p.2 #1 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I also really like Sigma lenses. They have been growing on me lately because of their rendering.
I have never had a bad one, unlike sony, tamron, and samyang.
I have the
16-28mm f2.8 (sharp, good but not stellar rendering - i mainly use it for the 16-20 range)
28mm f1.4 (my favorite lens, i can not say enough great things about it)
40mm f1.4 (a bit too heavy)
45mm f2.8 (the rendering won me over)
70mm f2.8 macro (selling it after getting the 105)
105mm f2.8 macro (sharp and beautiful rendering, dual use as macro and portrait)
150-600 mm (c) adapted from Canon
picked up both the 28 and 40 for about 500 each.
My typical kit with a backpack is a
Voigtlander 21mm 3.5 (sometimes will swap this out for the 16-28)
Sigma 28mm f1.4
Sigma 45mm f1.4
Sigma 105mm f1.4 (sometimes leave this if going lighter)
While i previously had the telephoto and 70mm art, what really opened me up to the Sigma's was when i purchased the 45mm f2.8 (for 275). While not the sharpest lenses ever made, particularly close up, the choice Sigma made for emphasizing rendering gave me a lot of respect for Sigma. It helps that it has decent closeup as well (although not sharp wide open close-up). Then the 28mm sealed it - I would take that lens over a GM any day.
I obtained the 40mm recently, and have not really had time yet to put it through its paces, mainly because the 28mm always wins out in my bag. I am looking forward to it, and most likely go out with it as a single lens to start with.
I often go out with just the 105mm as well, or paired with the 45mm, and with a Godox ad200 flash and a small modifier.
I am also looking at the 65i (as on sale at moment). The 35i looks attractive, but too close to the 28, and i have a few other 35's.
p.2 #3 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I have the Sigma 18-50 and 45/2.8 and love them both. Did have the 85/1.4 Art which is a wonderful lens but I wanted something lighter so traded (down) to a Batis 85/1.8 which is also wonderful.
p.2 #4 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I'm actually in the process of wondering, as an amateur photographer who still loves having high quality glass, if I wouldn't be better served by Sigma. For the price of the 100-400GM + 24-70GMII, I could get a Sigma 100-400, a 24-70 DG DN, and two or three primes (like 35f.4 and 85f1.4 and 105f2.8 macro).
The only lens that seems weak in the list is the Sigma 100-400, but if it's better than my Sony 70-200f4 below 300mm, it's definitely a win for me.
If you have suggestions based on your experience, you could make me save a bit of money and / or get additional good lenses
p.2 #6 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
pierrep69 wrote:
I'm actually in the process of wondering, as an amateur photographer who still loves having high quality glass, if I wouldn't be better served by Sigma. For the price of the 100-400GM + 24-70GMII, I could get a Sigma 100-400, a 24-70 DG DN, and two or three primes (like 35f.4 and 85f1.4 and 105f2.8 macro).
The only lens that seems weak in the list is the Sigma 100-400, but if it's better than my Sony 70-200f4 below 300mm, it's definitely a win for me.
If you have suggestions based on your experience, you could make me save a bit of money and / or get additional good lenses ...Show more →
100-400DN is actually pretty close to the GM. If you don't need the best AF performance or TC support, you should be ok (plus it's a bit smaller and lighter). I did have some issues with long distance focus accuracy on the long end though, where the GM seemed to nail focus more consistently.
p.2 #8 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
pierrep69 wrote:
I'm actually in the process of wondering, as an amateur photographer who still loves having high quality glass, if I wouldn't be better served by Sigma. For the price of the 100-400GM + 24-70GMII, I could get a Sigma 100-400, a 24-70 DG DN, and two or three primes (like 35f.4 and 85f1.4 and 105f2.8 macro).
The only lens that seems weak in the list is the Sigma 100-400, but if it's better than my Sony 70-200f4 below 300mm, it's definitely a win for me.
If you have suggestions based on your experience, you could make me save a bit of money and / or get additional good lenses ...Show more →
I owned the Sony 70-200 F4 and sold it to purchase the Sigma 100-400 as soon as it came out. The Sigma is definitely a much better performer in my experience, keeping in mind that I primarily shoot landscapes. I find the Sigma's focusing to be fine, keeping in mind that when you are on the long end you can encounter atmospheric issues, like any long lens. I find the stabilisation to be good on my A7RIII and the color and contrast are really nice.
p.2 #9 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
In my hands, the Sigma 14-24/2.8 out performed the Sony 12-24GM…and at half the cost. I now own the Sigma.
I think Sigma makes very high quality lenses these days, but they are often much heavier than the Sony model and generally focus slower than the Sonys. For some applications, that matters, others not.
The Sigma 35/1.4 Art is a beautiful lens with lush colors, a great portrait lens. I happened to prefer the Zony ZA at the time, but nothing wrong with the Sigma.
I have been drooling over the Sigma 105/1.4 but keep hoping Sony will make one that is as nice but weighs less than a Volkswagen.
p.2 #12 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I have the 16-28/2.8 and the 28-70/2.8 as well as the 24f3.5C. For my uses, the size/weight/cost/optical quality equation of Sigma lenses is just about right. Might consider the new Sony 20-70G, but I love the color and portrait rendering of the 28-70. We'll see.
p.2 #13 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I moved from Sony to Olympus in the past year, but decided that I prefer full frame for landscapes and interiors. Consequently, I reacquired an a7RIII and two Sigma lenses that I thought would provide the most versatility and good IQ for the Sony specific applications: the 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 24-70mm f/2.8.
p.2 #14 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
FJR1 wrote:
I moved from Sony to Olympus in the past year, but decided that I prefer full frame for landscapes and interiors. Consequently, I reacquired an a7RIII and two Sigma lenses that I thought would provide the most versatility and good IQ for the Sony specific applications: the 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 24-70mm f/2.8.
I have both of those. The 24-70 has good rendering in my opinion, and my version of the 14-24mm is tack sharp.
p.2 #15 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I personally like a lot Sigma lenses, specially Art series. I own these ones and for sure I won't get rid of any of them:
- 14-24 f2.8 DG DN Art
- 24-70 f2.8 DG DN Art (outclasses my 24-70 GM MkI without any doubt)
- 85 f1.4 DG HSM Art E-Mount
- 105 f2.8 DG OS HSM Macro adapted with Metabones V.
p.2 #16 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
dbehrens wrote:
The Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art is my absolute favorite go-to lens in my kit.
I had the HSM version when using an adapter on my Canon R5 I had. it was freaking outstanding. NO distortion and sharp edge to edge corner to corner. The color rendition was top flight and there was NO COMA nor CA. I just ordered one for my A7R5 and can't wait. It will be a perfect answer to my wide needs. Virtually EVERY review I could get my hands on said it beat the pants off the Sony GM 16-35 f2.8. and that was twice the price. You can't beat the build quality of those ART lenses.
p.2 #17 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
Grenache wrote:
In my hands, the Sigma 14-24/2.8 out performed the Sony 12-24GM…and at half the cost. I now own the Sigma.
I think Sigma makes very high quality lenses these days, but they are often much heavier than the Sony model and generally focus slower than the Sonys. For some applications, that matters, others not.
The Sigma 35/1.4 Art is a beautiful lens with lush colors, a great portrait lens. I happened to prefer the Zony ZA at the time, but nothing wrong with the Sigma.
I have been drooling over the Sigma 105/1.4 but keep hoping Sony will make one that is as nice but weighs less than a Volkswagen.
but keep hoping Sony will make one that is as nice but weighs less than a Volkswagen.
You made me laugh at that one. I had one with a prior Canon and oh baby you could use that bad boy to do curls and beef up your muscles. But man is that lens built like a Rolls Royce. Sharp as a pin and bokeh to die for (why they call it Bokeh Master)
p.2 #18 · Anyone else ending up with a lot of Sigma lenses?
I love Sigma’s rendering, build quality and price, but I feel Sigma is overall one or two steps behind in AF compared to my Sony lenses and my Tamron 35-150. My current Sigma lenses are all purchased with weight and size in mind. I really enjoy using this kit.
