Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM

  
 
caMARYnon
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


http://www.lenstip.com/389.11-Lens_review-Sigma_A_24-105_mm_f_4_DG_OS_HSM_Summary.html


Nov 14, 2013 at 08:12 AM
fraga
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


Thanks for the link.
It looks like a good performer.

Now let's just wait for the price to drop.



Nov 14, 2013 at 09:56 AM
Bruce Sawle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


Resolutin numbers look very good for this lens. Very impressive what Sigma has been able to do with all of its new lenses.


Nov 14, 2013 at 10:35 AM
stargazer78
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


Direct comparisons with the 24-105L can't be made off this review, since that lens was reviewed on an EOS 20D and this Sigma was reviewed on a 1Ds3. But they appear to have comparable sharpness and distortion levels.

But the Sigma uses 82mm filters, costs $100 more than the Canon kit lens, and most importantly it weighs 33% heavier. In fact, this lens weighs more than the 24-70L MKII.

Once again, I do not see the point of this lens in EF mount. It's a Sigma version that is more expensive, much heavier, and doesn't offer anything that the Canon brand doesn't already have.



Nov 14, 2013 at 11:13 AM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


stargazer78 wrote:
Direct comparisons with the 24-105L can't be made off this review, since that lens was reviewed on an EOS 20D and this Sigma was reviewed on a 1Ds3. But they appear to have comparable sharpness and distortion levels.

But the Sigma uses 82mm filters, costs $100 more than the Canon kit lens, and most importantly it weighs 33% heavier. In fact, this lens weighs more than the 24-70L MKII.

Once again, I do not see the point of this lens in EF mount. It's a Sigma version that is more expensive, much heavier, and doesn't offer anything that the Canon brand
...Show more
But if you don't buy the Canon as a kit, the Canon is $1149 and the Sigma is $899. And the Sigma is available in other mounts...it's not like they made it exclusively for EF. Given that the prevous few Sigma Art lenses have been pretty darn impressive, I think it's a least worth waiting for direct photo comparisons before dismissing the lens as pointless



Nov 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


stargazer78 wrote:


But the Sigma uses 82mm filters, costs $100 more than the Canon kit lens, and most importantly it weighs 33% heavier. In fact, this lens weighs more than the 24-70L MKII.



I just looked at the pro/cons section (havnt got time to fully read the review yet) and considering the size of the lens its a bit disappointing to see
significant vignetting on full frame,
as the first con



Nov 14, 2013 at 12:13 PM
howard
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


Significant vignetting on full frame

That kills it for me. I hoped that the 82mm filter size and larger front element will allow Sigma to optimize the design to reduce vignetting. The worst aspect of the Canon 24-105L is its severe vignetting at the wide end. If the Sigma is no better, why bother?



Nov 14, 2013 at 12:28 PM
timpdx
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


Wide angle distortion and Significant vignetting.....very un-interested now.


Nov 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


While I had only limited interest in this lens as I now have the 24-70 II, it is still disappointing and I agree with howard about the 82mm filters being a sign that this should have been a much better lens for vignetting. Distortion at 24mm is even higher than the 24-105L. And for all that you have a much heavier rlens than the 24-105L. If I couldn't afford the 24-70 II, and I wanted something better than a 24-105L (not that it it's a bad lens, far from it) I'd have to go with the Tamron 24-70 VC.

Edited on Nov 14, 2013 at 06:18 PM · View previous versions



Nov 14, 2013 at 03:33 PM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


The samples don't back up the MTF charts.


Nov 14, 2013 at 04:14 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


Is this thing better than the Nikon designs at all?

I'm a bit disappointed that it isn't a slam-dunk for Sigma sharpness-wise; that's their thing. Maybe it's better on the long end where the 24-105L is the weakest.

And I think that I'll wait for TDP and DxO tests to really get a feeling for it.



Nov 14, 2013 at 06:13 PM
alexdi
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


I wouldn't judge by Lenstip samples. They're posting out-of-camera JPEGs with what appears to be negative sharpening. Even the lenses that break resolution records look a little soft. The samples are mostly useful for bokeh, CA, and so on.

I don't see a lot of appeal here because the 24-105/L is regularly around $700 in mint used condition. It's light, small, and sharp enough for most work. If Sigma had knocked it out of the park with edge resolution, I might overlook the weight and large filters. As-is, I've no lust to replace my well-calibrated Canon.

In Nikon-land, I might have a different opinion. The 24-120/4 isn't exactly a stellar optic.



Nov 21, 2013 at 07:42 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Review of Sigma A 24-105 mm f/4 DG OS HSM


artd wrote:
But if you don't buy the Canon as a kit, the Canon is $1149 and the Sigma is $899. And the Sigma is available in other mounts...it's not like they made it exclusively for EF. Given that the prevous few Sigma Art lenses have been pretty darn impressive, I think it's a least worth waiting for direct photo comparisons before dismissing the lens as pointless


Real world, who pays $1149 for the 24-105L though? Heck, the 24-70 f/4 IS sitting in front of me at the moment was $1025 so who pays $1149 for the 24-105L? You either get the 24-105L for a good $200 less than the sigma or the 24-70 f/4 IS (which is probably sharper and is like half the size and weight) for only $126 more or the Tamron 24-70 VC (which is like the same size and weight despite being f/2.8) for $125-200$ more or the Canon 24-70 II if you don't need IS and go all out (oh and despite it being much sharper and f/2.8 it's lighter than the sigma too!).

But yeah fair point more samples need to be seen and more tests done.



Nov 22, 2013 at 12:29 AM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.