Honestly I don't mind the CA and it seems like when these things are not overcorrected lenses have much better rendition and I feel this sigma renders more beautifully than it's older sibling. Not to mentioned it is smaller. I love it
Curious about comparison to the original Sigma Art lens. The mark 1 is one of the sharpest zooms I've ever used, but it's quite heavy. Saving 100 grams seems well worth the upgrade to me.
I moved in a different direction - from the original Sigma 24-70 f2.8 front-heavy 850 g down to Sony 20-70 f4 470 g. Can recommend - ultra sharp, no chromatic aberration, super sticky AF, better for hybrid work with video (20 mm, parfocal, focus breathing), a bit better macro capabilities (much better at 70 mm), better ergonomics (eg. custom buttons are much easier to feel and find, printed focal length values are more readable and so on). The one f-stop loss is not an issue - even f/2.8 doesn't really work in dimly lit interiors and during/after blue hour, so an f/1.4 prime will circumvent that. I miss some of the bokeh though.
Dam. I was super surprised to see a mk ii right after I bought my mk i used lol. But compared to your 4 year old video on the mk i, this mk ii doesn't look better in the corners technically? at least at 24mm where I feel like that matters more for the landscape shooters. Do you still have the mk i for comparison?
Actually, I heard that the optical structure of the mk ii is almost the same as mk i, so it’s no wonder why the IQ of these two generations look so similar
what about the dust resistance ???? At Sigma 24 70 no1 was very easy to dust dots to came inside the glass, like ridiculous easy. Like , one walk at the park was enough..
@christopherfrost thanks for the nice review Chris! I find it strange or even funny that no one talks and compares the original Sigma 24-70 to the new model II about the biggest flaw original had - the stepped aperture in video mode when filming in aperture priority mode. Can you please confirm, does the new Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN Art Mark II has, smooth or stepped aperture in aperture priority mode (when filming video)? Love from Finlandia 💜.
I don't feel the need to upgrade from the old version but this new one is a pretty nice upgrade! How often will you notice that poor longitudinal CA anyway? In my case never. But IF I ever decide to upgrade it would be the Sony mk2, or even mk3 by that time
As a pretty happy Nikon shooter, still envy the options on Sony. Maybe if Canon starts allowing more 3rd party, Nikon will give Sigma/Tamron a wide lane to release whatever they want.
Wonder how smooth the zoom ring would be as using a focus motor from a gimbal. I know that the 24-70 GM II has the smooth switch and they work perfectly, but my 24-105 is very eavy for the motor and I wonder how would be the Sigma. Does anyone tried it?
Thank you for saying, “God bless” at the end. Those little things actually mean a lot. Thank you. Your reviews are also so helpful. Stepping into some photography from my video work. Your insights have been hugely helpful.
The only reason to get the native Sony lens is because they intentionally cut down the FPS. I've also heard another reviewer say that the AF hit rate for Eye AF isn't as good. But after seeing this I would have a hard time justifying paying nearly double the price just to have the Sony lens. Great review as always!
Hello Christofer I would like to have two additional tests in the future: Image quality for subjects in infinity setting. The CA tests should also show real life images. Not just the book. I think the quality at 24mm and at close range plus CA is not good for the price. And please MFT Body and lenses would be great.
Gheez I thought my Sony 24-105mm had poor minimum focus image quality. Overall seems like a much better lens than the 24-105mm though, if I had the option at the time I probably would have got this Sigma but it's too late.
In light of the lens's strengths and comparatively good value for money, I don't think people should worry about it all that much (although if it's a big deal for you personally then now you know about it :-)
It is only when focused real close. And for example the Canon's RF 70-200/2.8 behaves pretty much the same at 200mm f/2.8 at minimal focusing distance. So it is about the use case. If you plan to shoot majority of your pictures at 45mm wide opened at minimal focus distance, this lens is not for you. 60mm-ish macro lens would serve you better in such a case.
That horrible bowing distortion at 24mm also somewhat visible at 70mm, sorry but I dont like this lens I loved the 1.2 & 1.4 50mm sigma relased but this is not as good or recommended
@@Riskbreaker2009 You are making up a problem out of nothing. The 24mm distortion is pretty comparable with other like lenses. Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 is worse. Plus it is perfectly correctable in camera or in post process with zero IQ penalty, so not an issue by any meaning.
I wanted to email you but I saw you don't respond to random questions - which I totally understand if you receive a lot - and I want to see if I am lucky today :) So I am trying to find the best camera for shooting fashion and architecture. Which camera would you recommend? Until now I've been shooting in film and I am curious about the fujifilm
I actually bought this Sigma 24-70 DG DN II lens, and promptly returned it due to just being way too soft in the corners at the wide end (I shoot landscape mostly). I'll likely just get the Sony GM II version at some point (even though it's annoyingly expensive). The Sigma is more of a portrait lens, the Sony GM II is decently good at everything (at least from the reviews I've watched).
Its weird how your video's commentary on loca is the opposite of petapixel. Given how wild your loca is I would have assumed that there is something wrong with your copy of the lens.
Yes, but A6600 is APS-C and this is full frame, so you would use only the center portion of the lens glass, and get longer focal lengths and smaller aperture. Also it's heavy and big for A6600.
@@chukwuebukaokafor7264 sorry can't help you - I don't own or know that system :-[ also you didn't specify your use case/requirements. Google will help you.
I really have to wonder why, despite no less than 2 SLD and 8 (!) FLD pseudo-fluorite elements, this zoom still has such terrible longitudinal chromatic aberration. At least at 70mm at close range - that is.
Is this just normal performance for variable zoom lenses? For the price, I was kinda expecting better, but I'm starting to wonder if my opinion has been skewed by watching so many reviews of prime lenses recently.
@@richardgrant418 Yes but I think that says more about how obsurd Sony's prices are than it does about this lens. But I dont know anymore... I'm new to high end photography and still have trouble believing that a tube with glass in it is somehow actually worth more than my truck. Obviously this is all relative but there's a limit to how much I'll just take for granted.
@@noscopesallowed8128 no doubt Sony makes a much higher marginper lens. I would think Sigma lens has “only a “moderate“ margin. We’re not just paying for the materials, labour, tight quarters control - we are paying for the recouping the R&D Especially when new lenses come out every year or two, they’ve only got ? around two years of Sales to recoup that. As for what the R&D was, I have no idea.
Uncomparable lenses. The Tamron is one and a third stops slower. At f/2.8 the Sigma is clearly sharper across the frame and vignetts notably less. Even wide opened the SIgma is comparably sharp as the Tamron wide opened. The price to pay for these is limited focal range. And by no means this Tamron is a champion in LoCa... So different horses for different courses.
@@petrpohnan875 I was talking about Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2. How can it be one and a third stops slower? I own the Tamron, and from my own experience and Christopher's own reviews the Tamron is clearly the winner wide opened at the shortest focal length. But I agree they're different lens, though not far too different.
In this photographic context and with the presence of loca, it’s more achromatic, corrected for red and blue, apochromatic corrected for red, green and blue wavelengths.
@@russellbaston974 Since when do chromatic aberrations have all rainbow colours? They don't, but they are still chromatic, which is just colour, not the full spectrum of colour.
Peta Pixel didn't use their normal LOCA area for testing as they didn't shoot the lens at all on their test chart. Also perhaps the LOCA might be less apparent when zoomed out to 24mm as that 70mm macro shot was pretty bad compared to the 24mm one.
@@Rollergold4 Yeah their test image wasn't ideal, it was mostly flat.. Dustin Abbott's LoCa was a bit worse than Petapixel's, but a bit better than here.
I really enjoyed the Petapixel review! But their choice of subject for the LoCA test was not good IMHO. If you look closely at the drilled metallic holes at 07:39 in their video you can actually see a lot of colour fringing, and the rest is hidden by the smoother metal areas of the subject. My own setup is a serious stress test, though, admittedly, to look at the worst possible case scenario. In any case, LoCA isn't really that much of a major issue in normal photography, 95% of the time
I could tell from the first few sample photos that I’m not a fan of this lens. I think it has something to do with the bokeh. It just doesn’t speak to me.
I guess it must be called a 'chromatic' lens then - perhaps that's why the bokeh rendering is far better than most other new lenses, it has a vintage, one could even call it, artistic rendering. APO leases basically always have smooth but busy bokeh in complex scenes, I'd much prefer this, a razor sharp, but "vintage" rendering lens...
Weather dealing - does it stop air flow in / out? Let's face it if it let's damp air in and dust it's not that well sealed. To me kit wise damp air is 'weather'.
Whelp. I feel like this is a bit of an uncharacteristic bad show for Sigma. All they've really done is rehoused the old Sigma 24-70mm to put it (visually) in step with their newer lineup, namely, aperture ring. From what I can tell here is that there are there are no real improvements in the II version(the AF seems improved a touch) and no real reason to purchase the II over the original; In fact I'd say that the old one seems to perform better in places...
Sharpness is not the most important aspect of a quality image. Landscapes and product photography, maybe, but not when it comes to people, and the 24-70 is a people lens. Go with an OEM, not with a 3rd Party lens because the likes of NIkon, Sony and Canon optimise their image processing firmware to match the characteristics of their own lenses. They only give the generic data to 3rd parties. And many photographers in the fashion and portrait game are ditching their Sony kit. One said the images look like they are off a colour photocopier they are so sterile.
I think Samyang 24-70 ist the best option if you consider money and image quality. I had a 24-70GM II and I sold it. It is amazing lens that does not make sense for that price. This lens has bad contrast outside the middle. It is so weak in contrast that it is not a good lens for me. I will keep my Sony 20-70mm F4 G also not perfect like this lens, but at least wide
@@thechinesepotato6263 I did not. I did make the switch to the Sony 20-70 F4 G from the 24-70 GM II. Please make sure to read the entire comment before responding to avoid any embarrassment. However, I briefly borrowed a 24-70 Samyang from a friend, and it's fantastic. It's a bit heavy, but considering the price, it's truly impressive.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Comparison video with this lens's competitors coming VERY soon!
I’ll insist on the 12-24mm gm review
Will it be also compared to the Mark 1 version? (didn't watch this video yet)
Please compare with the tamron 28-75 2.8 ii, it is not an 24mm but is in the alternative side. Thank you!
Please compare with GM 1 version
Would really love to see how it compares with sigma own 28-70
Mr. Frost you are on point as usual, I'm not watching anyone's else's videos about this lense unless i watch yours first.
The focus pulling at wide angle not just has breathing, the barrel distortion also changes.
I noticed that too - which is strange, should be corrected by the camera right?
Love this guy for his honest reviews.. Definitely upgrading to this once available here !!
That rainbow color chromatic aberration though 😂
kinda like it, wouldn't want it
"That's a feature, not a bug" lens version
That kills a lens for me since it's the one thing you can't edit out in most situations
😅😅😅😅
At short distance only.
Honestly I don't mind the CA and it seems like when these things are not overcorrected lenses have much better rendition and I feel this sigma renders more beautifully than it's older sibling. Not to mentioned it is smaller. I love it
I completely agree - the rendering is so beautiful on this ii version, even beats my 20mm and 50mm 1.4 DG DN's it seems like...
Curious about comparison to the original Sigma Art lens. The mark 1 is one of the sharpest zooms I've ever used, but it's quite heavy. Saving 100 grams seems well worth the upgrade to me.
same here! plus Aperture ring, love this
you will pay +400usd for an aperture ring?
I moved in a different direction - from the original Sigma 24-70 f2.8 front-heavy 850 g down to Sony 20-70 f4 470 g. Can recommend - ultra sharp, no chromatic aberration, super sticky AF, better for hybrid work with video (20 mm, parfocal, focus breathing), a bit better macro capabilities (much better at 70 mm), better ergonomics (eg. custom buttons are much easier to feel and find, printed focal length values are more readable and so on). The one f-stop loss is not an issue - even f/2.8 doesn't really work in dimly lit interiors and during/after blue hour, so an f/1.4 prime will circumvent that. I miss some of the bokeh though.
Dam. I was super surprised to see a mk ii right after I bought my mk i used lol. But compared to your 4 year old video on the mk i, this mk ii doesn't look better in the corners technically? at least at 24mm where I feel like that matters more for the landscape shooters. Do you still have the mk i for comparison?
Actually, I heard that the optical structure of the mk ii is almost the same as mk i, so it’s no wonder why the IQ of these two generations look so similar
Yes really looking forward to the comparison video. These are all stellar lenses.
what about the dust resistance ????
At Sigma 24 70 no1 was very easy to dust dots to came inside the glass, like ridiculous easy. Like , one walk at the park was enough..
@christopherfrost thanks for the nice review Chris! I find it strange or even funny that no one talks and compares the original Sigma 24-70 to the new model II about the biggest flaw original had - the stepped aperture in video mode when filming in aperture priority mode. Can you please confirm, does the new Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN Art Mark II has, smooth or stepped aperture in aperture priority mode (when filming video)? Love from Finlandia 💜.
Thanh you for honest and straightforward review. After watching this, i am happy for keeping tamron 28-75 g2
Absolutely. And this new sigma is still 200gr heavier, so, yeah...
@@MariansPetrsyeah and 4mm less on the wide end…
Wowzers how much lens distortion would you like with your focus breathing?
Yes.
I surprised he didn’t call it out
6:30... SIGMA DIDN'T FIX THIS..
Just being curious, which f/1.8 zoom performs better in here?
@petrpohnan875 are there any f1.8 zooms?
@@ayekaye8055 Exactly :-) !
@@petrpohnan875 I'm just not sure what you're saying
@@ayekaye8055 I think maybe he mistook this video for the 28-45mm f1.8.
Outrageous value… sigma does it again.
I don’t feel the need to upgrade from the sigma 28-70mm, but this thing is clearly a beast.
No comparison against signa 24-70 2.8 art mk1?
I don't feel the need to upgrade from the old version but this new one is a pretty nice upgrade! How often will you notice that poor longitudinal CA anyway? In my case never. But IF I ever decide to upgrade it would be the Sony mk2, or even mk3 by that time
For RF-Mount…
Is what I want to hear in a future video of yours.😅
Does this lens fit on a crop apsc sony? How functional does it? I'm interesting about sony zv-e10. Thank you very much in advance. Keep up good work!
As a pretty happy Nikon shooter, still envy the options on Sony. Maybe if Canon starts allowing more 3rd party, Nikon will give Sigma/Tamron a wide lane to release whatever they want.
Just make the switch no future with Nikon. Come experience real autofocus.
Wonder how smooth the zoom ring would be as using a focus motor from a gimbal. I know that the 24-70 GM II has the smooth switch and they work perfectly, but my 24-105 is very eavy for the motor and I wonder how would be the Sigma. Does anyone tried it?
Thank you for saying, “God bless” at the end. Those little things actually mean a lot. Thank you. Your reviews are also so helpful. Stepping into some photography from my video work. Your insights have been hugely helpful.
The only reason to get the native Sony lens is because they intentionally cut down the FPS. I've also heard another reviewer say that the AF hit rate for Eye AF isn't as good. But after seeing this I would have a hard time justifying paying nearly double the price just to have the Sony lens. Great review as always!
Do I need to upgrade from my Original V1 24-70 2.8 though?
Only if u are not satisfied with the v1
Not sure why th 1st gen Sigma lens wasn't mentioned at all. That's what we're all actually here to find out. That's a massive oversight.
Hello Christofer I would like to have two additional tests in the future:
Image quality for subjects in infinity setting. The CA tests should also show real life images. Not just the book. I think the quality at 24mm and at close range plus CA is not good for the price.
And please MFT Body and lenses would be great.
Gheez I thought my Sony 24-105mm had poor minimum focus image quality. Overall seems like a much better lens than the 24-105mm though, if I had the option at the time I probably would have got this Sigma but it's too late.
I'm mostly happy about this release because I'm hoping that it will cause the first generation to hit the used market more often.
Could you also compare it to the version 1 of the lens please?
Highly recommended with this amount of LoCa? Or was that only really an issue when focusing closely?
LoCA is only a minor issue in most situations, even if it's bad
The sigma 14mm f1.4 also has this bowing focusing issue
Still prefer tamron 28-75 g2. Much cheaper and similar image quality. Also I have 24 prime starting form 28 to 75 offers better range I think.
No apsc test?
I haven’t switched to mirrorless and I was just looking around and it seems that sigma hasn’t brought over its 15-35/1.8 to a mirrorless mount. Why?
Christopher - with this catastrophic longitudinal CAs you should give a "Highly Recommend" on this lens.
In light of the lens's strengths and comparatively good value for money, I don't think people should worry about it all that much (although if it's a big deal for you personally then now you know about it :-)
It is only when focused real close. And for example the Canon's RF 70-200/2.8 behaves pretty much the same at 200mm f/2.8 at minimal focusing distance.
So it is about the use case. If you plan to shoot majority of your pictures at 45mm wide opened at minimal focus distance, this lens is not for you. 60mm-ish macro lens would serve you better in such a case.
That horrible bowing distortion at 24mm also somewhat visible at 70mm, sorry but I dont like this lens I loved the 1.2 & 1.4 50mm sigma relased but this is not as good or recommended
@@Riskbreaker2009 You are making up a problem out of nothing. The 24mm distortion is pretty comparable with other like lenses. Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 is worse.
Plus it is perfectly correctable in camera or in post process with zero IQ penalty, so not an issue by any meaning.
I wanted to email you but I saw you don't respond to random questions - which I totally understand if you receive a lot - and I want to see if I am lucky today :)
So I am trying to find the best camera for shooting fashion and architecture. Which camera would you recommend? Until now I've been shooting in film and I am curious about the fujifilm
I actually bought this Sigma 24-70 DG DN II lens, and promptly returned it due to just being way too soft in the corners at the wide end (I shoot landscape mostly). I'll likely just get the Sony GM II version at some point (even though it's annoyingly expensive). The Sigma is more of a portrait lens, the Sony GM II is decently good at everything (at least from the reviews I've watched).
im just waiting until we get sigma for full frame rf mount
Hi Chris, many thanks for reviewing this indeed great lens! It's a pity they don't offer it with Nikon Z or Canon RF mount! Best wishes, Ralf
great review, thank you!
but tamron 28-75 g2 still better (and cheaper)
if you don't really want to go for 24mm, choose tamron
Will this lens be available on nikon z?
Its weird how your video's commentary on loca is the opposite of petapixel. Given how wild your loca is I would have assumed that there is something wrong with your copy of the lens.
How is the stabilization
Question for videographers, which one would you choose, Sony 24-105 f4 OSS vs new sigma 24-70 mark 2 f2.8? btw I’m using a Sony zv-e1, thanks!! 🙌
24-105 is beast for video, especially if you have a7iv 🙂
Can this lens fit into the mount of a Sony A6600?
Yes, but A6600 is APS-C and this is full frame, so you would use only the center portion of the lens glass, and get longer focal lengths and smaller aperture. Also it's heavy and big for A6600.
@@megamastah what lens would you suggest for the A6600?
@@chukwuebukaokafor7264 sorry can't help you - I don't own or know that system :-[ also you didn't specify your use case/requirements. Google will help you.
Came here hoping that this was coming to the RF mount
For the RF we already have the stellar 28-70/2. Sure, it is much more expensive but for the money you get much longer reach and the native mount.
I really have to wonder why, despite no less than 2 SLD and 8 (!) FLD pseudo-fluorite elements, this zoom still has such terrible longitudinal chromatic aberration. At least at 70mm at close range - that is.
Wow, plenty of not too pleasant surprises
Is it better than my canon rf28-70mm f2?
Does it still have dust issue like mark 1?
newer versions - no
@@krtkarkrtkar394 it is hard to know whatever the stock we got is older or newer version of mark 1. many store i asked didnt know about it
Christopher,
BEAUTIFUL church - where is it, what is it?
Cheers
Llandaff Cathedral, Cardiff
GM II is still worth the extra money. It's lighter, better quality, and you'll get the maximum fps.
Not to mention tons of extra contrast at wide and medium focal lengths
Is this just normal performance for variable zoom lenses? For the price, I was kinda expecting better, but I'm starting to wonder if my opinion has been skewed by watching so many reviews of prime lenses recently.
“For the Price“ ? it’s about half the price of the equivalent Sony
@@richardgrant418 Yes but I think that says more about how obsurd Sony's prices are than it does about this lens.
But I dont know anymore... I'm new to high end photography and still have trouble believing that a tube with glass in it is somehow actually worth more than my truck. Obviously this is all relative but there's a limit to how much I'll just take for granted.
@@noscopesallowed8128 no doubt Sony makes a much higher marginper lens. I would think Sigma lens has “only a “moderate“ margin.
We’re not just paying for the materials, labour, tight quarters control - we are paying for the recouping the R&D
Especially when new lenses come out every year or two, they’ve only got ? around two years of Sales to recoup that. As for what the R&D was, I have no idea.
Looks like that the G2 is my way to roll...
Crazy CA, closeup softness and fringing, keeping my tamron 28-75mm, and saving money for sony 24-70 2.8 gm II
wow, a good lense😍😍👏👏
Have to stop down to f11 to get rid of CA? No, thanks. I'd buy Tamron 28-75mm instead.
Have you used either for video? Thanks!
Uncomparable lenses. The Tamron is one and a third stops slower. At f/2.8 the Sigma is clearly sharper across the frame and vignetts notably less. Even wide opened the SIgma is comparably sharp as the Tamron wide opened. The price to pay for these is limited focal range. And by no means this Tamron is a champion in LoCa...
So different horses for different courses.
@@petrpohnan875 I was talking about Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2. How can it be one and a third stops slower? I own the Tamron, and from my own experience and Christopher's own reviews the Tamron is clearly the winner wide opened at the shortest focal length. But I agree they're different lens, though not far too different.
Go with a 24mm. 28 is not quite wide enough to be really useful, and the 24mm zooms are usually better quality.
CA is delt with by software anyway.
The opposite of 'apochromatic' is just 'chromatic', or to make it sound better, 'colourful'.
In this photographic context and with the presence of loca, it’s more achromatic, corrected for red and blue, apochromatic corrected for red, green and blue wavelengths.
@@russellbaston974 But the point was that it wasn't well corrected at all. The opposite of something is not just a lower grade of it.
@@Bayonet1809 But it isn’t ( real world!) completely un corrected if it was truly ‘chromatic’ it would display a rainbow on everything.
@@russellbaston974 Since when do chromatic aberrations have all rainbow colours? They don't, but they are still chromatic, which is just colour, not the full spectrum of colour.
So Leica will be bringing out their Mark 2 24-70mm L-mount SL3 soon, then.
You should start reviewing L Mount Lenses too some are better than sigmas top best lenses
Considering that fast standard zooms are difficult to construct, it's actually quite good for the price. But I'm still sticking with my GMII 😅
First. Hi from Trinidad and Tobago 🇹🇹 Chris
Hi!
It's a bit underwhelming. I was expecting better results. The test isn't even on a 61MP sensor.
Hi Chris, why dont you do reviews on lumix lenses
He don't shoot L Mount cameras - though he did just review a Leica SL3, so perhaps there's hope for us :)
Now Canon just needs to open up for third parti lenses like this one. 🙂
Except, that's exactly why Canon doesn't want other manufacturers to make lenses for RF.
Decent price but weird that Sigma didn’t make it that much better than the version 1
6:25 This lens is crap. There is no reason to use with that quality of close up image.
When will come the review of the Canon RF 24-105 f/2.8 L?
Strange you found that much LOCA Chris. Other reviewers found minimal. I’m sticking with my version 1 of this lens.
For those of us new to the game … not up on all the acronyms
LOCA?
@@richardgrant418 longitudinal chromatic abberation, Chris always looks at that towards the end of the video.
look forward to see review of the new fuji kit 1650wr lens🎉🎉
Looks like a phenomenal lens, I'd imagine this will go down very well with the video makers.
Horrendous LOCA for this Chris vs. virtually no LOCA for PetaPixel Chris. Maddening!
Would it be quality control issues?
Peta Pixel didn't use their normal LOCA area for testing as they didn't shoot the lens at all on their test chart. Also perhaps the LOCA might be less apparent when zoomed out to 24mm as that 70mm macro shot was pretty bad compared to the 24mm one.
@@Rollergold4 Yeah their test image wasn't ideal, it was mostly flat.. Dustin Abbott's LoCa was a bit worse than Petapixel's, but a bit better than here.
I really enjoyed the Petapixel review! But their choice of subject for the LoCA test was not good IMHO. If you look closely at the drilled metallic holes at 07:39 in their video you can actually see a lot of colour fringing, and the rest is hidden by the smoother metal areas of the subject. My own setup is a serious stress test, though, admittedly, to look at the worst possible case scenario. In any case, LoCA isn't really that much of a major issue in normal photography, 95% of the time
@@christopherfrost Your reviews are the gold standard, Christopher.
I’m genuinely shocked by the image sharpness!
I could tell from the first few sample photos that I’m not a fan of this lens. I think it has something to do with the bokeh. It just doesn’t speak to me.
I guess it must be called a 'chromatic' lens then - perhaps that's why the bokeh rendering is far better than most other new lenses, it has a vintage, one could even call it, artistic rendering. APO leases basically always have smooth but busy bokeh in complex scenes, I'd much prefer this, a razor sharp, but "vintage" rendering lens...
Weather dealing - does it stop air flow in / out?
Let's face it if it let's damp air in and dust it's not that well sealed. To me kit wise damp air is 'weather'.
Whelp.
I feel like this is a bit of an uncharacteristic bad show for Sigma.
All they've really done is rehoused the old Sigma 24-70mm to put it (visually) in step with their newer lineup, namely, aperture ring.
From what I can tell here is that there are there are no real improvements in the II version(the AF seems improved a touch) and no real reason to purchase the II over the original; In fact I'd say that the old one seems to perform better in places...
The distortion is not that bad... still cellphones are worse😅😅. Definitely going to order it better than the 28-75mm
I see no reason why one would go with this lens over the 200gr lighter tamron 28-75 g2.
4mm more at the wide end would be a pretty good one imho.
Was going so well until that LOCA :)
Wow that LoCA is bad
Now you've made me regret buying the Tamron 28-75mm G2...
Damn that rendering is flat
The rainbow lens ever😅
Sharpness is not the most important aspect of a quality image. Landscapes and product photography, maybe, but not when it comes to people, and the 24-70 is a people lens. Go with an OEM, not with a 3rd Party lens because the likes of NIkon, Sony and Canon optimise their image processing firmware to match the characteristics of their own lenses. They only give the generic data to 3rd parties. And many photographers in the fashion and portrait game are ditching their Sony kit. One said the images look like they are off a colour photocopier they are so sterile.
0:16 there is dirt on the rear glass - i'm flabbergasted
No, that's a black spot on the table that you're seeing focused through the lens.
I thought exactly the same... then i realize there are black lines on the table
People need to relax, it's a great lens for the price.
I own the mark 1 and I can say it is simply not a sony G-master lens. Quality is much lower.
Hey look guys it's a 24-70 f2.8, bet you've never seen one of those before.
Ever see a 24mm F1.2? Checkmate
@@hikertrashfilmswhat are you going on about?
@@BurneraccountXD69you cant afford it so now ur mad lmao
@@gettriggered8404 no I can afford it, I'm just gonna spend my money on the 28-45mm f1.8 instead.
Sigma lens design = ugly as always
Corners wide open are not great.
Not recommended
I think Samyang 24-70 ist the best option if you consider money and image quality. I had a 24-70GM II and I sold it. It is amazing lens that does not make sense for that price. This lens has bad contrast outside the middle. It is so weak in contrast that it is not a good lens for me. I will keep my Sony 20-70mm F4 G also not perfect like this lens, but at least wide
this is some top waffling lol, how do you sell a 24-70mm GM II for a Samyang 24-70 lmfao
@@thechinesepotato6263 I did not. I did make the switch to the Sony 20-70 F4 G from the 24-70 GM II. Please make sure to read the entire comment before responding to avoid any embarrassment. However, I briefly borrowed a 24-70 Samyang from a friend, and it's fantastic. It's a bit heavy, but considering the price, it's truly impressive.
Does it fit in the sony A6400?
Yes, the E Mount version does, but it's then a 36-105mm full frame equivalent focal length, with a bokeh like a f/4.2.
You should start reviewing L Mount Lenses too some are better than sigmas top best lenses