p.49 #4 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
viperrabbit wrote:
Review of Haida rear filters by Dustin Abbott
Although a smart solution, one reason I wanted to have a zoom for is to avoid changing lenses in dusty conditions.
Using rear filters, I would need to do so all the time if I wanted to apply different filters for different scenes.
Getting the Nisi S5 system and a starter filter kit would add an additional 1100 Euros to the lens, that's then 300-400 Euros more than the Sony 16-35 GM in Germany. In that case I would prefer the GM, to be honest, it is clearly lighter, too. Just my thoughts.
p.49 #5 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have no issues with the cap. I've taken the lens to a few trips and it never came out on its own.
I love the cap. Had no issues with nikon one, but the Sigma is even better. Slightly tighter (but definitely not to tight - very good engineering from Sigma seems). It also has slightly 'rawer' plastic, wich makes sliding more resistant (then say flat shiny plastic).
The only problem (a no issue) is if you put cap to fast on, the top and botton are bend, and you can't push it further. You must put the cap in a straight line on. But you feel immediately when this happens, and also fix, it. I do this with my eyes elsewhere (muscle memory). This issue is very small tbh. Overall great cap
p.49 #6 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Holger wrote:
Although a smart solution, one reason I wanted to have a zoom for is to avoid changing lenses in dusty conditions.
Using rear filters, I would need to do so all the time if I wanted to apply different filters for different scenes.
Getting the Nisi S5 system and a starter filter kit would add an additional 1100 Euros to the lens, that's then 300-400 Euros more than the Sony 16-35 GM in Germany. In that case I would prefer the GM, to be honest, it is clearly lighter, too. Just my thoughts.
Although you need to add the price of the same filters to both systems to look at the price difference. I use the Nisi CPL+ND64 and it covers all my needs in a single filter, so the cost of my S5 'system' was only about US$400. The Sigma offers noticeably better IQ in the corners than the GM, and the 100g weight difference is not of much consequence imo. Probably the more important issue if you are choosing between the two is whether the inclusion of 35mm or 14mm is more useful to you. To me the two ranges are quite different.
p.49 #7 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
rvh23 wrote:
Although you need to add the price of the same filters to both systems to look at the price difference. I use the Nisi CPL+ND64 and it covers all my needs in a single filter, so the cost of my S5 'system' was only about US$400. The Sigma offers noticeably better IQ in the corners than the GM, and the 100g weight difference is not of much consequence imo. Probably the more important issue if you are choosing between the two is whether the inclusion of 35mm or 14mm is more useful to you. To me the two ranges are quite different. ...Show more →
I just didn't see any comparison between the two to judge corner performance that definitely. What I have seen though, is that the GM is a very good lens, too, and reviews reflect that (Albert Dros' review is just one example. diglloyds comparison is a bit skewed due to a decentered lens). Nevertheless, I would prefer the Tamron right now.
I would need to obtain the full set of Nisi filters, so here I would need to pay more for the Sigma + filters than the GM + 82mm filters (which I could use on other lenses, too, similarly to the Nisi ;-) reducing the size and weight of my baggage considerably. What is the weight of the S5 package including the huge polarizer? At BH they write 800g (filter holder kit), too heavy in my opinion.
p.49 #8 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Holger wrote:
I just didn't see any comparison between the two to judge corner performance that definitely. What I have seen though, is that the GM is a very good lens, too, and reviews reflect that (Albert Dros' review is just one example. diglloyds comparison is a bit skewed due to a decentered lens). Nevertheless, I would prefer the Tamron right now.
I would need to obtain the full set of Nisi filters, so here I would need to pay more for the Sigma + filters than the GM + 82mm filters (which I could use on other lenses, too, similarly to the Nisi ;-) reducing the size and weight of my baggage considerably. What is the weight of the S5 package including the huge polarizer? At BH they write 800g (filter holder kit), too heavy in my opinion. ...Show more →
I haven't compared the two Sony's and the Sigma all side-by-side for the same scene, but in my own tests I found corner sharpness for the the GM at 16mm was no better than the Laowa 15/2, but the Sony 12-24 was a lttle better. But the improvement with the (DSLR design) Sigma 14/1.8 compared to the Laowa was much greater. A well centered copy of the Sigma DN zoom is even better than the 14/1.8 in the corners. I posted tests showing some of these comparisons in the past.
My round S5 adapter/holder with the CPL-ND64 filter, plus front and back caps weighs 400g.
p.49 #9 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
rvh23 wrote:
I haven't compared the two Sony's and the Sigma all side-by-side for the same scene, but in my own tests I found corner sharpness for the the GM at 16mm was no better than the Laowa 15/2, but the Sony 12-24 was a lttle better. But the improvement with the (DSLR design) Sigma 14/1.8 compared to the Laowa was much greater. A well centered copy of the Sigma DN zoom is even better than the 14/1.8 in the corners. I posted tests showing some of these comparisons in the past.
My round S5 adapter/holder with the CPL-ND64 filter, plus front and back caps weighs 400g.
p.49 #10 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Most of my previous tests with the Sigma were at infinity. Here is a comparison of the extreme corner performance wide open focused at about 5m, where in my landscape work I often want sharp small details.
I'm showing 100% crops from A7R4 (60MP) that include the last few pixels from the extreme top left corner at 14, 19 and 24mm, and for comparison my Loxia 21. All shots were at f2.8 1/320sec (ISO 100) and focused for best corner performance. Minimal default LR sharpening.
Each of the Sigma crops is from a single trial, whereas to be sure of my result, I repeated the Loxia shot half a dozen times to be sure I included its best performance. It's a well centered Loxia that performs at least as well as any of the samples I have tested in recent years.
AS with my infinity tests, it's pretty clear that even at the long end the Sigma zoom at least matches, and probably exceeds the Loxia performance for extreme corner sharpness. And at the wide end it is cearly superior.
p.49 #11 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
rvh23 wrote:
Most of my previous tests with the Sigma were at infinity. Here is a comparison of the extreme corner performance wide open focused at about 5m, where in my landscape work I often want sharp small details.
I'm showing 100% crops from A7R4 (60MP) that include the last few pixels from the extreme top left corner at 14, 19 and 24mm, and for comparison my Loxia 21. All shots at f2.8 1/320sec (ISO 100) and focused for best corner performance. Minimal default LR sharpening.
Each of the Sigma crops is from a single trial, whereas to be sure of my result, I repeated the Loxia shot half a dozen times to be sure I included its best performance. It's a well centered Loxia that performs at least as well as any of the samples I have tested in recent years.
AS with my infinity tests, it's pretty clear that even at the long end the Sigma zoom at least matches, and probably exceeds the Loxia performance for extreme corner sharpness. And at the wide end it is cearly superior.
From full size sample posted here on FM, comparing it to the 16-35 GM and Tamron 17-28, the main issue I saw from the Sigma wasn't corner performance, but midzone, where it clearly struggled with less acuity and greater CA.
p.49 #12 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
pdmphoto wrote:
From full size sample posted here on FM, comparing it to the 16-35 GM and Tamron 17-28, the main issue I saw from the Sigma wasn't corner performance, but midzone, where it clearly struggled with less acuity and greater CA.
Unless it was a suboptimal copy, that doesn't sound right to me at all. The Sigma is about as CA free as I've seen in any WA lens. Noticeably better in fact than Loxia 21 and CV21. It's one of its great strengths. Can you post the link you're refering to? I'll see if I can repeat the test midframe too, but anecdotally I've only seen even better perfromacne away form the extreme corners with the Sigma.
p.49 #13 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Following up on the comment above, here's a quick look at midframe performance (12mm from center correspondng to the near edge) and also the far edge (18mm from center).
This time I only compared the Sigma at 21mm against the Loxia 21, both lenses wide open at f2.8 and focused for best performance in the region of interest. As before, 100% crops from 60MP, minial sharpening.
The Sigma again looks sharper than the Loxia to me, and has no CA at all that I can see (unlike the Loxia that does show a little). As far as I'm concerned, the Sigma has taken the place of the Loxia (or CV21) as the reference 'gold standard' WA lens to beat. I'm really looking forward to seeing its measured MTFs at lensrentals when they're available.
Note that the text on the image says "focused at 5m" because that's what the display showed for the Sigma, but probably the target bush was more like 7 or 8m away (and severely distressed by our ongoing record-breaking dry-weather conditions that are wreaking havoc all over the country )
p.49 #15 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
I'm still on my LCD but just looked at every focal length I tested 14,16,18,21,24 and all wide open and every corner is maybe the best corner of any wide prime I've seen. Never thought I'd make a comment like that especially a zoom lens
p.49 #16 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
GMPhotography wrote:
Never thought I'd make a comment like that especially a zoom lens
I continue to be very happy/impressed with this lens. And the combo with the Sigma 24-70mm really gets the job done for me. Depending on the day's work, I might also throw a 50mm 1.2 or 85mm 1.8 or 70-200mm in the bag, but seldom need them.
p.49 #18 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Well this is a major holy smokes lens. There really is no weak point. Ultimate quality in corners for 14mm and 16mm, 24mm is F5.6 and that is being extremely picky. Even 2.8 in the corners of those focal is really good. NO question I have a excellent copy. I know many primes that would not hold up to this zoom. More than likely the zoom would smoke a lot of them. Distortion is quite good which really is amazing. Im damn impressed with 21mm it will kill a Loxia 21 and the weak focal I thought would be 24mm and its really good so this replaced my 24mm 1.4 that I sold but I still needed a great 24 and as a 2.8 lens I needed that over F4. I made a great call. The only down side is bulk and weight but you get about 6 focal lengths to work with. Thats damn good
Well the hype matches the output so no one is pulling the wool over your eyes.
p.49 #19 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
GMPhotography wrote:
Well this is a major holy smokes lens. There really is no weak point. Ultimate quality in corners for 14mm and 16mm, 24mm is F5.6 and that is being extremely picky. Even 2.8 in the corners of those focal is really good. NO question I have a excellent copy. I know many primes that would not hold up to this zoom. More than likely the zoom would smoke a lot of them. Distortion is quite good which really is amazing. Im damn impressed with 21mm it will kill a Loxia 21 and the weak focal I thought would be 24mm and its really good so this replaced my 24mm 1.4 that I sold but I still needed a great 24 and as a 2.8 lens I needed that over F4. I made a great call. The only down side is bulk and weight but you get about 6 focal lengths to work with. Thats damn good
Well the hype matches the output so no one is pulling the wool over your eyes. ...Show more →
Yes, when I first heard about this lens I was hoping it would match the IQ of the large Sigma 14/1.8 at its wide end so I could use it aloing wih my Loxia 21 and 25 for a three lens solution covering WA and UWA. What we got was something way beyond what I think any of us were expecting. Apart from when you are shooting directly against the light or want sunstars, for which the Loxias/CVs still rule imo, it's a zero compromise single lens solution.
As I said above, I consider the Sigma DN zoom to be the new gold standard for E-mount wide angle lenses. On a Sony A7R4 it gives me IQ that is as good as I will ever need, even for large 40" prints.
Good to hear you got a good copy first try Guy. When members first started reporting their experience just after it was released that didn't seem to be the case, but the poll is indicating the majority of them are now, which is good news.
)
