Lenstip (Click here) published the very first image samples taken with the new Sigma 24-105mm f/4.0 Full Frame lens. They used the Canon mount version but as you know the lens is available for A-mount too at Amazon (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) and Adorama (Click here).
30 Responses
I am really dissapointed, but I think this bad photos /especially at the wide end/ are due to back/front focus.
I agree it must either be focusing, jpeg, a defective lens or a combination of those.
Yeah, i see there’s a problem with the photographer. I don’t think there’s a photo there that was shot mounted on a tripod. This sharpness reminds me the 18-105 nikon dx that a have, i’m not impressed, but i guess putting it will be priced correctly and will sell well. I would like o see this vs the canon one, but i’m hopping for a minimal diference…
You have to be aware that Lenstip always uses zero sharpening for testing lenses.
Just exactly how many photographers buying this lens will shoot from a tripod? Probably near zero, so it’s really more appropriate to show photos taken the way the lens will be used even if more care and a tripod might improve the results.
btw, if this is 900 bucks, why would people buy it? the canon 24-105L is around 600-700 all day, 600 if you get it with a body, 700 in the used market (but really most of them are NIB, people just buy it with the body and try to make a quick buck). sorry but unless this thing is under 500, good luck with sigma trying to push this into the market.
I agree; for Canon mount this price makes no sense. Expect it to drop quickly to 500.
However, for A-mount Sigma can ask almost anything, nothing to compare it with except for film era 24-105 f3.5-4.5s.
Which should run your about USD 200 – 250 used; has horrible vignetting at 24mm, which might be correctable in PP (I haven’t tried; grab a 20mm/2.8 if you need decent quality around this focal length) and has a unusual (for Minolta/Sony) 62mm filter, but weighs about half of the Sigma (and is apparently 1/3 to 1/4 the price). Actually, the Minolta 24-105mm happens to be a great walk-around for the a99. Its just too bad Sony hasn’t decided to continue its production. Oh well, can’t have everything.
Don’t forget the 28-135mm minolta that has been selling for under 300.00 lately.
And the Minolta/Sony 24-105/3.5-4.5 performed quite well on full format, as per Kurt Munger’s review done on FF A900:
http://kurtmunger.com/sony_24_105mm_f_3_5_4_5_reviewid179.html
In addition, the lens is small, solidly built and weighs less than half what the Sigma weighs. No image stabilisation though.
Small excerpt from an excellent Kurt Munger’s review:
Quote:
For full frame users; This lens performs surprisingly well on the A900. The centers are sharp at almost any length and aperture, as I said above, the corners hold up well and look about as good as the much more expensive Sony 24-70mm F/2.8 Carl Zeiss zoom corners. There are a couple of issues though. There’s some color fringing throughout the zoom, especially noticeable at the long end. Light fall-off or corner darkening is pretty harsh, but can be mostly repaired in post processing. Distortion is also strong, but not much worse than other lenses in this price range. Currently, the Sony 24-105mm F/3.5-4.5 is the only standard zoom available for the A900 for a reasonable ($469) price, with a Sony name tag. Most people don’t need a big, heavy F/2.8 lens dragging them down. Although this lens doesn’t have a constant fast aperture, it performs just as well as some much more expensive lenses, and is a great bargain for full frame users.
Unquote
Sigma lens does not have image stabilisation for A-mount
You can buy Nikon version and order swapping the mount (new service from Sigma) ?
It will be more expensive but should give you IS.
As an owner of the Canon 24-105 I find that its performance is excellent;the whining of many Canon users notwithstanding. I am wondering if the design and manufacture of this FL range is actually a lot harder than it looks.
I note that Nikon owners complain about their 24-120 and I have yet to see any lens in this range being held up as the standard.
It’s hard to tell with the in-camera sharpening turned down to zero.
I think the canon is the standard and us nikon users are still jealous. Plus the sigma is 24-70 2.8 heavy
whoah, I find those images really soft and edges really blurry
Just download the image and sharpen in post as you like.
Please don’t judge this lens based on the lenstip.com samples…Lenstip always reduces the sharpening to zero…Every lens looks soft every time they post samples of any lens 🙂
They even had to remove the Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS II samples a few years back… 🙂
I want to see the Photozone test samples with Sony A99 or Nikon D800!
Me too. If the test from Photozone is higly recomended. Then i will order one straight away.
If extreme corners are tad soft the lens will get 3 stars from optical quality and won’t be recommended by Photozone. IMHO Photozone has too high emphasis on corner performance.
Don’t be serious.
Lenstip is a gun site paid by M4/3.
They always use the best body they can find to test the M4/3 lens, and use the oldest body to test other lens.
We don’t know what else they do on those samples.
Be real. What’s wrong with Canon EOS 1Ds MKIII? This is still top pro class camera with FF 21 Mpixel sensor, one of the best OVFs ever built and a shutter designed for 300,000 actuations.
The lens appears to be near-perfect, basically the same detail captured both at f/4 and f/8.
BUT! Those Lenstip boyz don’t know how to process image so that the captured detail is not killed. And they have always been like that, and they even stubbornly insist on their brain-dead ‘technique’.
They don’t do any processing. That’s why images look kinda unsharp (you can sharpen it yourself).
These f8 images are not very impressive in sharpness. Colours and contrast is OK though.
Jack Devant Ballet Photography
Let’s see other sample pictures before having a firm and definitive opinion on this lens please. You can’t judge on the quality with a preview from only one website.
I want to see how it performs on an APS-C sensor for instance.
If this is the best the sig 24-105 can do, then count me out. Detail is crap. Now it could be photographer, or the lousy processing but in either case if these are NOT indicative of the lens’ capabilities then Sigma should be in direct contact with the LenTip owners.
Another Test but without SD Card 🙁
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/10/29/first-impressions-sigma-24-105mm-f4-dg-hsm-os-canon-ef/
I haven’t checked the samples, but bear in mind, that Lenstip’s samples are always without or very low sharpening. Basically their samples always look quite soft.