The infamous Sigma 18-35mm 1.8

[Coleman121]

I’ve been looking at this lens for a long time. I’ve seen just how incredibly sharp and how great the contrast is with such wide apertures through the entire focal lengths. But I know this is notorouisly bad for AF issues with all types of mounts.

I’ve read that while you can go ahead and calibrate it with their USB dock, it seems as though it’s more of an inconsistency issue.

I know there’s a tonne of forums on this but should these problems restrict me from getting this lens? I use a D7200, and I don’t know what I should do.

 

[Derrel]

Good performance in terms of sharpness, even at wider f/stops. But...not very impressive in terms of focusing performance...

Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Review - Photography Life

I think it's a tough call. For events/wedding/sports I would never want a lens that had this focusing issue. But....for walkabout/landscape/casual uses where focusing speed/accuracy can be lesser, it'd be a fine lens.

 

[Coleman121]

Yeah, a very tough call for me. For such a professional lens for crop sensor cameras that’s so hard to give up on, but people having AF problems just pulls me away from it. My other option for a standard zoom was the sigma 17-50mm which I heard is also great, but then again there’s no guarantee that this lens wouldn’t also have AF issues

 

[ac12]

Note, the Sigma zoom ring turns in the opposite direction than the Nikon zoom ring.

For casual shooting it does not really make a difference, but for anything FAST, where you have to "zoom and shoot," it could/will be a problem.
I used a Sigma 17-50/2.8, once, for about 20 minutes, before I gave up in frustration. I kept loosing shots due to turning the zoom ring in the wrong direction. In sports, when I zoom, it is with muscle memory; I decide that I want to zoom in, and my hand turns the zoom ring in to the right, I don't think "hand, this is the Nikon lens, turn the zoom ring to the right."

There are some reviews where the reviewer complained of inconsistent focus. But how much of it is lens vs. technique, or lack of technique.

 

[ClickAddict]

I purchased the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art when it was still in pre-order so have had it as long as anyone out there. (First on my Canon T2i and then on my 7d II) I got the usb docking unit but it was pretty accurate from the start. I shoot with it for probably %95 of my shots so it pretty much is always on the camera. I also bought the sister lens the 50-100m Art 1.8 (also in preorder so have had it a while) and found it to be a bit more off for focus initially.
I shoot primarily studio work though so my subjects are not typically moving high speeds.

 

[Coleman121]

I purchased the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art when it was still in pre-order so have had it as long as anyone out there. (First on my Canon T2i and then on my 7d II) I got the usb docking unit but it was pretty accurate from the start. I shoot with it for probably %95 of my shots so it pretty much is always on the camera. I also bought the sister lens the 50-100m Art 1.8 (also in preorder so have had it a while) and found it to be a bit more off for focus initially.
I shoot primarily studio work though so my subjects are not typically moving high speeds.

So the AF consistency has been pretty spot on for you? Even giving you're shooting static subjects, I've just been a bit worried about some reviewers saying how it can be inconsistent, meaning that no amount of calibration can fix random OOF. Some have also noted that it can be spot on within the central 1-9 AF points but really dodgy on the outer points (which I'd like to think is pretty important to prevent focus & recompose method at such wide apertures.). However, you then see some reviews using the same bodies and they have no issues at all. It's so strange

 

[Coleman121]

Note, the Sigma zoom ring turns in the opposite direction than the Nikon zoom ring.

For casual shooting it does not really make a difference, but for anything FAST, where you have to "zoom and shoot," it could/will be a problem.
I used a Sigma 17-50/2.8, once, for about 20 minutes, before I gave up in frustration. I kept loosing shots due to turning the zoom ring in the wrong direction. In sports, when I zoom, it is with muscle memory; I decide that I want to zoom in, and my hand turns the zoom ring in to the right, I don't think "hand, this is the Nikon lens, turn the zoom ring to the right."

There are some reviews where the reviewer complained of inconsistent focus. But how much of it is lens vs. technique, or lack of technique.

To me personally, the most important thing is image quality & optics, AF accuracy + build quality. I'm more than happy to try and get used to a new way of doing things if it means that the quality coming out is a whole lot better. I also do have that 17-50 in mind still though

 

[ClickAddict]

I've read about some people with problems. I know I love the lens. I know another full time photographer who uses it as his main lens also and loves it. Not saying there aren't any problems, but if you look on the net for any period of time you'll find negative reviews of pretty much every product out there.

 

[ClickAddict]

I dont focus /recompose, And although the T2i only had 9 focus points (and thus nothing on the outer edges really anyway) I do use the various outer focus points frequently on the 7D mkII.

 

[Derrel]

Sigma has a long, earned reputation of not focusing properly on Nikon cameras, and of course, of zooming or focusing in the NON-Nikon direction. As far as it goes, Sigma seems to do pretty well with Canon d-slrs, but as stated in the review I linked to, one of the most-competent Nikon shooters on the web notes that the lens performed poorly in terms of autofocusing in some situations. Above, in this post, we have Canon shooters telling a Nikon user how great the lens performs--on Canon cameras. But the issue, as stated by Nasim, is that on the Nikon D850, the lens's AF has significant, real problems.

Here's Thom Hogan's review of it...this lens has problems on the D500, for example: Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Art Lens Review | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

Here's a segment of the dPReview review: Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review "
onclusion - Cons

• Restricted zoom range
• Needs detailed AF microadjustment for best results
• Inconsistent autofocus in difficult conditions even after microadjustment
• Physically rather large for a standard zoom"

So...as one can see, there is an actual AF issue with this lens, for some people...

Sigma has had so,so many autofocsuing problems over the years that they invented their accessory "dock", so users can tune their lenses so they work right...and yet...at times according to dPreview, even after microadjustment, there can still be focusing issues.

I dunno...I think you need to ask yourself WHY you want the lens; it's a 2x, 18 to 35mm zoom...that's a pretty narrow focal length range for a zoom that starts at 18mm...For APS-C, there are 18-55, 18-140mm, and up to 18-400mm zooms...Do you want the f/1.8 aperture option?

 

[Torbjorn Jonsson]

Hi,
One alternative would be to use it on a mirrorless camera. I have the EOS M50 and tried the Sigma 18-35 during an hour, testing AF performance. It was great, fast and spot on. I would not hesitate to buy it, but I have other prioroties right now.

Thanks
Torbjorn

 

[Coleman121]

Sigma has a long, earned reputation of not focusing properly on Nikon cameras, and of course, of zooming or focusing in the NON-Nikon direction. As far as it goes, Sigma seems to do pretty well with Canon d-slrs, but as stated in the review I linked to, one of the most-competent Nikon shooters on the web notes that the lens performed poorly in terms of autofocusing in some situations. Above, in this post, we have Canon shooters telling a Nikon user how great the lens performs--on Canon cameras. But the issue, as stated by Nasim, is that on the Nikon D850, the lens's AF has significant, real problems.

Here's Thom Hogan's review of it...this lens has problems on the D500, for example: Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Art Lens Review | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

Here's a segment of the dPReview review: Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review "
onclusion - Cons

• Restricted zoom range
• Needs detailed AF microadjustment for best results
• Inconsistent autofocus in difficult conditions even after microadjustment
• Physically rather large for a standard zoom"

So...as one can see, there is an actual AF issue with this lens, for some people...

Sigma has had so,so many autofocsuing problems over the years that they invented their accessory "dock", so users can tune their lenses so they work right...and yet...at times according to dPreview, even after microadjustment, there can still be focusing issues.

I dunno...I think you need to ask yourself WHY you want the lens; it's a 2x, 18 to 35mm zoom...that's a pretty narrow focal length range for a zoom that starts at 18mm...For APS-C, there are 18-55, 18-140mm, and up to 18-400mm zooms...Do you want the f/1.8 aperture option?

Yes the focal length is fairly narrow, and yes the lens looks to have issues with half of its users. But the key thing I’ve found especially some friends I’ve seen use it, is that it truly is an ART lens. For crop sensor cameras, I just don’t see you getting any lens that is just so sharp from corner to corner at f/2.8, let alone f/1.8. There’s plenty of canon users who have equal as many problems as Nikon users, but it does seem the D500 has the most. Maybe what I can do is go look at the second hand lenses people are selling and try out multiple different Nikon mounted versions of it, and test its’ AF consistency. Some D7200 users have no issues whatsoever, some do. It seems hit and miss, and I think if I can get my hands on a few different ones, then surely one will be just fine.

Like I said, it is an ART lens, and the quality they produce is simply unbeatable for 1.5x sensors. That’s why I’m hung onto it. Besides, if I need 50mm I still have my nifty fifty which I also love, so the 18-35 is no hassle.

 

[Derrel]

Well, it's only $799. I'd buy the lens and not worry about it too much.

 

[Coleman121]

Well, it's only $799. I'd buy the lens and not worry about it too much.

About $600ish second hand
But that’s what I was meaning, say I went to this guys house, had a look at this lens and brought my body with it, tested it for 10-15 minutes - it could give me an indication of how well the consistency would perform. Do you think that’s a solid idea?

 

[Derrel]

Well, it's only $799. I'd buy the lens and not worry about it too much.

About $600ish second hand
But that’s what I was meaning, say I went to this guys house, had a look at this lens and brought my body with it, tested it for 10-15 minutes - it could give me an indication of how well the consistency would perform. Do you think that’s a solid idea?

Sure, test it out. I think that's always a good idea with a used lens, and particularly with a model that has a reputation of having some type of issue. There's nothing to lose, and everything to gain by trying out the lens prior to buying it! For $600, it'd be a nice addition.