10 out of 10 points and recommendedSharp. Supergood feel when MF.No OS
Needs microadjustment but when you are finished with that cumbersome work you are really rewarded.reviewed August 8th, 2012 (purchased for $500)
With that manual fovus and silent HSM you can film very nice macros.
You need steady hands or tripod for best results.
Kills my Canon 100 mm 2.8 - so I sold it.
Best bang for the buck!
8 out of 10 points and recommendedAmazing little lens for 1,6 crop cameras. Sharp from 2.0. Good contrastLoud AF- motor. MF focus a pain.
Bought this used and gave away my 50 1,8. Very good for streetphoto and landscape. It is sharp from center to edge.reviewed August 8th, 2012 (purchased for $200)
Wouldnt pay more than the 200 $ though...
Try it on astrophotgraphy!
10 out of 10 points and recommendedA true gem! Sharp wide open. Small.Prone to flares wide open...
This is my favourite astrophotolens.reviewed August 8th, 2012 (purchased for $300)
And I use it with success photographing babys in low light situation.
You can use in streetphoto without people realising you in fact are zomming in with a 160 mm equivalent mount on a 7D.
7 out of 10 points and recommendedFocus just front of the lens. Only f1,8 20 mm in the world!Soft wide open.
Listprice is 700$. You shouldnt pay more than half of that.reviewed August 8th, 2012 (purchased for $300)
For the my price it is a funny little lens. Use on starry nights or when you want to do landscape with something up close.
Compared to Canon 10-22 it is soft until 8,0 but the Canon lacks 1,8 - 2,8.
Recommendet if you find it for the right price and is not decentered.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedSharp wide open, super sharp from 6.3. Takes TC with full AF. 2x very good from f9. OSHeavy. Inconsistent AF wich requires micradjustment. Contrast a bit weak.
Bought this lens after long consideration and after testing a used non OS version. Very pleasent surprise after testing on birds and wildlife.reviewed August 8th, 2012 (purchased for $2,500)
Have a supersharp Canon 100-400 but need more reach and better F plus full AF which is imposible witch Canon and a TC (unless you go for 1D). It possible to reach 600 mm and with my 7D it equals 960 mm. With the very good 3 step OS and full AF i have managed BIF shots impossible with the Canonlens.
It is heavy, 3 kg so i prefer my Canon 100-400 when mobile.
When i want bokeh and supersharp photos i use my Sigma.
Due to better OS and 2.8 you have a 3-4 steps advantage over the Canonlens.
All in all higly recommended for people who wants a versatile lens ( 120-300 F2,8 or 160-420 F 4,0). You get very good pics even with 600 mm F 9,0.