Sigma AF 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Lens Art Series Nikon Mount £467 @ kachashop / eBay - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
263

Sigma AF 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Lens Art Series Nikon Mount £467.00 @ kachashop / eBay

£467.00 @ eBay
Great price on these lenses! I couldn't fin any other place selling these under the 549£ mark. Ken Rockwell review: http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/18-35mm-f18.htm "ruly a revolutionary produc… Read More
ResveZ Avatar
7m, 2w agoFound 7 months, 2 weeks ago
Great price on these lenses!
I couldn't fin any other place selling these under the 549£ mark.

Ken Rockwell review: http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/18-35mm-f18.htm

"ruly a revolutionary product, the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 DC HSM is the first wide-angle to standard zoom lens to achieve a large aperture of 1.8. Designed specifically for APS-C sized sensors, the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 translates to 27mm-52.5mm on 35mm camera."
ResveZ Avatar
7m, 2w agoFound 7 months, 2 weeks ago
Options

All Comments

(26) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
grey import - and if you go down that route, you'll find them even cheaper than this.
#3
This is very nice lens for crop sensors, I have one for Canon. Good price.
P.S. Sigma are going to increase lens prices in Europe from 1 Jan 2017.

Edited By: noncho on Dec 07, 2016 08:21
#4
Good deal but I need to make do with my 24-120 f4; can't justify this. Would be great for low light photography though.
#5
1 Like #6
Amazing lens
1 Like #7
Managed to get this for less than £400 with 20% off warehouse deals, it's amazing. But a big heavy chunk, feels great though.
#8
used kachashop before - good seller
1 Like #9
The Ken Rockwell review makes it clear this isn't a long term investment (ie using 10 years down the track), nor is it a very useful range at only 18-35mm.
#10
Noddydog
The Ken Rockwell review makes it clear this isn't a long term investment (ie using 10 years down the track), nor is it a very useful range at only 18-35mm.
I have used these lenses and I loved them. They may not be your Holy Trinity but they are an amazing piece of glass for they're price-tag!
As for Rockwell, I only look at the image reviews, everything else has to be filtered, it's his opinion, after all the glass is nothing but a tool. Buying it not depends on the person and what do they intend to have as a final result, saying 18-35 isn't useful doesn't say anything to me, I might disagree.

Edited By: ResveZ on Dec 07, 2016 19:26
#11
Noddydog
The Ken Rockwell review makes it clear this isn't a long term investment (ie using 10 years down the track), nor is it a very useful range at only 18-35mm.
isn't it common knowledge that kens a tool?
this lens is basically thought of as multiple primes in a (large) can
any need a nice quality 18mm? how about a 20? how ... you get the idea...
oh its not a PRO lens? so he wouldn't buy it... chuck it in the bin!
1 Like #12
The 'practical' difference between an 18mm and 35mm is neglible. Take three steps forward and you've got the same thing. So multiple primes in this range is a nonsense.

The quality of the Art lenses is not lost on me. I recently made a promo in NY where the 50mm was on my camera most of the time. Wonderful bokeh and really beautiful light flare (if you catch it right). But nonetheless Ken makes a valid point. If 10 years from now it's unusable, it's a poor investment for the non-pro.
#13
18-35mm = 3 steps? lol? and ofc those 3 steps are always available to take
and ofc you are right - only pros buy lenses
#14
You give the example of 18mm and 20. Would you really go and buy a 20mm if you owned a 18mm?!!! Pros mostly don't worry much about a 10 year+ lifespan. We'll have earnt our money back on most lenses in a few weeks/months and by 10 years we'll have moved on to new glass or the lens will be pretty much knackered.
#15
Noddydog
You give the example of 18mm and 20. Would you really go and buy a 20mm if you owned a 18mm?!!! Pros mostly don't worry much about a 10 year+ lifespan. We'll have earnt our money back on most lenses in a few weeks/months and by 10 years we'll have moved on to new glass or the lens will be pretty much knackered.
no i have given the 18 and 20 as the beginning of a potential list - i never said that they had to be bought together
just showing that there is a wide range to 'choose from' in that existing package


Edited By: brilly on Dec 08, 2016 07:49
#16
But it's not a 'wide' range. At best the only two primes in this range you'd realistically have in your kit bag is 18 and 35. So I'll concede it's a 2 for one lens. But the range is still very limited which is why the cheapie old kit lens is normally 18-50/55mm.
#17
Noddydog
But it's not a 'wide' range. At best the only two primes in this range you'd realistically have in your kit bag is 18 and 35. So I'll concede it's a 2 for one lens. But the range is still very limited which is why the cheapie old kit lens is normally 18-50/55mm.
why not reply to whats written rather than what you think is written?
there are a wide range of focal lengths to choose from - let me break it down for you
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

i didn't say that covered a wide range

now if someone wants to choose a prime or 2 or 3 then they are not limited by whats available but only their ability to twiddle the lens

cheapie old kit is irrelevant as its usually 3.5-5.6 aperture, when that cheapie kit is a constant 1.8 then bring it up

summary: think for yourself
#18
This is a nonsense. Clever as you may hope it seems to list every number between 18 and 35, any real shooter isn't going to say 'I'll shoot this on a 20mm rather than a 18'. The whole point of NOT having a prime is you have a reasonably wide zoom range (at the expense of prime quality). Whilst you may consider Ken a tool (and what Internet guru doesn't get it wrong in a while) he's actually right on this. By all means keep posting your limited range of numbers, but it will look much more impressive when I do the same with a f2.8 70-200mm... if I didn't have better things to do.
#19
Noddydog
This is a nonsense. Clever as you may hope it seems to list every number between 18 and 35, any real shooter isn't going to say 'I'll shoot this on a 20mm rather than a 18'. The whole point of NOT having a prime is you have a reasonably wide zoom range (at the expense of prime quality). Whilst you may consider Ken a tool (and what Internet guru doesn't get it wrong in a while) he's actually right on this. By all means keep posting your limited range of numbers, but it will look much more impressive when I do the same with a f2.8 70-200mm... if I didn't have better things to do.
the point is - you dont have to choose between the primes - whats so difficult?
do i buy a 20mm or a 24mm? hmm which is better i dunno - what bout the 30mm i like nah its 2.8
oh wait... dont need to even consider here - have a full box of 1.8 primes
ofc you dont need to use them all at once
#20
You strike me as the sort who'd buy an Austin Allegro because it has four seperate wheels. So I guess we'll leave it there.



Edited By: Noddydog on Dec 08, 2016 11:49: Because sometimes it's good to change!
#21
Noddydog
You strike me as the sort who'd buy an Austin Allegro because it has four seperate wheels. So I guess we'll leave it there.
leave it where? at your nonsensical irrelevant attempt at humour? guess so!
#22
Noddydog
The 'practical' difference between an 18mm and 35mm is neglible. Take three steps forward and you've got the same thing. So multiple primes in this range is a nonsense.

The quality of the Art lenses is not lost on me. I recently made a promo in NY where the 50mm was on my camera most of the time. Wonderful bokeh and really beautiful light flare (if you catch it right). But nonetheless Ken makes a valid point. If 10 years from now it's unusable, it's a poor investment for the non-pro.


Stepping forward and zooming out doesnt give you the same shot. Different focal lengths give you completely different looks. [img]file:///storage/emulated/0/Android/data/com.tippingcanoe.hukd/files/Pictures/thread2567905/1481239914144_transformed.png[/img]
#23
This is an amazing lens, just wished I could afford it...
#24
Absolutely stunning lens for video makers (covers super 35 just fine, or micro 4/3 with speed booster which is similar)

Also absolutely stunning for photographers on a crop sensor. I keep this on my D7000. That said, since this is Nikon mount, you can put it on a full-frame body without issues. The image circle covers the sensor (depending on aperture) from about 27 to 35 mms.
#25
Why unusable in 10 years? isn't it the best lens for crop sensors in this range? Quite possibly. so any lens will be unusable in 10 years.
#26
Listing removed / no longer available....

The Sigma is a great replacement for a standard 'kit lens' such as the Nikon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6. As an alternative, I'd recommend Nikon's 35mm F1.8G unless you want the extra wide angle 18mm the Sigma Offers. Stunning prime lens for the price at only about £150...

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!