PDA

View Full Version : Focus adjustment for 2 Sigma 150mm Macros


CallaWolf
21st July 2011, 06:47 PM
What a difference

On my E5, one dials in at +5, the other at +20. I was surprised at the gap. Varying QC by Sigma?

Phill D
21st July 2011, 07:07 PM
So what are you supposed to do if you don't have focus adjust?

zuiko-holic
21st July 2011, 07:11 PM
So what are you supposed to do if you don't have focus adjust?

Avoid Sigma lenses?

Pernsonally, I've never encountered a Sigma lens without a focus problem (front.back focus) despite the camera system.

CallaWolf
22nd July 2011, 06:51 AM
Hmmmm......can't help thinking that's a little drastic

Because once the adjustments are dialled in, they're awesome lenses

Though as Phill D says, you have a problem if you have no way to adjust focus. Manual adjustments would be the only option.

zuiko-holic
22nd July 2011, 07:45 AM
Hmmmm......can't help thinking that's a little drastic

Maybe, but Zuiko lenses is probably the most valued advantage of the E-System.

Sigma is notorious for its bad QC and focus issues. I don't see why people bother with them. With E-620, E-30 and E-5 you can adjust focus but with other "E-" cameras this serious hardware-level issue cannot be solved and there simply isn't any sense of using Sigma lenses on them.



Because once the adjustments are dialled in, they're awesome lenses


Hm, I've personally tried an tested Sigma 30mm f/1.4, 105mm f/2.8, 150mm f/2.8 and the Bigma.

None of them convinced me.

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 was hopelessly soft up to f/2.8 and its edges were horrible. Still, it never reached the IQ of Zuiko 50mm f/2 at any aperture.

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 was probably the best of all but still it couldn't deliver the amount of detail and clarity that Zuiko 35mm f/3.5 and (especially) 50mm f/2 can.
I felt that there was something missing. Good lens for €200-250, not for more (here in Greece it costs €490)

Sigma 150mm f/2.8 is IMO a very overrated lens. I don't know how it behaves on other camera systems but I was very disappointed.
Pretty good for close-ups but if used as a tele lens (focus @ 20mm and above or infinity) it was horrible. Annoying "halos" around edges and mediocre clarity (tested indoors on a convention, artificial lights) make this lens a bad choice for tele work when compared to Zuiko 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5

The Bigma is the most noteworthy because if its reach but both copies I tested were problematic. One had really serious focus issues and the other had a defective diaphragm....

All in all, I've totally rejected Sigma lenses, especially for 4/3.
Focus problems aside, they are not even cheap. If they were, then I could understand why some Olympus users could prefer them.

But being expensive and problematic and with lower IQ than Zuikos ?
What's the point?

I was thinking of buying a Sigma 105mm for Macro work, but when I tested it I said "Thanks, but no thanks". I prefer cropping images taken with Zuiko 35mm and 50mm.

Greytop
22nd July 2011, 08:02 AM
Avoid Sigma lenses?

Pernsonally, I've never encountered a Sigma lens without a focus problem (front.back focus) despite the camera system.

My Sigma 150 is spot on without adjustment ;)

Greytop
22nd July 2011, 08:10 AM
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 is IMO a very overrated lens. I don't know how it behaves on other camera systems but I was very disappointed.
Pretty good for close-ups but if used as a tele lens (focus @ 20mm and above or infinity) it was horrible. Annoying "halos" around edges and mediocre clarity (tested indoors on a convention, artificial lights) make this lens a bad choice for tele work when compared to Zuiko 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5

Not bad for a telephoto lens IMHO.
OK the 50-200 is better (flexiblity and much faster focus) but the Sigma 150mm is no where near bad.
Edit: These are quite heavy crops.

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P5014285.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/33581)

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P5014277.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/33591)

Chevvyf1
22nd July 2011, 09:14 AM
Huw AWESOME SHOTS of that Heron ! Stunning ! Wow you made my day ... off with Sig 150 to find a heron ...

CallaWolf
22nd July 2011, 09:27 AM
+1 - those are excellent

zuiko-holic
23rd July 2011, 12:35 AM
Not bad for a telephoto lens IMHO.
OK the 50-200 is better (flexiblity and much faster focus) but the Sigma 150mm is no where near bad.
Edit: These are quite heavy crops.


These are really nice samples!

However, when lighting conditions are less than ideal, like an interior space with artificial light, I found the Sigma 150mm not up to the task.

Some examples:

Sigma 150mm wide-open

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/8717/sigma1wb.jpg
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/5276/sigma2h.jpg
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4072/sigma3c.jpg
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3871/sigma4.jpg


Zuiko 50-200mm wide-open

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/2873/zuiko1.jpg
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/543/zuiko2.jpg
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/7291/zuiko3.jpg
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/6117/zuiko4.jpg

*No Post-Processing. NF Off. JPEGs extracted from E-3 RAWs via Lightroom 3. Compressed with ACDSee @ 88% Quality. EXIFs intact to check settings.*

The differences can be easily noticed even without the crops or 100% pixel-peeping.
The pictures taken with the Zuiko 50-200 have much more clarity and appear sharper while those from Sigma could be again the result of a focusing issue (again!). None of the images I shot with the Sigma was actually sharp.

*Images taken at the 16th WFTU Congress which took place in Greece. April 6th 2011*

gregles
23rd July 2011, 01:25 AM
I have a soft spot for the sigma 10-20mm:)

Very nice lens for me

Ross the fiddler
23rd July 2011, 01:48 AM
So what are you supposed to do if you don't have focus adjust?

Use manual focus? The AF is useful with that lens, but so is MF. My lens seems to be pretty good on my E30, but I haven't yet tried testing it on a focus test chart to be totally sure.

Phill D
23rd July 2011, 05:36 AM
Ross if manual focus was the only alternative I wouldn't buy the lens. That would be so restrictive. I don't know how easy manual focus is on the higher end Oly cameras but with the small VF on the E510 it's pretty difficult. I almost never use manual. As you may have read in another focus thread I posted I am having issues with AF on my E510 at the moment so I guess I'm a bit sensitive to the issue. My E510 has just gone off to be recalibrated by Olympus estimated cost 145 :eek: I hope it was worth it. Maybe I'll post my experiences when I get it back.

Greytop
23rd July 2011, 10:34 AM
These are really nice samples!

However, when lighting conditions are less than ideal, like an interior space with artificial light, I found the Sigma 150mm not up to the task.

Some examples:


The differences can be easily noticed even without the crops or 100% pixel-peeping.
The pictures taken with the Zuiko 50-200 have much more clarity and appear sharper while those from Sigma could be again the result of a focusing issue (again!). None of the images I shot with the Sigma was actually sharp.

*Images taken at the 16th WFTU Congress which took place in Greece. April 6th 2011*

Maybe you tried a bad sample zuiko-holic but I wouldn't tarnish all Sigma lenses with the same brush.

To be honest I have rarely used mine wide open because I use it for macro (it's intended purpose) but just for my own curiosity I've just taken some long distance shots from my back door of features in our garden and beyond. The house is about 120+ metres away, the swing is about 50 metres away for reference.
These are all Jpegs straight from the camera, resized for the web, there are also a few other examples you can view at the same location.

I don't think these are at all bad for f/2.8

http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Sigma%20150mm%20wide%20open%20examples/P7236835.jpg

100% crop
http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Sigma%20150mm%20wide%20open%20examples/P7236835_crop.jpg

http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Sigma%20150mm%20wide%20open%20examples/p7236827.jpg

100% crop
http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Sigma%20150mm%20wide%20open%20examples/p7236827_crop.jpg

http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Sigma%20150mm%20wide%20open%20examples/P7236833.jpg

100% crop
http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Sigma%20150mm%20wide%20open%20examples/P7236833_crop.jpg

Chevvyf1
23rd July 2011, 11:31 AM
Huw,
I am with you 100% the Sigma 150 and Bigma are terrific lenses ! As per your own samples I have tried the 150 about the garden for distance shots and find it pretty good - considering its a MACRO LENS ! *chr Frankly, I would only use it for MACRO ! However, to get the best SETTINGS are the key *chr

zuiko-holic
24th July 2011, 11:14 AM
Maybe you tried a bad sample zuiko-holic but I wouldn't tarnish all Sigma lenses with the same brush.

Maybe, but again?

I can upload samples of a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 that were hoplessly soft.

It's what I said, it seems that NONE of ths Sigma lenses I've tried was a "good" copy.

I buy Olympus gear and Honda cars for their reliability and quality. I don't gamble with my money.

Sigma is known for its "bad" copies. These were not single incidents.


To be honest I have rarely used mine wide open because I use it for macro (it's intended purpose)


Yes, sigma 150mm is good at close-ups and Macro as I mentioned before.


but just for my own curiosity I've just taken some long distance shots from my back door of features in our garden and beyond. The house is about 120+ metres away, the swing is about 50 metres away for reference.
These are all Jpegs straight from the camera, resized for the web, there are also a few other examples you can view at the same location.

I don't think these are at all bad for f/2.8


These samples are not bad for f/2.8, but I don't cosinder them particularly good either for a lens that costs 695 (here in Greece at least) and weighs a ton.
I can get similar performance by my OM Zuiko 135mm f/2.8 wide open (ok, maybe with some purple fringing) that cost me 85.

Chevvyf1
24th July 2011, 11:30 AM
Maybe, but again?

I can upload samples of a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 that were hoplessly soft.

It's what I said, it seems that NONE of ths Sigma lenses I've tried was a "good" copy.

I buy Olympus gear and Honda cars for their reliability and quality. I don't gamble with my money.

Sigma is known for its "bad" copies. These were not single incidents.



Yes, sigma 150mm is good at close-ups and Macro as I mentioned before.



These samples are not bad for f/2.8, but I don't cosinder them particularly good either for a lens that costs €695 (here in Greece at least) and weighs a ton.
I can get similar performance by my OM Zuiko 135mm f/2.8 wide open (ok, maybe with some purple fringing) that cost me €85.

Zuiko-holic - I have to ask you, would you use a hammer to screw a SCREW in ?

zuiko-holic
24th July 2011, 11:43 AM
Zuiko-holic - I have to ask you, would you use a hammer to screw a SCREW in ?

You mean if I would use a tele-macro lens for tele work?
Yes, I probably would (as I did). It is a telephoto lens after all and f/2.8 is very useful in many situations (low light or if shallow DoF is desirable) if it is indeed usable. Who tells me not to?

Chevvyf1
24th July 2011, 11:58 AM
You mean if I would use a tele-macro lens for tele work?
Yes, I probably would (as I did). It is a telephoto lens after all and f/2.8 is very useful in many situations (low light or if shallow DoF is desirable) if it is indeed usable. Who tells me not to?

Oh! Dear !

Well, I bought my Sigma 150 Macro lens to use as a macro ! and this morning, getting some more awesome macro shots of Bees, for the first time I used it at a longer fl and got this of my roof pitch and the lichen ! Given what your looking at is a lossy jpeg, I think most will agree this is good detail. ooh and it was handheld, just its so heavy ! for me:(

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P7241651.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/37174)

THIS shot is 100% crop, but phenominal detail of the lichen, given the lens, low light (the sun had gone in:) ) ... so perhaps there is something wrong with your Sigma lens, or maybe your camera settings ?

I was at f10 and 1/250 (the bee settings for Macro :) )

and this is my first rubbish shot using BIGMA at the far end ... given my lack of knowledge of the lens/settings and the fl at full reach 500 its not bad, there is some clarity in feathers !

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P4090137c.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/32183)

David M
24th July 2011, 01:26 PM
These samples are not bad for f/2.8, but I don't cosinder them particularly good either for a lens that costs 695 (here in Greece at least) and weighs a ton.
I can get similar performance by my OM Zuiko 135mm f/2.8 wide open (ok, maybe with some purple fringing) that cost me 85.

Try finding the Tamron 135mm f/2.5, they probably sell for peanuts these days. A third of a stop faster than the OMZ and I seem to recall it focuses quite a bit closer.

The only Sigma I've tried that was half decent was the short lived 800mm f/5.6 and that was the UK importers demo copy so it should have been good.

zuiko-holic
24th July 2011, 03:38 PM
Try finding the Tamron 135mm f/2.5, they probably sell for peanuts these days. A third of a stop faster than the OMZ and I seem to recall it focuses quite a bit closer.

Thanks for the head's up, but I've stopped looking for other lenses unless they're Zuikos. I had collected many lenses over the years (Yashinon, Sigma, Quantaray, Sigma etc) but I've decided to restrick my OM collection to just Zuiko lenses.

Tamron had indded produced some very nice lenses.


The only Sigma I've tried that was half decent was the short lived 800mm f/5.6 and that was the UK importers demo copy so it should have been good.

Don't be so sure. The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I've tested was the importers demo and I couldn't take a single really sharp picture with it regardless the aperture setting. It was AF of course so that was to be expected.



Oh! Dear !

Well, I bought my Sigma 150 Macro lens to use as a macro !


Of course you did! I'm not gonna tell you how to use your lens.
And of course you cannot tell me how to use my lens too...

For example, I cannot use my Zuiko 50mm f/2 MACRO for portraits because it is a "Macro" lens?

Or maybe it is forbidden to use my OM Zuiko Auto-MACRO 50mm f/3.5 on my OM-4 for street photography because it is a "Macro" lens?

Or perhaps I shouldn't use my Zuiko 70-300 for close-ups or Macro because it is a Zoom-Telephoto and it isn't marketed as a Macro lens?


THIS shot is 100% crop, but phenominal detail of the lichen, given the lens, low light (the sun had gone in:) ) ... so perhaps there is something wrong with your Sigma lens, or maybe your camera settings ?


I have the feeling that people do not read my posts.
For the third time in this thread I will write: "Maybe the Sigma I tested had a focus issue, AGAIN?!?".

I also bet that most haven't checked the pictures I have uploaded in my previous post. The settings were the same for both Zuiko 50-200 and Sigma 150. Also, the EXIFs are available. Have you at least spent some seconds to check them out before posting some of your -admitedly good but low resolutions samples-? (you would have seen that the shots were taken indoors).

By the way, the topic of this thread is about the focus adjustment of the Sigma 150mm lens. Do you find it logical for someone who doesn't own an E-620, E-30 or E-5 (which offer focus adjustment) to invest on expensive Sigma lenses when the Quality Control of Sigma is horrible (and noone can deny that no matter how much he is fond of Sigma, regardless of the camera system he/she uses) and most of them may (and will) need a focus adjustment?

If you want us both to continue flaming the thread with a contradistinction about Sigma lenses, I can also upload samples of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I also tested and -AGAIN- had focusing issues if it isn't just a very mediocre lens, especially for the price.

Ross the fiddler
24th July 2011, 11:29 PM
What a difference

On my E5, one dials in at +5, the other at +20. I was surprised at the gap. Varying QC by Sigma?

My Sigma 150 (as mentioned earlier) works nice on my E30, but now I have the EC14, the combination needed -18 (for distant shots) to be set on the E30.

CallaWolf
25th July 2011, 08:27 AM
My Sigma 150 (as mentioned earlier) works nice on my E30, but now I have the EC14, the combination needed -18 (for distant shots) to be set on the E30.

Ross....bit puzzled by your addendum "(for distant shots)" - wouldn't your -18 setting also apply to macro shots were you to use the 150/EC14 combo there as well? Or is there some way of telling the AF adjust (as an example) "use -18 if the shot is distant, and 0 if the shot is close" ?

Ross the fiddler
25th July 2011, 10:14 AM
Ross....bit puzzled by your addendum "(for distant shots)" - wouldn't your -18 setting also apply to macro shots were you to use the 150/EC14 combo there as well? Or is there some way of telling the AF adjust (as an example) "use -18 if the shot is distant, and 0 if the shot is close" ?

I've only tried the combination so far on long distance & yes, it should be the same for close too (hopefully). Life has just been a bit upsetting & stressful this last fortnight so haven't had too much opportunity to try a lot.

CallaWolf
25th July 2011, 10:29 AM
Life has just been a bit upsetting & stressful this last fortnight so haven't had too much opportunity to try a lot.

Really sorry to hear that matey

Chevvyf1
25th July 2011, 01:55 PM
... Life has just been a bit upsetting & stressful this last fortnight so haven't had too much opportunity to try a lot.

Ross I am sorry to hear this and hope things get a lot better very soon

Ross the fiddler
25th July 2011, 10:25 PM
Thanks for the concern, but it was my Mum that enjoyed her 90th birthday party & died quickly a week later, sad to lose but happy to have her this long. The stress was getting a daughter back from Canada on holidays & another from Melbourne. Now it's just the logistics with the property & family (a brother still lives in the house with his wife).

Chevvyf1
26th July 2011, 08:42 AM
Ross I dont envy you ! My mother died two weeks before our holiday and it was and is stressful! But that she had a good age and a full life makes it easier.