ysultan wrote:
I always felt the same. Sony makes wonderful primes and some good zooms. The 24-70GM is probably the weakest of the GM line. It’s also not as good the new Nikon and Canon equivalents. I hope the new sigma compares favorably to these newer lenses.
This is great for us, but even better for the S1/R/H users, where the size and weight differences between their 24-70 and this are a bit more impactful.
MTF (they look very good, especially low astigmatism compared to DSLR versions of this lens). Drops a little towards corner but not severe. 24 and 70mm look very alike.
Just got a 24-70mm GM, but this lens has me incredible interested. If they make true for a very sharp lens, it might even compete with the nikon Z 24-70mm F2.8, wich some consider unbeatable cause of mount advantage.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The leaked specs show a 51g difference in weight compared to the Sony 24-70/2.8 GM. It's also 1/2" shorter. I agree, it's not much but I'm curious on how they compare optically. The GM zoom suffers from astigmatism towards the corners.
As someone has already mentioned, they can only make a 24-70/2.8 so small. The mirrorless format doesn't seem to help much - Canon latest gen equivalent for DSLR, the 24-70 L II, is 805g, lighter than both the Sony GM and the Sigma FE, and indeed the RF mirrorless version is 900g. Tamron alluded to a similar constraint in interviews where they explained their decision to go for 28-75 FE. Unlike Tamron, compactness isn't Sigma's priority here (it just happens to be the lightest native mount 24-70 )
Personally I probably wouldn't buy it, but do find the 11-blade aperture intriguing. The other well-known compromise or weakness of the Tamron 28-75 is harsh bokeh.
Sigma has never been good with zooms but the last release 14-24 was a pleasant impressive surprise. This can be good as well. Not going to pull the trigger myself as mid range zooms have never been of my interest.
ryanli wrote:
Personally I probably wouldn't buy it, but do find the 11-blade aperture intriguing. The other well-known compromise or weakness of the Tamron 28-75 is harsh bokeh.
The harsh bokeh of the Tamron has nothing to do with its size, it is simply by design. They have put an emphasis on sharpness. It is either sharp across the frame at max. aperture or smooth bokeh, you can't have both.
Some of the smallest lenses for E mount have excellent bokeh (e.g. the CV 50/1.2).
the sigma is a much better looking lens than the GM. My biggest issue would be the weight, the tamron pair weighs only a little bit more, and you've got coverage from 17-75mm f2.8
The Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art will be available in L-mount and Sony E-mount in mid-November 2019 through authorized US dealers. Pricing will be announced at a later date.
Nice
The very first competition to Sony comes from Sigma.
They own Tamron partially so they can tell them to not directly compete. But Sigma is making lenses for L mount and if they make them better than Sony, that’s competition.
Ayoul wrote:
I didn't buy any of the GM zooms for my work, I had always the feeling that they were not that good. If Sigma does as well as their 14-24 (that I will buy soon), I could be tempted.
I'm not trying to derail this into a 24-70GM thread, but I have to stand up for the lens and disagree. I've always found its IQ (really all the GM zooms) to be very impressive. Ultimately I sold it because shooting with it felt similar to what I imagine a bazooka would feel like. Still, I think it was Phillip Reeve who described the 24-70GM as a lead pipe full of primes, which I wholeheartedly agree with. I'm excited to see how, apart from price, Sigma will try to beat it.
I agree with you. I’ve been reading everywhere that the 24-70/2.8 GM is a weak lens and that’s just not the case. There is some astigmatism but I see that in other GM zooms and even primes. I see it as a balanced lens with great resolution stopped down and pleasant rendering (for a zoom).
flilow06 wrote:
I'm not trying to derail this into a 24-70GM thread, but I have to stand up for the lens and disagree. I've always found its IQ (really all the GM zooms) to be very impressive. Ultimately I sold it because shooting with it felt similar to what I imagine a bazooka would feel like. Still, I think it was Phillip Reeve who described the 24-70GM as a lead pipe full of primes, which I wholeheartedly agree with. I'm excited to see how, apart from price, Sigma will try to beat it.
)