Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 ART: Image Quality | 4K
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Profile Correction: 0:49 | Comparison with Tamron 15-30 - 9:00 | CA 14:44 | Flare 15:14 | Coma 16:22 | Distortion and Interiors - 17:15 | Summation 19:48 | Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 ART: Image Quality Breakdown | Photographer Dustin Abbott takes a careful look at the image quality from the amazing new Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 ART lens...and also highlights the unique new feature that no one is talking about! Visit the Image Gallery: bit.ly/sig1424ig | Read the Chateau Laurier article: bit.ly/laurierDA | Purchase the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 ART @ B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2FezkoM | Amazon: amzn.to/2Ei3TbD | Amazon Canada: amzn.to/2GzBKyM | Amazon UK: amzn.to/2GyT4br | Ebay: bit.ly/sig1424
Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at:
B&H Photo: bhpho.to/1TA0Xge
Amazon: www.amazon.com...
Ebay: bit.ly/DustineBay
Make a donation via Paypal: paypal.me/dustinTWI
Get a discount off all Skylum Editing Software (Luminar, Aurora HDR, AirMagic) by using code DUSTINHDR at checkout: bit.ly/LuminarDLA
Become a Patron: / dustinabbott | Check me out on: Personal Website: dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: bit.ly/DLAinsta | Google+: bit.ly/24PjMzv | Facebook: on. 1nuUUeH | Twitter: bit.ly/1RyYxIH | Flickr: bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu
My filming setup: Sony a7R III: B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2D6ibNO or Amazon: amzn.to/2CNxOvH | or | Sony a9 @ B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2HyWIyt or Amazon: amzn.to/2s1vYE0
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2FA00la or Amazon amzn.to/2G2kaEr
Lights: Rotolight AEOS @B&H Photo bhpho.to/2IK7mqV | Genaray Contender @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/33HbGNM | and Aputure AL-MW: bhpho.to/2N3MtZV
DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Keywords: Canon Lens Correction, Sigma 14-24mm, f/2.8, f2.8, 2.8, 14-24, 14-24mm, ART, Sigma, Sigma 14-24 ART, Sigma 14-24 ART Review, Sigma 14-24 2.8, Review, Dustin Abbott, Sigma 14-24 Review, Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 ART, Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 ART Review, Resolution, Contrast, Distortion, Sigma MC-11, Canon 5D Mark IV, Sony a7R3, Autofocus, Nikon 14-24mm, Nikon 14-24, Tamron 15-30, Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8, 2018, 1424ART
Reviews have to be like this. Objective straight and crystal clear explanation. No gimmicks, affinity, emotions. Best. Thanks To DA
Thanks for the feedback. I try to report on the facts as I see them.
You are my go to for reviews mate - you give the facts and don't harp on, clean and well put together review thank you!
Thanks, Kyle. Glad to hear it!
Just bought this lens!
I have a 5D IV, 24-20L (I), 70-200/2.8 L (II), Sigma Art 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 and just sold my amazing Samyang 14/2.8.
WOW, this Sigma 14-24 is my new favourite lens! I know it's not possible, but to me the clarity and sharpness and contrast of this lens beats all my other glass, including the 35/85 Art primes! I can fire directly into the sun and no flare (maybe a drawback to some) and the distortion is there but it's very nice. I can't say enough about this lens. The focus ring to me doesn't seem too stiff. Perhaps it's a bit stiffer than normal to prevent any lens creep if you point the lens up/down as it has a heavy element. No complaints. It's a beautiful lens!
It's definitely a beautiful lens. Lens creep isn't normally an issue with an internally zooming lens anyway.
Excellent review! The details you place on every review shows the vast knowledge you have. This video made me take my decision to get this lens instead of the canon 16-35 f/2.8 III
Enjoy your lens. It is an excellent one!
I'm getting this lens to my Z6 now. Used for 650 bucks but still strong.
Solid review! Thumbs up!
Good value. That's a great lens.
Thank you Dustin for this detailed review!
You're welcome
I just picked up this beauty today for my nikon d810. Oh my it is truly a spectacular glass. Its huge, beautiful and takes such incredible pictures. I haven't had time to test it in the field yet but will in a day or two. Evrrything you said in this video is so right. Good job sigma. They nailed it!! 😁🖒
Enjoy!
lol Mr Abbott you seemed really excited about this lens, your descriptions are never this emotional ; )
It’s a great lens, but I’m mostly excited about the breakthrough of having profile corrections in Canon and what that means for the future
Fantastic review Dustin! I really love your detailed reviews on how you go through in a great pace and talk about everything you could possibly want to know about a lens. I just traded in my Nikon 14-24 and got the Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 and am looking at a replacement for that ultra wide angle. Basically between the tamron 15-30 2.8 and Sigma 14-24 2.8. But it looks like you've really showed us just how stunning this lens it. Wow amazing job Sigma. This is like taking my super sharp 35mm 1.4 Art lens (which I love) and making it a 14-24 2.8.
Glad to help out.
Sev
Well....bought myself a tamron 70-200 g2 too.....and also doubting between tamron 15-30 and sigma 14-24 ....gonna wait a while for more comparison between these two....but...as allways.....excellent vid by dustin.
Thanks for the review. Not only are your reviews excellent buying guides, but also tremendously educational!
Glad to help out.
Congrats on 40k subs!! Awesome to see this channel growing.
Solid review, as always!
I'm pretty happy about the steady growth, too. Looking forward to hitting the 50K and 100K marks, though the latter is probably still a couple of years out.
@@DustinAbbottTWI guess what? 100k+ !!!
Wow so much detail. Thank you for this great review.
My pleasure.
Thanks for the detailed review especially the comparison
My pleasure.
The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 disliked this video lol. As always, a great review, Dustin!
That may explain things!! :)
Dustin really knew how to take great snow photos. Going to buy this lens after watching this video.
I get a lot of practice!
Got this lens yesterday and IQ is indeed great. But returned it because the AF motor started beeping and one hour later it completely died. Ok this can happen with other lens brands also but this really sucks. I went now for the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 instead.
Is it just me or have your sample pictures got much better in the recent years? The example shots for this review are really, really beautiful.
Thank you. Though, to be fair, the quality of my pictures is often dependent on where I get to shoot and under what conditions. That's no fault (or credit) to the lens I happen to be reviewing.
I was not really thinking about the lens quality, but rather about your composition and choice of shooting locations. Though this lens is looking great too. :)
The detailed review you and matt granger did of tamron 15-30 and now comparing it to sigma 14-24 i am getting the feeling better buy nice than twice .. Thanks Dustin for such a review .. waiting for third part of the review..
That's coming soon, but if I were choosing at the moment I would go for the Sigma.
And how about sigma 14-24 f2.8 in comparison to Canon native 16-35 f2.8 III. Apart from the Focal range of both which one would you suggest ?? Waiting for your reply regarding this ..
Thank you Dustin,outstanding job as always!
Thank you!
Finally , thanks sir! Have a nice day.
You're welcome.
Thank you so much for this review with Astro photography too!!!!!!!
For sure!
I can't wait to see your reviews using this lens with A7RIII.
I'll probably release some content next week
Thank you! I just got a message that my SonyA7III is on its way from Oslo to Lillehammer now, and that I can pick it up at Lillehammer next week. I planned to buy the new Tokina Firin 20mm f.2.0 for e-mount with autofocus, but got now really tempted by this Sigma lens. What will you recommend me?
I guess the Firin is smaller, but is it sharper? As it's a prime lens it might be? What do you think? Have you made a review of the Firin or plan to?
It too might be that Sigma plan to make a smaller wide angle lens for Sony in the future, as wide angle lenses can be made smaller for mirrorless. How long do you think we need to wait for a Sigma art lens wide angle designed especially for mirrorless?
Can you use screw filters on the Sigma lens?
I'm very, very interested in testing the Firin lens, but considering how small my sample size is with Tokina lenses (less than 3), it's impossible for me to even predict its performance.
Great great image quality test Dustin. We are looking forward for your test of that lens on Sony with an adapter MC11.
That's coming this week.
Hey Dustin, I'm on the hunt for a wide angel lens so I always check out your channel. Lens is going to be sitting on my Canon R6 and I've narrowed it to two, Sigma 20mm 1.4 or Sigma 14-24 2.8, totally different lenses of course. Heart just loves the uniqueness of a 20mm 1.4 but head says, come on it's a no brainer, 14-24 is so much more versatile.
I personally prefer the 14-24mm. It's one of the best wide angle zooms out there, and I value the versatility of the zoom range over F1.4 in a wide angle lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI cheers Dustin, appreciate the feedback.
Great Job!
Thank you
thanks for the review. Love wideangle lenses
You're welcome.
For me it seemed that the Sigma isn't that much sharper, but it handles Field Curvature much better than the Tamron. At 10:25 you can clearly see the bushes at close are in focus while the trees are out of focus on the Tamron, but no such problem on the Sigma. Also, consider the Tamron is $100 cheaper at MSRP and now $350 cheaper at retail (at least from where I live), the value for money, in my opinion, still favours the Tamron.
I own the Tamron and agree that it offers great value. But it isn't as sharp as the Sigma near the edges of the frame. It just isn't.
Thanks for the great review!
My pleasure.
I’m about to buy one
Enjoy. It's a sweet lens.
What a lens! Fingers crossed that it does as well on the Sony. As usual, great review, Dustin!
I'll be reporting on that this week.
Thanks for the excellent video. This confirms what I have seen so far with real world shooting. I am extremely pleased with the results this lens produces with both architectural and landscape images. The first landscape image I made was published immediately. I am shooting with a Canon 5DS-R, and am finding this to be a great combination.
That is a great combination, as you are able to resolve so much of the sensor with it.
Dudley Warner best lens ever by Sigma...just won an award.
Excellent review as always! Great job. What are your thoughts using this exclusively for interior real estate photography?
I think the 12-24 is perhaps a slightly better real estate option, particularly if working off a tripod. The 14-24 is a little sharper, though, and obviously has a light transmission advantage
Thanks Dustin for these reviews. I have been torn between Sigma 14-24mm and 16-35mm GM . I love my Samyang 14mm 2.8 on the wide for those different perspective shots. So to see how sharp the Sigma is throughout the range is impressive.
To loose the 35mm end is not a big issue for me, as I like to shoot wide in most cases. Some would say, 'then buy a prime', but I like to option to have to zoom to 24mm just incase. Then crop in for 35mm in post, or move forward a few step yes ??? Or use APS-c Botton on my A7rii to crop in.
One question though, do I loose quality using APS-C?
So hope to see Sigma in action once it arrives, thanks to your review.
The Sigma is a great choice here, I think. Using APS-C drops the resolution total on your A7RII to 18MP, so I would recommend just shooting in full frame and cropping only so much as needed.
Thank you Dustin for this great review. Do you think the Sigma 14-24mm is the better lense compared with the Sigma 14mm 1,8? i am waiting for the 14-24 to compare with my new14mm. Thank you.
In some ways, yes. It's a different lens for a somewhat different purpose. But I'm more tempted by the 14-24, myself, as I feel the flexibility of the zoom outweighs the flexibility of the larger aperture of the prime for my purposes.
Very impressive performance!
I agree
Thank you... I love your job.
Thank you
Dustan do you know if the lens profiles are in Lightroom yet and if not can using Nikons 14-24 profiles correct what ever barrel distortions that you find, since it doesn't seem like a lot. Thank you Dustin, your reviews are the best out there. The targeted market for this lens will be using tripods, so VC, which is a bonus, really isn't a factor, but the corner to corner sharpness is. It sounds like Nikon and Tamron have been detrowned????
The profile is definitely already there. I think the nature of having the profile loaded in lens may possibly preclude the need to wait for Adobe to generate one, actually.
Hi Dustin, I have a question, how would this lens compare at 14mm to the prime 14mm 1.8 art? how big of a difference is there in terms of resolution, contrast, distortion (I´m not really into astrophotography but wouldn´t complain of the 1.8 max aperture. IT´s just that im more into architecture photography than astro)? ..... I´m very interested in getting the 14mm 1.8 and also a milvus 25 f1.4 however I would definitely appreciate the cost and weight savings of having this lens instead.... I know it´s definitely not going to be as good as the primes but I wonder how much of a difference is out there. (I´m a prime lens junkie however my back doesnt like that very much)
The sharpness of this lens is stunningly good. I think it is a great option
same for me. I bought the Sigma 14mm on Friday with the option to change with 14-24mm when available in the next 28 days.
Great review , super interesting !
For sure!
Dustin Abbott The great thing about Sigma is that they are really improving.
The 85, 135 , 14 are much better than the 20 35 and 50 that have many issues
Bravo !
I agree. They seem to be making ground on improving their weaknesses while expanding on their strengths.
Hi Dustin,
thanks a lot for your detailed review as always. Originally I was about to buy Sigma Art 14mm 1.8 for landscape photography but as it is such an extreme angle and after your review I thought maybe it would be the smartest solution for me to buy the Sigma 14-24mm 2.8 Art. In regards to the resolution edge to edge and vignetting do you think there is a big difference between these lenses . I am usually making big prints out of the images.
Thanks in advance :)
Both are extraordinarily sharp. Vignette exists but clears up when stopped down. No big deal.
Thanks for answering. Not an easy decision :)
I am getting addicted to this channel. detailed and very informative reviews. If you are going to choose between rokinon sp 14mm 2.4 and this new sigma 14-24mm 2.8, which one would you choose? I am confused which one to buy now since you had a very good review also on the rokinon sp 14mm
It would depend on priorities. If you priority is shooting astro, the rokinon is the better choice. It's also much lighter and more portable. If you want versatility, the Sigma is a great choice.
Thanks a lot, Sir. Actually I'm just new to photography. I got a full frame canon body, and I am looking for third party lenses, and this led me to your brilliant channel. I think I am leaning towards the direction of portraiture and landscape. I will get a Rokinon 85mm 1.2 for sure. Thanks to your review about that. Now I'm still in the process of choosing which wide angle lens to get.
Dustin thank you for the in depth reviews. I have a question because I can’t decide on which of the following lenses to buy. Would you recommend the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 DG HSM Art or the Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8 L III? Its primary use would be interior and architecture photography. I’m using Canon 6D.
Edit: The main reason I’m considering these two lenses even they are not covering the same focal lengths, is because I could use the added focal length of the canon for other purposes other than interior photography which is my job. Now the main dealbreaker for me would be the quality of the image because I know 14-24mm is good for my job which is a priority, but if the quality is similar or better on the Canon then I would go for that lens.
I don't think the Canon is much better in terms of sharpness, and has more vignette. For the money I think the Sigma is a great bet, and it suits your primary purpose better.
Dustin Abbott Thank you very much for the advice! Always good to hear from an experienced expert :)
Ps you got a new subscriber
Hi Dustin I actually got this lens and I am very impressed with image quality it produces. You have mentioned that there is a sigma 14-24 2.8 art lens data correction available for canon cameras could you let me know how to instal this data into camera ?
It will automatically load from the lens. Just enable the corrections in camera.
Was there actually more sun shining on the trees in the Sigma pictures, or are they really that much better than the Tamron's? Thanks for the great shots, btw!
The lighting isn't identical, but yes, the Sigma is that much sharper.
Dustin another great in-depth video! I'm still debating between the Tamron 15-30 or this Sigma. I think I'm stuck on deciding having the VC or not. I would probably use my 3-legged helper often, but I'd like to use it had held. How much of a factor should this be if any?
Frankly a focal length like this is not difficult to handhold. The new Tamron 15-30 G2 may be a strong contender here, though I'm waiting for its arrival for review.
Thx Dustin! I’d rather sacrifice VC for better sharpness. Thx again
Great review and amazing channel. I watch your reviews all the time. :) Still, I have a question since I'm looking for a ultra wide lens and I'm a little stuck between Sigma 14mm f/1,8 and this one especially for landscape work, but astro too. Could you please write me some words about their differences apart from the f and zoom vs prime? I'm mostly interested in the resolution that both of the lenses resolves (center to corner of course, especially corner), also the color rendering, flare handling and of course.. construction. It would help me a lot! Thanks and keep up the amazing work you do. Your channel is indeed like a gold reference to me. :)
I'm afraid I don't have the time to dedicate to what you are looking for. I personally would go for the zoom, as I value the flexibility of the focal length more than the larger maximum aperture of the prime at this focal length.
Hi Dustin, great review! I have never bought a Sigma lens. But when I listen to your review, it’s quite tempting... Do you think that this lens can compete with the Zeiss 15 mm f/2.8, that you praised in a previous review, in terms of contrast and sharpness? Of course, the Sigma will have the advantage of the versatility and the autofocus, although the autofocus is not that important for landscape photography.
The short answer is yes.
Dustin Abbott Are you going to add this lens to your own kit?
Im very seriously considering replacing my Tamron with it
Dustin Abbott Hi Dustin, it’s Pierre-Louis again. I am getting back to my first question. In several reviews, when you compared Zeiss lenses (Distagon, Milvus or Otus) with Sigma lenses, you often said that Zeiss lenses were overall superior because you argued that the images taken with Sigma lenses were rather « clinical » (this is the exact word you used). Would you say the same regarding this Sigma 14-24 mm? Maybe you can talk about this topic in your final review of the lens.
I think that is less applicable to lenses that aren't really about rendering (bokeh, etc...). With a landscape/architecture lens, you mostly want great sharpness, contrast, and color rendition. The Sigma 14-24 ART has all of these.
I'm considering one of these 2 lenses and you definitely suggest going with the sigma over the tamron?
That's what I would do if I were spending right now. Unless you need the VC, the Sigma seems to be the way to go.
i wonder how it compares to 16-35 Canon, and nikon 14-24, IQ wise. This is the big one. But seeing is way better then tamron and tamron is pretty close to nikon 14-24 i guess i get some idea.
Not sure about 16-35 canon, the f4 one.
Thanks for the review, ive been waiting for this one for a while
I suspect the Sigma is sharper. I've been seriously impressed by its optical performance.
Wow. I've been borrowing my.koms 16-35 f/4 for years. Bought the 24mm 1.4 signs...but want more UWA for the inside of churches and buildings....this seems like a great idea! I also love UWA street photography of architecture. This seems like the lens I've been waiting for...what do you think?
I'm strongly considering it myself.
I bought the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 lens a bit ago. The resolution is fantastic, but I’m sometimes missing something a little wider, sometimes a little closer. Do you think that I’ll compromise resolution by switching up? I got the Zeiss for just $1000, and the Sigma costs a bit more new. It’s hard to find an used one in Denmark, and it’ll not be worth it if with the, for example American taxes combined with the Danish taxes.
The Sigma is every bit as sharp in my findings.
Dustin Abbott Thank you, Dustin! I might consider swapping it out, but time will tell. Is there anything superior about the Zeiss over the Sigma, beside weight and maybe color rendition? What about the Sigma 14-24mm art compared to their 14mm art?
Hi Dustin, do you need the Sigma dock with this Sigma 14-24 mm? I mean, does this lens focus properly without having to calibrate the lens? Thanks.
That's up to you. The other advantage is being able to do firmware updates to ensure the best performance and future compatibility from the lens. I didn't have any focus issues without dock calibration, though.
Dustin Abbott Hi Dustin, to be more precise, I own a Nikon D850 and I have Nikon, Zeiss, Tamron and Voightlander lenses. But I have never bought Sigma lenses. I heard that sometimes there were focusing issues with Sigma lenses and that it was recommended to use a Sigma dock to solve the focusing issues. Is it easy to calibrate a Sigma lens with the Sigma dock? Thanks. (p.s: I have never tried to calibrate a lens because I have never had any focusing issues with Nikon or Tamron lenses).
I wouldn't say that it is easy, but I do have some videos that teach how to do calibration.
i would like to see a head to head comparison with the 14-24 Nikkor 2.8. there had to be a reason it costs 2 grand.
I'm afraid that I won't be the one to do that comparison, as I don't shoot Nikon.
Hello, has anyone used this Sigma 14-24mm lens with Sigma MC-11 adapter on a Sony camera?
How is the result for video?
I'm a Canon and Sony user, so I'm considering buying the EF mount version. I already have the adapter.
First of all, Thanks.
Typically Sigma lenses work reasonably well with the MC-11. I suspect video AF won't be top notch, but I also haven't specifically tested that combination.
Thinking about getting this and the MC-11 over the 12-24mm G for my A7RIII. Do you think the aperture difference is worth adapted over native?
You can probably get this in native mount before long.
Hi Dustin, how would you compare this lens to the 12-24 art? I know they arent exactly equal lenses to compare but what are your thoughts on this?
I'll deal with that a bit in the final review.
Dustin Abbott ahh looking forward to it :) thanks!
I was just about to buy the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 but this now has my attention. How do you think this lens fares versus the 14mm? Considering I'd likely be shooting them both around f/2.8 often for astro.
I like the versatility of this lens better, myself, as my needs for f/1.8 at such a wide focal length are few.
I found an interesting comparison here, to my eye they're quite comparable even at f/2.8 with the 14mm looking a hair sharper in the middle but the 14-24mm actually looking better everywhere else. Does that match your observations? Vignetting seems to be very low with the 14-24mm wide open which is a huge bonus.
www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1182&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1121&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
I think the difference in center sharpness would be near imperceptible in real world shooting, but the edges on the 14-24mm are very impressive.
Yeah those are my thoughts too, corner performance is quite important as I consider this kind of lens ideal for "single shots" rather than panoramic stitches.
Hi Dustin, which one is a better lens between this and tamron 15-30 g2 for Canon eos R? i watched some of the review from your video, and still cant decide..
I think I would go with the Sigma, myself, unless you need the VC.
Dustin Abbott thanks dustin.. but i saw in one of your video using sigma with an adapter like mc 11 give a little soft in the edge of the pic, im guessing it might be the same for the eos r with the adapter because of the adapter spacing..
Looks nice, would it use 150mm filters with custom adapter?
I suspect the answer will be yes, particularly if the lens sells well (which I think it will).
What really puts me off these lenses are the 'problems' with filters for them.
That's true, though that is the price to pay to have a wide angle, wide aperture lens.
i saw the price between this new sigma are the same price as nikon 14-24mm secondhand. which one should i buy?
That’s hard for me to say, as I haven’t used the Nikon
Dustin Abbott guess i have to go to the nearest store and check the iq myself. thanks for the excellent video sir!
how does this sigma handle lowlight handheld with no vc.....how much better is this one than the tamron...or isnt it....is it just better on a tripod...??
The vast majority of the photos shown in this video or in the image gallery are shot handheld...and many of them at night. I had no issues.
Dustin Abbott
Good to read....the conclusion is this sigma buries the tamron...thanks for your reply...
Excellent descriptive review,as usual. For those who are interested in comparing this Sigma lens with Nikon opponent,here is a comparative review(published a week ago),given by a Chinese photography website(Use Google translate capability): www.mobile01.com/newsdetail/24940/14-24mm-f2-8-sigma-vs-nikon
I believe the Nikon lens copy used in this review is not good enough,but it is worth watching.That softness over edges,given in f/2.8 on Nikon D850 is obvious,but when stepped down,it disappears(Good cropping with post processing solves this problem on f/2.8).Interesting point is that Sigma lens is not actually starting at 14 mm,like Tamron 15-30 that starts at 16 mm.Also,Sigma color rendering is somewhat warmer than Nikon lens.See the review for yourself.
.
Another excellent review. Just want to add that the Tamron's Image stabilization (Vibration Control in Tamron speak) helps in several practical ways that can overtake the Sigma in image quality. When I shoot inside at most art museums they do not allow tripods or flash. Hence everything must be natural light. Even at F/2.8 I find I am often shooting around 1/30th of a second with the Tamron at multiple focal lengths. That is getting close to causing blur without image stabilization. Then at indoor events with low light where I don't want to become the event with the camera by walking all around or using flash I again am often shooting at very slow shutter speeds. Imagine stabilization saves the day. Lastly those night scenes where you were using ISO 6400 with the non-stabilized Sigma, presumably hand held, I suspect you could cut in half or more the shutter speed and reduce the ISO to 3200 or lower. Imagine stabilization matters and probably more so as pixel counts go up in cameras.
It's not Vibration Control (almost everybody fails) - it's "Vibration COMPENSATION" !!!
Peter, I do think that VC/IS/OS always makes a difference, though I also think that is far less necessary in wide angle lenses
Wow, that made all the difference in the world to the main point. All CAPS
Referring to Hans Wi comment. Assuming it was just a tongue in cheek comment
Dustin, I was using the general rule of not going slower than 1 over the focal length in seconds for shutter speed and the fact you were "forced" to shoot at ISO 6400 in one of your night pictures presumably because the Sigma lacked IS/VC. Also, I was wondering if you can pool together the all important customer support and reliability stats on the brands you review. Something that is absolutely critical for long term cost considerations and resale value. Lens rentals, for one, has done some of this. Canon has been a gold standard in this regard, Sony, not so much, for example.
The sigma is so much better than the Tamron. Meanwhile the Tamron is way enough if you are making an actual good shot. It's not that much of a deal on a good shot. The difference is for imho for pixel peepers like myself who don't care if no one else will notice the difference when just they know the difference because they work with the raw file and fine tune it. So basically a lens to please to photographer and not his audience.
I want one. ;-)
The Tamron has been an excellent lens for me, but I do think this Sigma is the better lens.
Congratulations, you're the first one on RUclips to post an actual video test of this lens.
The first written test is here: www.lenstip.com/528.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_14-24_mm_f_2.8_DG_HSM_review.html
The resolution figures look good (similar to yours) but they are reporting much higher distortion than Sigma advertises.
And I think they are probably right. This isn't as low distortion as the 12-24mm. Sigma claims distortion is next to nil at infinity, which isn't really a practical measurement. Barrel distortion at closer focal distances definitely exists.
Dustin, hello! I always admire your scrupulous reviews. Please tell me why you do not notice one important point: Sigma lenses demonize the image because they fall through the dark parts of the frame into black.
Hi there, I'm not entirely sure what you are suggesting by this. If you are suggesting that they crush blacks in a way that other lenses don't; I haven't seen that.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Hi! Just take two identical shots from Sigma and Canon and look at the dark parts of the shot. You will be surprised, I assure you :)
I've dozens of comparisons between Sigma and other lenses, and I've not seen that.
Did someone compare the zeiss milvus 15?
looking at the tests of The Digital Pictures would seem even better than the Sigma 14mm that the Zeiss ...... possible according to you?
www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1182&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1081&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
Perhaps the in the center. The corner performance from the Sigma is the best I've seen.
yes, in fact I meant to say that, from that test, the Sigma seems to be better on the whole frame ... and this leaves really extraordinary
pastor... Evaluation sequel took too long!
Understand that I have a lot of commitments and I want to do things right. I have a process that works for me
The part from 13:55 to 14:10, comparing performance at 24 mm ... it gets so obvious the Tamron lens is decentered/skewed, this whole comparison is worthless. Just look at the far horizont on the Tamron shots on the R side, and then on the L side - the distant horizont should be equaly sharp on both sides of the image, but it's not; it's perfect on the L side, but looks disastrous on the R side.
Also look at he zoomed-in image from 10:22 to 10:27; see how much sharper are the dried plants in the lower R corner on the Tamron-shot images, compared to the ones taken with Sigma? See ... skewed Tamron lens ... worthless comparison ... waste of time - yours and ours.
I own the Tamron, and it is not decentered. Thanks for your feedback, though.
@@DustinAbbottTWI well ... it was during this test.
Sigma. Did. THAT!
It definitely is an extremely sharp lens