Sigma 15-30mm noise

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by eug k, Mar 6, 2004.

  1. eug k

    eug k Guest

    hi,

    Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    by USM lenses?


    thanks


    --


    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. eug k

    Lisa Horton Guest

    eug k wrote:
    >
    > hi,
    >
    > Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > by USM lenses?


    Clearly you have been spoiled by USM lenses. It really is that loud,
    and really does have that weird grating/grinding sound. Seems to be
    pretty reliable, despite all that:)

    Lisa
     
    Lisa Horton, Mar 6, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "eug k" <> wrote in message
    news:c2b5nr$gad$...
    > hi,
    >
    > Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > by USM lenses?


    Yes, it's a feature.

    --
    Here lies the late Martin Francis
    He couldn't tell you the technical merits of Leitz and Zeiss
    But he did take some photographs once.
     
    Martin Francis, Mar 6, 2004
    #3
  4. eug k

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    eug k wrote:
    > hi,
    >
    > Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > by USM lenses?


    Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    of a lens.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Mar 6, 2004
    #4
  5. eug k

    eug k Guest

    Lisa Horton <> wrote:
    > eug k wrote:
    >>
    >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    >> by USM lenses?

    >
    > Clearly you have been spoiled by USM lenses. It really is that loud,
    > and really does have that weird grating/grinding sound. Seems to be
    > pretty reliable, despite all that:)


    Phew, I thought maybe something was wrong. My non-USM
    canon lenses do sound quite a bit quieter!

    oh well, as long as it doesn't grind itself to death that's ok.
    Definitely have to use manual focus in quiet auditoriums
    i guess. :(


    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #5
  6. eug k

    eug k Guest

    Paolo Pizzi <> wrote:
    > eug k wrote:
    >> hi,
    >>
    >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    >> by USM lenses?

    >
    > Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    > quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    > of a lens.


    i certainly would, if i had the extra $1000 or so. :)


    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #6
  7. eug k

    eug k Guest

    Paolo Pizzi <> wrote:
    > eug k wrote:
    >> hi,
    >>
    >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    >> by USM lenses?

    >
    > Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    > quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    > of a lens.


    I don't want to feel like lens whore - I think i'll wait a bit.
    :)


    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #7
  8. eug k

    Sloopy Guest

    In article <c2ben3$rj2$>,
    eug k <> wrote:

    > Paolo Pizzi <> wrote:
    > > eug k wrote:
    > >> hi,
    > >>
    > >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > >> by USM lenses?

    > >
    > > Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    > > quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    > > of a lens.

    >
    > i certainly would, if i had the extra $1000 or so. :)


    Paolo's a Marie Antoinette-style liberal.

    -Sloopy
     
    Sloopy, Mar 6, 2004
    #8
  9. eug k wrote:

    > hi,
    >
    > Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > by USM lenses?


    Sigma construction just isn't anywhere near as good as Canon, so yes -
    you're spoiled. :)

    Fred

    --
    "...Linux, MS-DOS, and Windows XP (also known as the Good, the Bad, and
    the Ugly)."
     
    Fred A. Miller, Mar 6, 2004
    #9
  10. eug k

    Jim Townsend Guest

    eug k wrote:

    > hi,
    >
    > Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > by USM lenses?
    >


    LOL.. I had all Canon USM lenses until I bought a Sigma 15-30..
    I had no need for ultra wide until I started using a 10D.

    Yes, they're loud.. It actually startled me when I first heard the
    racket when the AF kicked in :)
     
    Jim Townsend, Mar 6, 2004
    #10
  11. eug k

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Sloopy wrote:

    >>> Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    >>> quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    >>> of a lens.

    >>
    >> i certainly would, if i had the extra $1000 or so. :)


    Make it an extra $100, that's all.

    > Paolo's a Marie Antoinette-style liberal.


    Hmmm, I say let'em have a national health system, not cake... :)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Mar 6, 2004
    #11
  12. eug k

    Sloopy Guest

    In article <R9d2c.34628$>,
    "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote:

    > Sloopy wrote:
    >
    > >>> Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    > >>> quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    > >>> of a lens.
    > >>
    > >> i certainly would, if i had the extra $1000 or so. :)

    >
    > Make it an extra $100, that's all.


    15-30: $578
    12-24: $649

    B&H says Paolo's right!

    -Sloopy
     
    Sloopy, Mar 6, 2004
    #12
  13. eug k

    eug k Guest

    Paolo Pizzi <> wrote:
    > Sloopy wrote:
    >>>> Return it and get the 12-24, a lot more useful, faster and
    >>>> quieter AF (HSM.) Still, I loved my 15-30, it was one heck
    >>>> of a lens.
    >>>
    >>> i certainly would, if i had the extra $1000 or so. :)

    >
    > Make it an extra $100, that's all.


    Actually yeah, it's a lot cheaper than I thought! I got
    mine off ebay though, so i can't return it... but that's
    ok, i'll try ignore the existence of the 12-24 for the
    moment (read the review today - argh!).



    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #13
  14. eug k

    eug k Guest

    Fred A. Miller <> wrote:
    > eug k wrote:
    >
    >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    >> by USM lenses?

    >
    > Sigma construction just isn't anywhere near as good as Canon, so yes -
    > you're spoiled. :)


    Hrm.. oh well, the price difference makes up for it. :)

    What about the HSM lenses? Are they as silent as USM?


    thanks

    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #14
  15. eug k

    eug k Guest

    Jim Townsend <> wrote:
    > eug k wrote:
    >
    >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    >> by USM lenses?
    >>

    >
    > LOL.. I had all Canon USM lenses until I bought a Sigma 15-30..
    > I had no need for ultra wide until I started using a 10D.
    >
    > Yes, they're loud.. It actually startled me when I first heard the
    > racket when the AF kicked in :)


    One of the reviews I read described it as "The focusing is
    quiet, but not "silent wave" quiet." So much for that! I
    too was startled when the AF kicked in... it reminded me
    of my old cordless screwdriver! :)


    --
     
    eug k, Mar 6, 2004
    #15
  16. eug k

    Guest

    In message <psc2c.115216$>,
    "Fred A. Miller" <> wrote:

    >eug k wrote:
    >
    >> hi,
    >>
    >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    >> by USM lenses?

    >
    >Sigma construction just isn't anywhere near as good as Canon, so yes -
    >you're spoiled. :)


    Non-L Canons have very poor construction, in general. I dropped a 50mm
    f1.4 18 inches, into soil, and it was completely destroyed. Lens
    elements fell out, and the focusing mechanism jammed. I was changing my
    Sigma 15-30mm, holding it about 5 feet above the concrete when someone
    on a bike crashed into me, and the lens fell 5 feet to the concrete; the
    only damage was to the cap over the back of the lens.

    Non-L canon lenses in general have very shoddy manual focusing, as well,
    with lots of play and lots of variation in friction.

    I don't think it's a stretch to say that the better Sigma lenses are
    better built than the low-end Canon lenses.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Mar 6, 2004
    #16
  17. eug k

    Tom Monego Guest

    We had a Sigma 28-70 f2.8's front come off when hit by a falling light stand, a
    couple months later the same thing happened to a 105 Nikon macro and the stand
    bounced off the lens. We all looked for wires from then on. Oh yes the stand
    had a Norman head and a large softbox on it.

    Tom

    >Non-L Canons have very poor construction, in general. I dropped a 50mm
    >f1.4 18 inches, into soil, and it was completely destroyed. Lens
    >elements fell out, and the focusing mechanism jammed. I was changing my
    >Sigma 15-30mm, holding it about 5 feet above the concrete when someone
    >on a bike crashed into me, and the lens fell 5 feet to the concrete; the
    >only damage was to the cap over the back of the lens.
    >
    >Non-L canon lenses in general have very shoddy manual focusing, as well,
    >with lots of play and lots of variation in friction.
    >
    >I don't think it's a stretch to say that the better Sigma lenses are
    >better built than the low-end Canon lenses.
    >--
    >
    > <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    > John P Sheehy <>
    > ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    Tom Monego, Mar 6, 2004
    #17
  18. eug k

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    eug k wrote:

    > What about the HSM lenses? Are they as silent as USM?


    Yes.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Mar 6, 2004
    #18
  19. eug k

    Lisa Horton Guest

    wrote:
    >
    > In message <psc2c.115216$>,
    > "Fred A. Miller" <> wrote:
    >
    > >eug k wrote:
    > >
    > >> hi,
    > >>
    > >> Just picked up a Sigma 15-30mm lens... are they meant to
    > >> be that noisy? Sounds awfully loud, or have I been spoiled
    > >> by USM lenses?

    > >
    > >Sigma construction just isn't anywhere near as good as Canon, so yes -
    > >you're spoiled. :)

    >
    > Non-L Canons have very poor construction, in general. I dropped a 50mm
    > f1.4 18 inches, into soil, and it was completely destroyed. Lens
    > elements fell out, and the focusing mechanism jammed. I was changing my
    > Sigma 15-30mm, holding it about 5 feet above the concrete when someone
    > on a bike crashed into me, and the lens fell 5 feet to the concrete; the
    > only damage was to the cap over the back of the lens.
    >
    > Non-L canon lenses in general have very shoddy manual focusing, as well,
    > with lots of play and lots of variation in friction.
    >
    > I don't think it's a stretch to say that the better Sigma lenses are
    > better built than the low-end Canon lenses.


    I usually find myself in agreement with you John, but not completely
    this time.

    Canon's kit lenses, those I would grant as probably being less well
    constructed than the Sigma EX line, but OTOH, far better than Sigma's
    low end line. From my experience so far, I'd rate Canon's better
    consumer lenses as roughly equal to the Sigma EX line in build quality.
    L lenses of course are beyond comparison with any Sigma lenses.

    Lisa
     
    Lisa Horton, Mar 6, 2004
    #19
  20. wrote:

    [snip]

    > I don't think it's a stretch to say that the better Sigma lenses are
    > better built than the low-end Canon lenses.


    I do! And, so do most everyone else. I'd VERY much like to see "as good"
    cheaper lenses, but so far, NADA!

    Fred

    --
    "...Linux, MS-DOS, and Windows XP (also known as the Good, the Bad, and
    the Ugly)."
     
    Fred A. Miller, Mar 6, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dave.US

    Sigma 15-30mm Lens for Canon EOS 10D

    Dave.US, Aug 30, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    1,150
  2. Alan F Cross
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    655
  3. John

    Fuzzy images using a Sigma 17-30mm f2.8 lens

    John, Oct 11, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    704
  4. Steven Wandy

    Sigma 30mm f1.4 lens opinions?

    Steven Wandy, Nov 4, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    362
    Walter Hofmann
    Nov 7, 2006
  5. Cynicor

    Sigma 30mm f/1.4

    Cynicor, May 12, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    409
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=
    May 13, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page