90mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary
11 lenses in 10 groups
9 diaphragm blades (circular diaphragm)
minimum shooting distance 0.5m
maximum shooting magnification 1: 5
filter diameter 55mm
Size φ64×59.7mm
weight 295g
Suggested retail price in Japan the same as the 35mm F2
Sigma 24mm F2 DG DN | Contemporary
13 lenses in 11 groups
9 diaphragm blades (circular diaphragm)
minimum shooting distance 24.5cm
maximum shooting magnification 1: 6.7
filter diameter 62mm
size. It is φ70x72mm
weighs 365g
compatible with magnetic caps.
Suggested retail price in Japan the same as the 35mm F2
I want to love these lenses but it's just so weird to me that they are not fully weather sealed. If I had to go home when it starts raining here in southern scandinavia I think I'd get about 10 pictures per year
wow, the 24/2 DG DN will be a serious lens. Probably sharp wide open to the corners. It's almost the size of the 65/2 DG DN, only a tad shorter and 40 grams lighter.
The currently 24/3.5 is way smaller and lighter and has 1:2 magnification instead of 1: 6.7.
Flavourdynamic wrote:
I want to love these lenses but it's just so weird to me that they are not fully weather sealed. If I had to go home when it starts raining here in southern scandinavia I think I'd get about 10 pictures per year
Weather sealed lenses is something rather new. The Nikon DSLR lenses, I used to own, most often weren’t weather sealed, neither the manual focus Olympus OM glas before that. Still I coped, and I too live in southern Scandinavia.
Fred Miranda wrote:
wow, the 24/2 DG DN will be a serious lens. Probably sharp wide open to the corners. It's almost the size of the 65/2 DG DN, only a tad shorter and 40 grams lighter.
The currently 24/3.5 is way smaller and lighter and has 1:2 magnification instead of 1: 6.7.
Sigma 24/2 C weighs 30 grams more than the Batis 25/2 and takes 62mm filters instead of 67mm that the Batis takes. Also the Batis 25/2 is 10/8 elements/groups compared to 13/10 in case of the Sigma 24/2 C. Then there’s the haptics and controls,…, Sigma wins, I think.
Sony 24/1.4 GM has also got 13/10 elements/groups.
Not ideal but tolerable if it happens. Zeiss long term rule dating from pre-digital is 2%. Batis 85mm is 2.1% pincushion; Sony 100/2.8 STF is 2.4%; Sony 24-105/4 (at 105mm) is 3%. Loxia 85mm is 1.1%.
bjornthun wrote:
Sigma 24/2 C weighs 30 grams more than the Batis 25/2 and takes 62mm filters instead of 67mm that the Batis takes. Also the Batis 25/2 is 10/8 elements/groups compared to 13/10 in case of the Sigma 24/2 C. Then there’s the haptics and controls,…, Sigma wins, I think.
Sony 24/1.4 GM has also got 13/10 elements/groups.
I think the real competition for the Sigma is the surprisingly strong performing Viltrox 24/1.8. It has a vignetting problem and some minor but complex distortion, but they also offer a profile for LR that clears both up well. It has the worst MFD in this class at .3M, but I can live with that. The 11 in 9 construction includes two asph and three ED elements. Backlit performance is solid with a light amount of veiling flare wide open and a tendency to have some ghosting with the sun in the frame, but both those qualities improve substantially stopped down. Bokeh's well-balanced front and back despite some minor SA wide open. Coma and CA correction are a little weak wide open, but the problem with both is gone by f/2.8 And it takes a 55mm filter, which, outside of former Nikon-shooters, is probably a more common size. While it lacks an MF/AF switch, it does have an aperture ring with third stops and a nicely wide focus ring that's decently dampened.
Stuffing all that goodness in at $429 is a fairly high bar. I hope the Sigma will be worth the extra couple of hundred.
freaklikeme wrote:
I think the real competition for the Sigma is the surprisingly strong performing Viltrox 24/1.8. It has a vignetting problem and some minor but complex distortion, but they also offer a profile for LR that clears both up well. It has the worst MFD in this class at .3M, but I can live with that. The 11 in 9 construction includes two asph and three ED elements. Backlit performance is solid with a light amount of veiling flare wide open and a tendency to have some ghosting with the sun in the frame, but both those qualities improve substantially stopped down. Bokeh's well-balanced front and back despite some minor SA wide open. Coma and CA correction are a little weak wide open, but the problem with both is gone by f/2.8 And it takes a 55mm filter, which, outside of former Nikon-shooters, is probably a more common size. While it lacks an MF/AF switch, it does have an aperture ring with third stops and a nicely wide focus ring that's decently dampened.
Stuffing all that goodness in at $429 is a fairly high bar. I hope the Sigma will be worth the extra couple of hundred....Show more →
Not in my country as no one carries Viltrox lenses. Samyang on the other hand is carried by all major photo stores. I still think Zeiss has homework to do here, if they want to stay competitive. Sigma is the middle ground pricewise and a well known brand.
bjornthun wrote:
Not in my country as no one carries Viltrox lenses. Samyang on the other hand is carried by all major photo stores. I still think Zeiss has homework to do here, if they want to stay competitive. Sigma is the middle ground pricewise and a well known brand.
bjornthun wrote:
Not in my country as no one carries Viltrox lenses. Samyang on the other hand is carried by all major photo stores. I still think Zeiss has homework to do here, if they want to stay competitive. Sigma is the middle ground pricewise and a well known brand.
That's too bad. Not even the APS-C lenses? Hopefully it will change when their 28/1.8 and 16/1.8 are released.
That's one area where I'm hoping the Sigma is an improvement, but I'd take those onion rings over the petri dish look of the Samyang. The rings are distinct and kind of beautiful in their own way.
freaklikeme wrote:
That's one area where I'm hoping the Sigma is an improvement, but I'd take those onion rings over the petri dish look of the Samyang. The rings are distinct and kind of beautiful in their own way.
Well, I guess if you like onion rings that's the only reason to get the Viltrox, as it seems from the reviews I've read it's the worst of the bunch...
bjornthun wrote:
No, and only one retailer carries Voigtländer, and that only half heartedly at best.
That sucks (particularly about the CV lenses).
I agree with you about Zeiss, but I'm not sure how competitive they plan to be right now. It seems they've taken a step back from new lens development.
j4nu wrote:
Well, I guess if you like onion rings that's the only reason to get the Viltrox, as it seems from the reviews I've read it's the worst of the bunch...
I shot it and the Samyang side-by-side, and the Samyang's a bit sharper and significantly lighter, and the Viltrox has better bokeh and a better build, but optically, they're more similar than they are different.
freaklikeme wrote:
I shot it and the Samyang side-by-side, and the Samyang's a bit sharper and significantly lighter, and the Viltrox has better bokeh and a better build, but optically, they're more similar than they are different.
