) AF motor with full time manual focus, that ensures fast and quiet AF. Of course, the lens does not extend durin focussing, nor it rotates the front element: all the focus operation are internal.
On the rear of the lens, it is possible to mount Gelatin-tipy filter - they are more awkward than the classic filter, but the exceptional angle of view and the very convex front element of this lens make impossible to use the standard front-type filters. That said, I am not a fan of filters so this is not a big problem for me.
Similar Lenses (for Canon EOS)
The Sigma 12-24 is an unique lens - is you want a 12mm for fullframe, there aren't other choices. It would be great if Canon annouces a 12-24 L lens with weather sealing and better image quality in the corners, but so far this lens doesn't exist.
The Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM has shorter focal lenghts, but it works only on APS-C cameras, where it gives the same angle of view of a 16-32mm. It is a little sharper than the 12-24 and it has less tendency to flare; it is smaller and cheaper: overall, it is a much better choice if you plan to stay with APS-C cameras.
The Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM and the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM have a better image quality, in particular in the edges, and a slightly better built (they are weather sealed), but they are much less wide than the Sigma 12-24.
The Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 L USM is almost as wide as the Sigma, but it does not matches yet the 12mm focal lenght, it is much more expensive and it is less versatile, since it has a fixed focal lenght.
Image Quality
The image quality of the sigma 12-24 is surprisingly good, even with a FF camera. It as sharp as the 17-40, except in the extreme corners, that are very soft at f/4.5 (remember, I refer to fullframe, non APS-C). It improves by stopping down and it is pretty good from corner to corner at f/16, the aperture that I use for the majority of my landscape photos. The distortion is exceptionally low - much better than the Canon 17-40 L.
The following samples show the image quality of the lens; they are all at 12mm since this is the focal lenght that I use for the 90% of my photos with this lens. For the same reason, the samples are taken at small apertures since I almost always use it at f/11, f/16 or f/22 (I want wide depth of field for landscapes). These photos are not meant as artistic photos, they are just test samples; if you want to see "artistic" photos taken with this lens browse in the galleries. The photos had been taken in RAW format and converted with Photoshop CS2; I processed them to optimize the image quality (contrast, color, sharpness), and I saved them as high-quality JPEG for web display. You can download both the processed JPEG and the original, untouched RAW file.
Click on every image to download the full size JPEG sample, or use the RAW link to download the untouched RAW (large files!). Please respect the copyright! These images can be printed only to evaluate the quality of the lens, for personal purposes. All other usages are prohibited.
[image samples in full review]
Other Reviews
- Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM Review by Petteri Solunen
- Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM Review by Photozone
Conclusions
Pros
. The widest lens currently available for fullframe (35mm format)
. Versatile zoom range
. Very good AF
. Good built quality
. Extremely low distortion
. Very good image quality even on fullframe, if you stop down a little
Cons
. Lack of weather sealing
. Softness in the corner at the widest apertures (on fullframe)
Conclusion
The unique Sigma 12-24 is not a lens for everyone. If you don't have a fullframe camera and you don't plan to buy one soon, there are better choised for APS-C format: on a 400D or 30D the Sigma 10-20 gives a wider view, less flare and a little more sharpness. If you have a FF camera, the amazing angle of view of the 12-24 makes it very interesting: the Canon offering have a slight edge in terms of sharpness, but they don't even come close to 12mm. I highly recommend this lens to landscape photographers who use a fullframe camera.
Note: this is the NPN version of the review. Full review (with photos and image samples) here: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM Field Review
I've recently switched to Nikon equipment and found (sadly) that there simply is no lens equal for Nikon bodies, either from Nikon or 3rd parties (I tried Nikon, Tokina and Sigma). Found that the Sigma 10-20mm was the closest in performance, but still not as good as the Canon 10-22mm.
there are various super wide zooms for APS-C, I've chosen to mention the Sigma 10-20 because I've tried it and I really liked it, but overall I think that the Sigma 12-24 should be compared only to the other FF lenses, instead of APS-C lenses...If I had to choose a lens for APS-C I'd exclude immediately the Sigma 12-24, the are many better choices; instead, it shines on FF, where it is truly unparalleled.
Of course this is just my personal opinion! ;-)
Thanks for the review, interesting to read. I think I'll go for a Tokina 12-24, though, since I don't think I'll have the money for any kind of FF camera anytime in the next 10 years.
Basil
Kent in SD