First impressions shooting with the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM


We’ve just published our first impressions of shooting with the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM | Art. We’ve tried to express just why we’re so excited about this lens, that offers APS-C DSLR users access to some of the depth-of-field and low light capabilities that full frame shooters get from their F2.8 zooms. We’re hoping to hear about pricing and availability soon so, in the meantime and in the light of our first impressions, what would you expect to pay for this lens?



Rather than this lens I’d have DX 18mm f/1.4 and 24mm f/1.4 brothers for the 30mm f/1.4.

I guess in a way this lens is a lot like the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8: very narrow range but replaces a number of non-existant primes. I wonder if the price will be similar to the 11-16 as well.


Besides, for those who have tried it: the difference in bokeh between the excellent Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 on DX, and the 24-70mm f/2.8 on FX, is very very faint.

At the wide end there is a slight difference in amount of OOF blur, while at the long end the difference is negligible (due to the DX lens being slightly longer at 85mm equivalent).


Yes, wide primes are sorely lacking for APS-C SLR cameras.

moizes 2

At the setting of 18mm needs f8.0, at least. Sample of the lens given needs to be FT-ed to the body , looks like -2, for the combo. Take a look at the image – plane is sharper than building. Overall good lens, but not for fantastic price of $1800. $1200 is what everyone wants to pay for.


There is what they call the “Sweet Spot” of market PRICING a product such as this lens.

Too high a price disenfranchises potential serious buyers, loosing sales.

Too low a price eats up profits and lowers margin.


Sometimes there is such a case of “Wholesale Windfall”.

Sigma should price this lens a little lower than expected and see a significant boom in sales… and a greater following and respect to their brand name.



Great specs but too big, heavy and probably too expensive…


To me it has to be cheaper than the 24-70mm f2.8 full frame zooms to be successful. But looking at smaller format fast zooms, you have the Panasonic MFT f/2.8 zoom and Olympus’s 14-35mm 4/3 f/2 zoom – which still sells for $2,300. I’d say $1800 sounds about right for this lens… Not that I’ll buy one!


I bet 2000$ however i dont buy lenses for more than 400$


Had the zoom range been just a bit more practical for day-to-day use… let’s say 18-70mm… this would have been the perfect ‘always-on’ lens. Considering that a 50mm f1.8 is so tiny and light, surely 70mm at f1.8 is possible without the lens becoming too large or expensive? But then I know nothing about the physics of lenses!


An APS-C 18-70 constant f/1.8 zoom would be so much more larger, heavier and expensive that it would just be impractical.


OK then, too impractical. But with this limited range, for Canon users the well reviewed EF-S 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 will be a much more useful everyday lens – plus a 50mm f1.8 for those who really need low DoF. I suspect both together will be cheaper than this Sigma.


I hardly think you can consider the 15-85mm in the same class as this lens. They offer very different things. And the 15-85 is only f/3.5-5.6 too. A 24-70 f2.8 would surely be a better comparison?

TB Rich

Agree with Thorbard, I have a 15-85mm lens, the 2 can not be compared as very different purposes. I am considering an indoor fast prime to compliment the 15-85, perhaps a Sigma 30 1.4, but it might not be wide enough at times and I don’t want multiple yet similar FL primes. Therefore this new 1.8 zoom is perfect. Fast enough and flexible enough to do indoor great when speedlites are not practical.


Ever since the Merril Foveon Sensor
Sigma’s new lenses have upped their game simply because the Merrill Sensor shows up flaws in lens design unlike anyother sensor.

Source Article from