p.69 #3 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Voigtlander is a very good compact lens but honestly, for landscapes you can't do better than Sigma 14-24/2.8, CV 50/2 APO and 100-400 GM.
Fred,
I totally agree!
I'm ordering the new CV 35mm and CV 50mm to pair with my Sigma 14-24 and 100-400 GM as my landscape kit.
I don't think you can go wrong wtth this combo for landscapes and even travel/cityscapes (minus the 100-400) substitute with my Batis 85 or Batis 135.
p.69 #4 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Chuck Coyne wrote:
Fred,
I totally agree!
I'm ordering the new CV 35mm and CV 50mm to pair with my Sigma 14-24 and 100-400 GM as my landscape kit.
I don't think you can go wrong wtth this combo for landscapes and even travel/cityscapes (minus the 100-400) substitute with my Batis 85 or Batis 135.
I have to have a true maco in there somewhere, so for me that would be the Sony 90/2.8 or Sony 50/2.8. Voigtlander 40 goes with the 90 macro, Sony 35 with the 50 macro.
p.69 #6 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Ok, just for the record, it took me 4 tries to get a copy I'm going to keep. It's not perfect but it's close enough for me (one corner is still trailing a bit) . I have to say that the difference of the best corner and the worst corner of the copies I tested or the difference between copies was pretty substantial when viewed at 100% .
p.69 #7 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
j4nu wrote:
Ok, just for the record, it took me 4 tries to get a copy I'm going to keep. It's not perfect but it's close enough for me (one corner is still trailing a bit) . I have to say that the difference of the best corner and the worst corner of the copies I tested or the difference between copies was pretty substantial when viewed at 100% .
That's pretty much my experience also. It took me 6! copies to get one which I kept. It still has a slight dip in the upper left corner which only goes away at f/9 and further. It seems that this lens had much better copy to copy variation at introduction than it does now. But still, it's worth being patient as there is nothing this good at all FLs in the Sony ecosystem.
p.69 #8 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Although it can be a pain to have to try multiple copies to obtain a good one ( I tried 4 too), I consider it well worth the effort for this particular lens. If ultimate IQ across the whole frame is your main priority, then once you have a good copy of this zoom, you can pretty much stop looking at anything else in its focal range, and just get on with taking photos instead.
Keep in mind too that most (possibly all) other ultrawide zooms are actually worse than this one in terms of sample variation. The Sigma art lens are well above average in that regard. Many forum members have reported receiving copies that are good across the whole range on their first try, which is unusual for a zoom. Also slight corner asymmetries are more obvious since the introduciton of 60mp sensors. I've found that even some of my best primes that seemed near perfect on 42mp, are often not when re-examined at 60mp.
p.69 #9 · 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 →
Thanks for the trade, Guy!. Now I may need to get a Loxia 21 just for the sunstar and the easy use of filters.
p.69 #10 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Your welcome bud . I know I should have kept it but two zooms is just not me and I have the 24-70 as the real money lens so I can play. I traded for the CV 15 and CV 21 1.4. I have a 10 day road trip so this should be fun
p.69 #11 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
GMPhotography wrote:
Your welcome bud . I know I should have kept it but two zooms is just not me and I have the 24-70 as the real money lens so I can play. I traded for the CV 15 and CV 21 1.4. I have a 10 day road trip so this should be fun
Hopefully the CV 15 will be Choppy 3
I think I got the Choppy 2 from you, I remember Choppy 1 was the VM version? The CV 15 I am sending you is very good, bought from Dannyburk, who is also very picky with lenses. He doesn't post on FM as much, he got a real life.
p.69 #13 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
So, I've tested the Aurora vs Kase vs no-filter and I'm getting surprising results at 14mm....
1) Aurora and Kase perform EXACTLY the same. No changes in performance or color cast. They probably use the exact same glass vendor (Scott) and thickness (0.3m). BTW: My Kase filter cracked in half at the end of the test and I was been super careful...
2) I'm scratching my head here but both Aurora and Kase perform BETTER than the Sigma bare (no filter) at the extreme corners. At first I thought it was because IBIS or some other setting but it was not. I have IBIS off and all the camera settings are absolutely the same. I've tested this 5 times and get the exact same results.....The Sigma lens without any filter looks similar at center (a tiny bit better micro-contrast) and pretty much the same at mid-zone but at the extreme corners, it looks softer!!! Perhaps the filter is adjusting the native FC and make the corners even better? I'm not sure what's going on here. Any ideas?
p.69 #15 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
Fred Miranda wrote:
So, I've tested the Aurora vs Kase vs no-filter and I'm getting surprising results at 14mm....
1) Aurora and Kase perform EXACTLY the same. No changes in performance or color cast. They probably use the exact same glass vendor (Scott) and thickness (0.3m). BTW: My Kase filter cracked in half at the end of the test and I was been super careful...
2) I'm scratching my head here but both Aurora and Kase perform BETTER than the Sigma bare (no filter) at the extreme corners. At first I thought it was because IBIS or some other setting but it was not. I have IBIS off and all the camera settings are absolutely the same. I've tested this 5 times and get the exact same results.....The Sigma lens without any filter looks similar at center (a tiny bit better micro-contrast) and pretty much the same at mid-zone but at the extreme corners, it looks softer!!! Perhaps the filter is adjusting the native FC and make the corners even better? I'm not sure what's going on here. Any ideas?...Show more →
Very strange indeed. Does the difference remain visible as you stop down?
p.69 #17 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
To check if it's FC you could corner focus without the filter and then add in the filter. Corner performance in that case should be worse with the filter. If it's not, the issue is not FC.
p.69 #18 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions
If you tilt the lens, so one corner is covering infinitiy, and the other is covering the ground near your feet, does the corner covering the ground in front of you show different sharpness? Basically if the corners get sharper at infinity and you don't see changes in near subject sharpness, that would seem to eliminate FC right?
-Tim
Fred Miranda wrote:
Still not sure what could be causing "2)" above. Please post your suggestions.
. I have to say that the difference of the best corner and the worst corner of the copies I tested or the difference between copies was pretty substantial when viewed at 100% 
.
. Now I may need to get a Loxia 21 just for the sunstar and the easy use of filters.
