p.1 #1 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Nevertheless here is a full set of shots at about 25' at 24, 35, 50 and 70mm. Processed with Raw Developer. No noise reduction. Sharpened with Deconvolution .6mm 25 iterations. All manually focused using the Sony 2x eyepiece magnifier.
What do you think? How does it compare to the SAL2470 for Sony shooters? How about the contax zooms for those using them?
p.1 #2 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
masimo wrote:
Nevertheless here is a full set of shots at about 25' at 24, 35, 50 and 70mm. Processed with Raw Developer. No noise reduction. Sharpened with Deconvolution .6mm 25 iterations. All manually focused using the Sony 2x eyepiece magnifier.
What do you think? How does it compare to the SAL2470 for Sony shooters? How about the contax zooms for those using them?
p.1 #4 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Wow, I really expected this lens to be great given it's high price but that does not appear to be the case. Corners are terrible when looking at the F8 24, 28 and 35mm settings. I don't know how it compares with the ZA 24-70, but I can say that my primes are much better...and cheaper.
p.1 #6 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Btw, I still don't get why people still buy Sigma lenses. In my experience, if you buy 5 copies of the same lens, you will probably get 1 copy that works like advertized, 1 lemon, and 3 paper weights.
p.1 #7 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
edwardkaraa wrote:
Btw, I still don't get why people still buy Sigma lenses. In my experience, if you buy 5 copies of the same lens, you will probably get 1 copy that works like advertized, 1 lemon, and 3 paper weights.
Many haven't had that experience.
Of the 6 Sigma lenses I've owned over the last 6 years 1 was garbage (28-70 kit lens), 1 was mediocre (170-500 APO), 2 were very good (24/2.8 Super-Wide II, EX 50/2.8 Macro) and two were excellent (EX 10-20, 17-70). None of the lot had the supposedly common QC issues (although I've seen others have those issues).
Sigma offers lenses nobody else does and a fairly good price/performance ratio. Of course they do have some dogs in their lineup (and their f2.8 normal FF zooms have long fallen in that category with the exception of the 24-60).
p.1 #8 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Well, I've had the 20, 24, 28, 12-24, 24-70, and 70-300. All were sold only a month later to be replaced by equally crappy Canon stuff, until I discovered I can actually adapt alternative glass.
p.1 #9 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Tariq,
I hope to go out today and take a set where the bottom corners at least are in focus to eliminate the oof vs corner resoloution issue. The corners on these images are either far in front of the focus area in the wider images or far behind it in the closer images. I don't know that the corners are any better but this test doesn't really answer the question.
I too was hoping for better corners as that is the weak spot in the Zeiss. However in either case the corners can be cropped out and stitching is always an option.
p.1 #10 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
That's a good point. This is a lens I have considered recently and I'm anxious to see your findings. It would really be great to see it compared with the ZA 24-70. I noticed it was back in stock at Amazon the other day.
masimo wrote:
Tariq,
I hope to go out today and take a set where the bottom corners at least are in focus to eliminate the oof vs corner resoloution issue. The corners on these images are either far in front of the focus area in the wider images or far behind it in the closer images. I don't know that the corners are any better but this test doesn't really answer the question.
I too was hoping for better corners as that is the weak spot in the Zeiss. However in either case the corners can be cropped out and stitching is always an option.
p.1 #13 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
I've had a lot of luck with Sigma lenses but the 24-70 is really a dog. Sigma have produced like 6 different versions of this lens; it is a surprise that they haven't managed to get it right.
p.1 #14 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Not any better than i expected. Even the bokeh is horrible. Pop Photo never saw a lens with advertising dollars that it didn't like. I agree with Edward. Not sure why anyone who is serious about the craft bothers with Sigma -- and one of the main problems they have with their DSLR (the sensor debate aside) is that you are stuck with Sigma lenses, and this 24-70 is supposed to be one of the best they have to offer. Sigma's big strategic mistake was venturing out into DSLR's and not focusing on their core competency, lenses. As a result both products suffer.
p.1 #15 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
I did a google search and found THIS
It is a comparison between the new HSM and a Nikon 24-70. I didn't have time to read it yet, so I won't comment.
Jim
p.1 #16 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Lotusm50 wrote:
Not any better than i expected. Even the bokeh is horrible. Pop Photo never saw a lens with advertising dollars that it didn't like. I agree with Edward. Not sure why anyone who is serious about the craft bothers with Sigma -- and one of the main problems they have with their DSLR (the sensor debate aside) is that you are stuck with Sigma lenses, and this 24-70 is supposed to be one of the best they have to offer. Sigma's big strategic mistake was venturing out into DSLR's and not focusing on their core competency, lenses. As a result both products suffer.
The 24-70's long been considered one of the worst of the EX series lenses, dunno where you got the idea that it was one of the best unless you're thinking of the 24-60, which is a FAR better performer than any of their other f2.8 normal zooms (the 28-70's are better than the 24-70's, but that ain't saying much).
Sigma makes some excellent kit. But they do have their dogs, and the new 24-70 HSM is clearly one of the more ridiculous examples given the asinine pricing attached to it.
p.1 #17 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
mawz wrote:
The 24-70's long been considered one of the worst of the EX series lenses, dunno where you got the idea that it was one of the best unless you're thinking of the 24-60, which is a FAR better performer than any of their other f2.8 normal zooms (the 28-70's are better than the 24-70's, but that ain't saying much).
Sigma makes some excellent kit. But they do have their dogs, and the new 24-70 HSM is clearly one of the more ridiculous examples given the asinine pricing attached to it.
According to the published reviews I've read, this was supposed to be the new 24-70, a premium HSM lens with a significant performance upgrade and price premium over their other lenses in that focal range. It was supposed to compete with the Canon and Nikon offerings. All the buzz that Sigma tried to generate with the introduction of this lens appears to be entirely unjustified
I wasn't expecting much (as I implied), but was prepared for the possibility that Sigma might have gotten it right with the new offering. Just more of the same form Sigma, I'm afraid.
p.1 #19 · Sigma 24-70 f2.8 hsm on Sony A900 samples up on pbase
Lotusm50 wrote:
Not any better than i expected. Even the bokeh is horrible.
Could you show some examples?
The only weird bokeh from that I've seen is funkadelic highlight bokeh in somewhat unusual shooting conditions.
Sharpness/flare control looked better than Canon's 24-70L (though it's an old lens) and only slightly worse than Nikon's 24-70 which is the current standard (though I haven't seen any comparisons w/ the Zeiss 24-70)...
