fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3 … 8

10 … 71 72 end

Archive 2019 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

scrappydog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #1 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

@rvh23 Here's a comparison of the Sigma 14-24 against a lot of lenses, including the Loxia 21:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LrVBPJFo5nYpetm-87NAXEO_wvw7CZjt/view?usp=sharing

The download is 2GB, so it is large.

The comparison includes:
Canon 16-35mm f/4L, shot on Metabones V adapter (at 16, 18, 21, 24, at f/4, 5.6, 8)
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II, shot on Metabones V adapter (at 24, at f/2.8, 4, 5.6, 8)
Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 for Sony E (at 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 24, at f/2.8, 4, 4.5 (at 15mm), 5.6, 6.3, 7.1, 8)
Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM (at f/2.8, 4, 5.6, 8)
Sony 24-105 f/4 (at 24, at f/4, 5.6, 8)
Voigtlander 15mm Ultra Wide Heliar III f/4.5 for Leica M, shot on TAP (at f/4.5, 5.6, 8)
Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 (at f/2.8, 4, 4.5, 5.6, 8)
Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 (at f/2.8, 4, 4.5, 5.6, 8)

All are shot at infinity on a stable platform. No corrections, although ACR exports with default sharpening applied. The VC15 shots are darker because it has a lot of vignetting by default, it was my first lens tested, and the exposure changed over time, but I maintained the same shutter speed settings at each aperture (the test lasted about 1.5 hours). The Canon 16-35 has mechanical vignetting at wider settings.

Aug 24, 2019 at 12:40 PM

hiepphotog
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #2 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

scrappydog wrote:
@rvh23@ Here's a comparison of the Sigma 14-24 against a lot of lenses, including the Loxia 21:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LrVBPJFo5nYpetm-87NAXEO_wvw7CZjt/view?usp=sharing

The download is 2GB, so it is large.

The comparison includes:
Canon 16-35mm f/4L, shot on Metabones V adapter (at 16, 18, 21, 24, at f/4, 5.6, 8)
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II, shot on Metabones V adapter (at 24, at f/2.8, 4, 5.6, 8)
Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 for Sony E (at 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 24, at f/2.8, 4, 4.5 (at 15mm), 5.6, 6.3, 7.1, 8)
Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM (at f/2.8, 4, 5.6, 8)
Sony 24-105 f/4 (at 24, at f/4, 5.6, 8)
Voigtlander 15mm Ultra Wide Heliar III...Show more →

Thank you for the testing. Would you mind giving us a brief summary of what you think of the lens.

Aug 24, 2019 at 02:23 PM

raul jarquin
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #3 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

I am testing the Sigma 14-24's manual focus and I am noticing that the distance scale that appears on the view finder reaches infinity in the middle of the scale bar instead of at the end. I am also able to continue focusing way past this mark. I don't have this issue with my two other AF lenses. Is this normal?

Aug 24, 2019 at 03:47 PM

hiepphotog
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #4 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

raul jarquin wrote:
I am testing the Sigma 14-24's manual focus and I am noticing that the distance scale that appears on the view finder reaches infinity in the middle of the scale bar instead of at the end. I am also able to continue focusing way past this mark. I don't have this issue with my two other AF lenses. Is this normal?

that's normal

Aug 24, 2019 at 04:19 PM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #5 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

wind30 wrote:

The previous post shows the flare from 12-24mm. It is the worst flare out of 30 pics into the sun.

I see this ghosting + ring quite often but never anything like the one below from the sigma 14-24mm


	http://www.keehian.com/img/flare2.jpg

I'm pretty sure you can get much worse flare than that from the 12-24, but it depends on the scene. In any case, both these lenses are zooms with large bulbous front elements, not really well suited to shooting straight into the sun - a CV12 or 15 would be a much better choice at the wide end of the range we are talking about.

If you look at Fred's tests of the Sony, you will see it can actually produce not one, but multiple concentric ring flares. The Sigma produces ghosts instead and no ring flare, which I find easier to work with. Especially in normal exposures rather than strongly over-exposed flare tests, I find the Sigma does a good job for this kind of lens.

(p.s. In my earlier flare tests I thought I was seeing some ring flare with the sun near the middle of the frame but it was actually a narrow arc-shaped ghost instead).

Aug 24, 2019 at 05:13 PM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #6 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

Aug 24, 2019 at 05:19 PM

scrappydog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #7 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

hiepphotog wrote:
Thank you for the testing. Would you mind giving us a brief summary of what you think of the lens.

It's a little heavy, but smaller and lighter than the Nikon 14-24, and it feels nicely balanced on the A7R3. The FL adjustment ring is smooth (I have not MF'd yet). The build quality is excellent.

The AF is not as fast as some native lenses, and the Eye-AF struggled more than my native lenses. I am hoping Sigma comes out with the firmware upgrade on the AF. The AF seems accurate, except for my 16mm tests where it missed entirely (not sure what happened there). I only shot the lens (so far) in AF-C.

It's sharp at f/2.8 in the center at all FLs, and decent in the corners. The lens really opens up at f/5.6 and is good to f/8 (unlike the Loxia 21, which noticeably diffracts at f/8). By f/11, diffraction is evident. I need more tests to assess the mid-field. The color is good and I prefer the colors to the Sony 12-24. From my earlier tests, the weakest FL is 24mm.

It has excellent contrast wide open and all FLs. It has very little CA; I don't recall seeing any in my shots. It has very little vignetting. Based on a quick early test, the Sigma has substantial moustache barrel distortion at 14mm, it's less pronounced at 18mm, seems flatish at 21mm, and has slight pincushion at 24mm. A good profile will be necessary.

I don't think the flare is a problem, but others do, so YMMV. I think more flare tests need to be done. It does have a bulbous front element, but it's nicely recessed. I haven't tested bokeh or stars yet.

Of my tests, only the 24GM beat it (at 24mm). The Canon 24-70 was neck-and-neck with the Sigma at all apertures (at 24mm). The Batis 18mm was close to the Sigma, but the Sigma performed slightly better on the whole. The Sony 24-105 was very close to the Sigma at 24mm, except on the left side, due to slight decentering in the 24-105. The Loxia 21 was better in the periphery up to f/5.6, but then the Loxia's performance dropped at f/8 where the Sigma was better across the frame. The VC15 was bettered by the Sigma in all aspects. The Canon 16-35/4 was a mixed bag and very slightly better at 21mm; the Sigma is much more consistent performer.

Aug 24, 2019 at 06:13 PM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #8 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

Since most copies of this lens will have some asymmetry between corners when used wide open, I rechecked the worst performing corner on my copy against the Nokton 21/1.4 at my typical working landscape aperture of F8 (nearly always including focus stacks). Both lenses are essentially flat field under these conditions. Note also that this is at the long end of my zoom, where performance is poorest (it's best at 14mm).

100% corner crops, 42mp, minimal default CR sharpening, manufacturer CA-correction profile applied to both, no other corrections.


	http://www.richardvanhoesel.com/test/F8%20worst-corner%2021mm.jpg

This certainly puts to rest any concern I may have had that the corner variation wide-open might also affect stopped-down performance. There is no reason for me to choose the CV over the Sigma in terms of sharpness under these conditions. That's a remarkable accomplishment from the Sigma, and reassuring for field use, where it will no longer be necessary for me to sacrifice the convenience of a zoom to get optimal sharpness.

Aug 24, 2019 at 10:49 PM

nicephore
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #9 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

hiepphotog wrote:
Thank you for the testing. Would you mind giving us a brief summary of what you think of the lens.

Thanks a lot scrappydog. This is really useful to get an idea on how good this zoom is. I've started to check the comparisons with the Loxia and was very impressed (not sure diffraction is super visible at f8 but, for sure, the main difference lies in the quality of the corners, especially the bottom left corner). I guess your sample must be very good here as even this corner is superior to the one of the 24GM (which I agree is the only lens which does beat this zoom) ...

I am also impressed with how little vignetting the zoom has.
Great Work, thanks !

Aug 25, 2019 at 01:32 AM

scrappydog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #10 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

nicephore wrote:
Thanks a lot scrappydog. This is really useful to get an idea on how good this zoom is. I've started to check the comparisons with the Loxia and was very impressed (not sure diffraction is super visible at f8 but, for sure, the main difference lies in the quality of the corners, especially the bottom left corner). I guess your sample must be very good here as even this corner is superior to the one of the 24GM (which I agree is the only lens which does beat this zoom) ...

I am also impressed with how little vignetting the zoom...Show more →

Regarding the Loxia, I will take a look at the photos again, as I was fairly exhausted from shooting and analyzing all of the shots and I may have mis-analyzed them. If I came to one conclusion from this exercise, it is that these lenses are very close to each other. I really like the Sigma because it delivers consistent, excellent results across the range reviewed.

Aug 25, 2019 at 07:40 AM

hiepphotog
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #11 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

rvh23 wrote:
I'm pretty sure you can get much worse flare than that from the 12-24, but it depends on the scene. In any case, both these lenses are zooms with large bulbous front elements, not really well suited to shooting straight into the sun - a CV12 or 15 would be a much better choice at the wide end of the range we are talking about.

If you look at Fred's tests of the Sony, you will see it can actually produce not one, but multiple concentric ring flares. The Sigma produces ghosts instead and no ring flare, which I find...Show more →

Yesterday when I tested it again, I found an angle, in which the sun was totally out of the picture but the sun rays hit the front lens at a very particular angle that produces a washed out image with ghosting all over the image. Whereas, when I shoot with the sun in the frame, my copy is excellent in most regards. In the end, what matters is how it performs in general, not just under a specific condition that can be avoided by framing differently. In most situations, it actually holds the contrast really well.

Aug 25, 2019 at 10:31 AM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #12 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

hiepphotog wrote:
Yesterday when I tested it again, I found an angle, in which the sun was totally out of the picture but the sun rays hit the front lens at a very particular angle that produces a washed out image with ghosting all over the image. Whereas, when I shoot with the sun in the frame, my copy is excellent in most regards. In the end, what matters is how it performs in general, not just under a specific condition that can be avoided by framing differently. In most situations, it actually holds the contrast really well.

Fortunately when the sun is not in the frame flare is easy to avoid by shielding the lens (I use a small-camera mounted flag rather than lens hoods for that purpose).

Before the lens was available, flare was one of my biggest question marks about whether this lens would find a place in my kit. But having tested it now, it's a definite keeper.

Aug 25, 2019 at 05:20 PM

jeetsukumaran
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #13 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

First of all, thank you all so much for being so generous with your time and efforts in carrying out these tests and sharing the results with the rest of the community. Very much appreciated.

I've been eyeing this lens since it was announced, and have been pinning really high hopes on this. I love the focal length --- makes much more sense than my current go-to UWA, the FE 16-35 f/2.8.

However, I can only justify the switch if I see resolution/sharpness across the frame at least as good (if not better) than the 16-35. And, I will be honest, I am having a hard time seeing this. Now, without the images of the same scene taken under the same condition side-by-side, it is very tricky to compare, so the only safe conclusion is that the jury is still out. I plan to get a copy of my own and do the comparisons. But until then, I just thought I might post some examples of the corner sharpness that I've come to expect from the 16-35 and was hoping to see in the Sigma:

(100% lower-left corner crop)

(100% lower-right corner crop)

(100% upper-right corner crop)

These are all at 16mm at f/8 (though I also have f/5.6 for no real discernible difference). And no PP at all beyond defaults in LR when importing. Most importantly, these crops are of extreme corners, all the way to the very edge to the last pixel in the corner, and not only is there no drop in quality at all, but the absolute resolution is eye-wateringly razor sharp. Just like the center (did not post, but it might make your eyes bleed).

The full image is here so you can get context:

Here are a couple more taken "in the wild" (i.e., not controlled tests, but just some pilot shots while location scouting), and you can see the incredible detail that pops out in the vegetation, from centers right out to edges when you zoom in 100% or even 200%.

(And again, none of these have any PP)

What worries me is that I am not seeing similar hard-edged eye-slicing resolution coming across in the any of the samples of the Sigma, official or otherwise. Light, subject distance/detail, etc. all might make a difference, of course, and that's why I am waiting till I get my hands on a copy for actual side-by-side before fully deciding.

BTW, I should note for an UWA, near-field performance is VERY IMPORTANT to me. At least equal (and maybe even more so!) than infinity performance. Just the way I like to compose.

Aug 25, 2019 at 07:23 PM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #14 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

jeetsukumaran wrote:
I can only justify the switch if I see resolution/sharpness across the frame at least as good (if not better) than the 16-35. And, I will be honest, I am having a hard time seeing this. Now, without the images of the same scene taken under the same condition side-by-side, it is very tricky to compare, so the only safe conclusion is that the jury is still out. I plan to get a copy of my own and do the comparisons.
....

What worries me is that I am not seeing similar hard-edged eye-slicing resolution coming across in the any of...Show more →

At F8 my Sigma 14-24 is without question as sharp as my Nokton CV 21/1.4 all the way to the far corners, and the Nokton and Loxia 21 are generally considered to be as sharp as it gets in WA options for Sony at present.

One problem with taking sample sections from a single frame is that DOF plays a role (especially near field). The first 100% crop in your post for example looks a bit soft to me, but it may just be due to DOF.

But of course you are right - the best way to know for sure is by testing lenses side by side. That's how I decided not to keep either of the two 16-35GMs that I compared against a Loxia 21, and also to keep the Sigma after comparing it against the Nokton 21.

In the meantime here's a quick near-field (1-2m) example of the most extreme LR-corner pixels with my Sigma at 16mm/F8. 100% crop from 42mp, minimal default CR sharpening.


	http://www.richardvanhoesel.com/test/F8-16mm%20near-cnr.jpg

Aug 25, 2019 at 09:08 PM

TravelinBriNY
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #15 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

Thanks for this - excellent info. How would you compare it to the native Sony lenses in terms of sharpness; particularly the 12-24 and 16-35/GM?

Bri

Aug 25, 2019 at 09:17 PM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #16 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

I don't have the Sony zooms anymore to test them side by side, but expect the Sigma is sharper in the corners. At F5.6 and beyond corner performance is excellent with the Sigma. At wider apertures, sample variation seems to play a larger role, so performance will depend more on the particular copy of the lens you have landed (and the corner you test). At 14mm, where my particular copy is well centered, it is amazingly sharp even wide open. Perhaps even more so than the large Sigma 14/1.8 (tested at F2.8) that previously easily outperformed everything else I tested near that focal length, including the Sony 12-24.

In direct comparisons, I found my copies of the Sony zooms were not quite as good as Loxia/Nokton 21 in the far corners, even at F8. Whereas my Sigma is.

Aug 25, 2019 at 09:48 PM

jeetsukumaran
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #17 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

rvh23 wrote:
At F8 my Sigma 14-24 is without question as sharp as my Nokton CV 21/1.4 all the way to the far corners, and the Nokton and Loxia 21 are generally considered to be as sharp as it gets in WA options for Sony at present.

One problem with taking sample sections from a single frame is that DOF plays a role (especially near field). The first 100% crop in your post for example looks a bit soft to me, but it may just be due to DOF.

But of course you are right - the best way to know for sure...Show more →

Thanks, rvh! Very helpful. Yes, DOF is a difficult factor to account for in assessments, especially with near-field resolution. Your sample is superb though, and has revitalized my optimism in the lens. Looking forward to testing my own copy.

One thing that remains a dealbreaker for me, though, at least at this time, is if I cannot control focus through the Sony bluetooth remote. Here's to hoping that works out!

Aug 26, 2019 at 12:17 AM

welluca_
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #18 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

Take this considering I am no professional nor technical expert

Mounted on the camera it feels nice, surely better than the 2470 gm...

Yesterday night I was in the backyard of a friend that was testing his telescope. I did some shot on the tripod just to see what is like shoot milky way compared to the 2470

The manual focus was "different" compared to the 24-70..
On the 24 70, the sweet spot where I have stars in focus is quite on the right end of the scale. And it changes quite easy if you don't have a very delicate regulation
At 14 mm it was way easier, in the range from 9m to 12m in the photos I checked the stars were in focus. This is around at 3/4 of the scale.
I guess it's just the focal length difference that makes it different/easier

I tried a few random shots indoor in my room with low light, the autofocus felt slower than the gm

Anyway this weekend I am going for two weeks vacation in the US and will have plenty of time to test it

Aug 27, 2019 at 03:30 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #19 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

@rvh23,
Quick question:
Where did you find the "distance" value on the EXIF?

Aug 27, 2019 at 05:45 PM

rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #20 · Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN first impressions

Fred Miranda wrote:
@rvh23@,
Quick question:
Where did you find the "distance" value on the EXIF?

It's described by "focus distance 2" near the end of the exif file if you are using exiftool.

Aug 27, 2019 at 06:58 PM

1 2 3 … 8 9 10 … 71 72 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 8 9 10 … 71 72 end