p.3 #1 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
jeetsukumaran wrote:
Thanks for sharing.
WRT the samples in the previous page,
(1) which corners are these? UL/LL/UR/LR etc.
(2) would you mind showing the full images, so we can get an idea of what proportion of the frame these crops represent?
(3) do you have any crops of the center?
(1) They are upper left corners in general (coma was I think upper right). But the lens is well centered and all corners perform similarly.
(2) All the crops are at 100% from a 42mp sensor, which has about 8000 pixels across. So e.g. the first image on page1, which is about 1200 pixels across, represents about 15% of the full image width. Most of the crops are very similar to that.
(3) center (and mid) crops are shown above in the comparison with the Nokton 21. The subject was kept the same and placed in different parts of the frame to facilitate comparisons.
p.3 #5 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
j4nu wrote:
Thanks for your testing
Could you tell me if the lens feels front heavy or is it rather well balanced?
This is much more of a subjective thing, but yes it does feel a bit front heavy. It's not surprising when the largest, heaviest glass elements in the lens are at the front.
p.3 #6 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
timerickson wrote:
This is much more of a subjective thing, but yes it does feel a bit front heavy. It's not surprising when the largest, heaviest glass elements in the lens are at the front.
Thanks! Yes, looking at the design had me thinking that this might be the case. On the other hand, people seem to be positively surprised by Sigma 35 f1.2 handling
p.3 #7 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Agreed, it is not a light lens, but probably doesn't feel very different to the Sony 16-35 GM, although it's been a while since I owned that lens.
If you are used to the 12-24, which I don't have anymore either, I think you would notice the weight increase. But it's perfectly acceptable imo to achieve the Sigma's superb performance and increase in speed from F4 to F2.8. It's not anywhere near as bulky/heavy as the Sigma 14/1.8 or Samyang 14/2.4 (with adapter). I will be perfectly confident using the Sigma zoom with the camera mounted directly on a tripod, whereas with the Sigma 14/1.8 you really need a tripod-mount on the lens.
IQ wise, I compared the Sony 12-24 against a Sigma 14/1.8, and as good as the former is, it's not in the same league as the latter, whereas the new Sigma zoom is.
p.3 #8 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
rvh23 wrote:
Agreed, it is not a light lens, but probably doesn't feel very different to the Sony 16-35 GM, although it's been a while since I owned that lens.
If you are used to the 12-24, which I don't have anymore either, I think you would notice the weight increase. But it's perfectly acceptable imo to achieve the Sigma's superb performance and increase in speed from F4 to F2.8. It's not anywhere near as bulky/heavy as the Sigma 14/1.8 or Samyang 14/2.4 (with adapter). I will be perfectly confident using the Sigma zoom with the camera mounted directly on a tripod, whereas with the Sigma 14/1.8 you really need a tripod-mount on the lens.
IQ wise, I compared the Sony 12-24 against a Sigma 14/1.8, and as good as the former is, it's not in the same league as the latter, whereas the new Sigma zoom is....Show more →
Do you think the new Sigma 14-24/2.8 wide open is as good as the Sigma 14/1.8 prime @f/2.8 or it needs to be stopped down a bit?
I've heard that the Sigma 14/1.8 at f/2.8 had good correction for coma. Would you say the zoom @14mm and f/2.8 is just as good?
p.3 #9 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
rvh23 wrote:
Agreed, it is not a light lens, but probably doesn't feel very different to the Sony 16-35 GM, although it's been a while since I owned that lens.
If you are used to the 12-24, which I don't have anymore either, I think you would notice the weight increase. But it's perfectly acceptable imo to achieve the Sigma's superb performance and increase in speed from F4 to F2.8. It's not anywhere near as bulky/heavy as the Sigma 14/1.8 or Samyang 14/2.4 (with adapter). I will be perfectly confident using the Sigma zoom with the camera mounted directly on a tripod, whereas with the Sigma 14/1.8 you really need a tripod-mount on the lens.
IQ wise, I compared the Sony 12-24 against a Sigma 14/1.8, and as good as the former is, it's not in the same league as the latter, whereas the new Sigma zoom is....Show more →
I have the Sony 12-24mm. I am not that concerned about sharpness but flaring.
What would you rate as the biggest improvement of the sigma vs the Sony 12-24 other than the f2.8. I usually shoot f5.6 or more.
p.3 #10 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Fred Miranda wrote:
Do you think the new Sigma 14-24/f2.8 wide open is as good as the Sigma 14/1.8 prime @f/2.8 or it needs to be stopped down a bit?
I've heard that the Sigma 14/1.8 at f/2.8 had good correction for coma. Would you say the zoom @14mm@ and f/2.8 is just as good?
I can't say for sure without testing them side by side, but it seems to me the new zoom may actually be sharper in the corners a when both lenses are at F2.8. Below are two 100% far corner crops comparing the same scene, but taken on different days and different time of day so the light is different.
One thing that bothers me a little, and may be related to another comment wrt another comparison, is that DOF (at F2.8 and focus for infinity) seems larger with the zoom. I will need to do more tests to be sure, but did double check aperture was changing all the way down to 2.8.
I think coma with the zoom wide open is also slightly better than the 14/1.8 at 2.8, but both are great. I have a sample of the Sigma 14/1.8 coma stopped down to 2.8 here, which you can compare with the zoom wide open here. But again, different days, stars, and settings.
p.3 #11 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
rvh23 wrote:
I can't say for sure without testing them side by side, but it seems to me the new zoom may actually be sharper in the corners a when both lenses are at F2.8. Below are two 100% far corner crops comparing the same scene, but taken on different days and different time of day so the light is different.
One thing that bothers me a little, and may be related to another comment wrt another comparison, is that DOF (at F2.8 and focus for infinity) seems larger with the zoom. I will need to do more tests to be sure, but did double check aperture was changing all the way down to 2.8.
I think coma with the zoom wide open is also slightly better than the 14/1.8 at 2.8, but both are great. I have a sample of the Sigma 14/1.8 coma stopped down to 2.8 here, which you can compare with the zoom wide open here. But again, different days, stars, and settings....Show more →
Thank you for the all the tests so far. I certainly didn't cancel my pre-order of the Sigma. I'm not sure a wider DOF would be a problem (ain't that a desirable thing in this range?). Also, I think your crop doesn't indicate that it's quite far enough to be truly an infinity shot. However, as long as it's sharp (certainly looks like it's much sharper than the Tamron at WO and even stopped down.) I can deal with the slightly wavy distortion. Low vignetting is a huge plus IMO.
p.3 #13 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Treat the DOF comment with a grain of salt at this stage. I'm not sure if it is even possible for lens design to have such an effect (apart from FC effects). Maybe I was just standing closer to the foreground on the 14/1.8 shot - I can't remember. But it did make me wonder whether 2.8 on this lens really was 2.8. The roof tops in my shots btw are about 50m away, which I think is far enough at these focal lengths. At 14mm/F2.8 with the zoom everything from about 10m onwards is sharp.
I'm pretty sure you will be really impressed with the zoom. I look forward to hearing other opinions when more lenses arrive.
p.3 #14 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Yes thank you for all the testing you have done, I put my preorder in at Adorama this morning after seeing what your lens did in your tests so far. I’m looking forward to testing mine out on my A7Riii and with the new A7RIV when it arrives as well!
p.3 #16 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Paired with an A7R IV this lens is will be a super high res combination. I find it hard to imagine the rumored Fuji 20-36 on a 50r or 50s would be noticeably better in terms of IQ, so I'm kind of glad the Fuji zoom didn't come out before the Sigma Zoom and A7R IV announcements.
p.3 #17 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
wind30 wrote:
I have the Sony 12-24mm. I am not that concerned about sharpness but flaring.
What would you rate as the biggest improvement of the sigma vs the Sony 12-24 other than the f2.8. I usually shoot f5.6 or more.
Flare is much better controlled than on the Sony 12-24. You will certainly still see ghosting in some circumstances, but it's much easier to deal with and imo less objectionable than the fairly major flare issues with the Sony. That alone (combined with virtually coma-less f2.8 for astro) would probably be reason enough for me to choose the Sigma over the Sony.
But on top of that sharpness is better. Even though that was already rather good at the wide end for the Sony, once I saw the Sigma 14/1.8, despite the size/weight of that lens I had trouble going back to anything else until this new Sigma zoom. You can see my comparison of the Sony and the Sigma 14/1.8 at F6.3 here And at the long end of the Sony 's range, at least my copy could not match my Loxia 21 (and therefore also CV 21/1.4) and 25, whereas the new Sigma zoom does and in fact looks better than any of them in the corners.
Thirdly, I like the color from the recent Sigma Art lenses much more than the Sony zooms, and especially the 12-24. But that's a personal preference.
p.3 #18 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Hi @rvh23, do you happen to have the Sony bluetooth remote? If so, would you be kind enough to check to see if the focus +/- control works in conjunction with this lens?
p.3 #19 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
No I don't have that remote. But it's an electronic focus lens so I don't see any reason to think it wouldn't work.
But that reminds me to note that the one thing I've found so far that I don't like with this lens is the fact that there is no distance scale marked on it, which means I am forced to use the low resolution electronic distance readout from the camera for focus stacking (or use angle of focus ring rotation estimates). But the Sony zooms are the same in that regard
p.3 #20 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
In regards to using front filters, if you have a Sony 12-24 adapter already, I have found a good solution for now by using a rubber 'wrist band' on the front part of the lens. Here is a link to the one I used, available in a lovely range of colors . It can be left on the lens semi-permanently, just before the end of the lens cap, and provides the right added thickness to the lens to let me use my Nisi S5 Sony-12-24 filter adapter securely.
