Tamron Sp 1530mm F28 Di Vc Usd G2 Vs Sigma 1424 Art Nikon

In the 12 months Sigma has released two ART series lenses with very like focal lengths but different purposes. Last year Sigma released the 12-24mm f/4 Art lens, which I reviewed here. This yr Sigma followed up with the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM Art lens. Casual observers might wonder at the need of both these lenses, but part of what I'll encompass in this review is why these lenses are really for 2 unlike kinds of photographers. Nikon has dominated this focal length for years with what has been the gold standard for wide angle zooms – the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 1000 lens. If at that place was any Nikon lens that gave Canon shooters envy, it was this one. Green-eyed no more, Canon shooters, every bit the new Sigma fourteen-24 ART manages to deliver better optical performance at a much cheaper toll…and comes with a very unique trick upwards its sleeve. Read on to find out what it is.

Prefer to watch your reviews? Check out my thorough, existent earth video review of the fourteen-24 ART here:

Cheque me out on:  Google+: | Facebook: | Twitter: | Flickr: | 500px: | Sign Up for My Newsletter :

I'm accustomed to getting press releases on new Sigma products well in advance of the public (which e'er makes it interesting to run across people speculate and draw wrong conclusions while y'all bite your tongue!). Every bit I perused the printing release on the Sigma xiv-24 ART, nevertheless, something jumped out at me. It was this, "The Nikon mount features brand new electromagnetic diaphragm, whereas the Canon mount is compatible with the Catechism Lens Aberration Correction function." I was immediately intrigued, equally Canon has been notorious for favoring their own lenses by not assuasive in camera corrections for whatsoever third-party lenses. Did Sigma scissure the code, or did they enter an agreement with Catechism? I still oasis't gotten an respond to that, but I can tell you beginning hand that the Sigma xiv-24 Art is in fact compatible with everything in the Lens Aberration tab save "Digital Lens Optimizer".

And it definitely makes a huge difference in your JPEG files. JPEGs are beautifully corrected for distortion, vignette, and CA (not that I saw any that needed correction) and evangelize a beautifully fifty-fifty illumination across the frame.  Here'due south a await at a test shot without the correction and then with the correction enabled.

They look great, and I was reminded of how much Canon has done to tilt the playing field in favor of Catechism lenses in the past. Withal Sigma has managed to level that playing field, I'g delighted by it. In the past I've frequently had to disable all of the Digital Lens Optimizer settings when using 3rd party lenses considering information technology actually would crusade weird problems with the images. That meant that sometimes Lens Optimizations would be inadvertently disabled when I was using Canon lenses. The fact that the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.viii ART is fully supported by this applied science is a huge nugget for this lens. The rumor on the street is that future firmware updates for other ART lenses will enable support for them likewise…which would be fantastic!

If y'all are a JPEG shooter (in particular), this is a huge bonus for you lot. RAW shooters are less impacted, equally lens correction for RAW files is done through import profiles in postal service rather than in-camera. Though I'g a RAW shooter, I practice tape in dual format (ane to the SD slot, the other the CF slot in my 5D Marking 4), so I would prefer my JPEG files to look every bit skillful as possible if I'g delivering them direct to clients. I'm delighted nigh this development for a number of reasons, not the to the lowest degree of which is that I retrieve Canon relaxing its stance on this issue could increment its competitiveness with Sony, which tends to be much more than "open-source" with tertiary-political party lenses.

Sigma fourteen-24 Fine art Build Quality

The 14-24mm ART is another beautifully built albeit very large lens from Sigma. Sigma seems to take decided that compact and lite aren't a priority for shooters (though I do beg to differ on that point). In this example, however, I doubt that information technology would have been possible to develop this lens (with this kind of performance) any other fashion. The master competitors are the Tamron fifteen-30mm f/ii.8 VC, which is physically a scrap larger and only slightly lighter (50g), while the Nikkor fourteen-24mm f/2.8G lens only minutely smaller and lighter (150g). The fourteen-24 Fine art is 3.8" (96.4mm) in diameter and v.32" (135.1mm) in length. As noted, that'southward really a half inch shorter than the Tamron 15-xxx (which I've owned for several years), but Sigma managed to once once again produce the heaviest lens in the grade at 40.57 oz (1150g). It's a hefty thing, to be certain.

This particular zoom range is not especially great (less than 2x), but it covers a essentially all the central focal lengths for mural work, and is a overnice compliment to a 24-70mm lens.  Here's a look at the wide end of the focal range compared to the "telephoto" cease:

Watch this video to go a close, hand'southward on look at the build and blueprint of the 14-24 ART.

When you lot accept it out of its square padded instance (thank you for that, Sigma!!), the "look" of the lens is instantly familiar to someone like myself who has reviewed a number of Sigma Fine art broad angle lenses in the last couple of years. Substantially all of the recent Sigma ART lenses with fixed lens hoods (12-24mm, 14mm f/1.8, etc…) accept employed the wide flare at the forepart of the lens with the focus ring on what looks to be the lens hood (it's non, actually). you will chop-chop note that the lens is then wide (particularly towards the front) equally to seem almost square. The plus in this application is that you should never grab the wrong ring inadvertently, as they are in very different locations. The zoom band is a bit narrower and occupies the "normal" spot on the lens barrel.

The focus ring feels about like you lot'd expect, with decent only non exceptional feel (the difficult stops at minimum and infinity have that slightly disconnected feel typical of many autofocus lenses). There is near 150 degrees of focus travel. The zoom ring moves smoothly with a weight just slightly on the firmer side. The forepart element does move forward as the lens is focused towards the wide end of the focal range, but e'er with the confines of the lens butt (the lens never changes length during focus or zooming).

At that place are those of you who might be interested in using a lens similar this in an underwater housing or in a virtual reality configuration and are concerned about the integrated front hood. Sigma volition exist offering a Front Conversion Service for the lens that reconfigures the front housing and eliminates that stock-still hood. You also get a new, custom front cap as a part of that service. You can read more here:

I'm presuming that this lens (similar almost all recent Sigma lenses) is as well eligible for Sigma'southward mountain conversion service if you alter camera systems. It is compatible with the Sigma USB dock for updating firmware and programming focus tweaks at different focal lengths and focus distances. It is besides compatible with Sigma'due south MC-xi mount converter to apply on Sony mirrorless cameras.

On that note, I had a brief window in which to compare the lens with some Sony mountain lenses that I only had on mitt for 1 more than day after the Sigma arrived. While shooting some comparisons, I noted that I get inconsistent metering results with the MC-eleven, which I knew what not at all typical for Sigma lenses and the MC-11. I immediately wondered if either the lens or the MC-eleven needed a firmware update. While there was no firmware update for the lens at the time of this review, there was a firmware update for the MC-11 that was specifically targeted at eliminating this issue.

It worked, and the operation of the 14-24 ART on my Sony a7R3 is much improved. There volition be an FE mount version of this lens bachelor in the hereafter, only for those of us who shoot ii systems that MC-11 option and Catechism EF mount lenses is a nice combination. I did notice 1 lingering quirk: the discontinuity would sometimes reset when the camera was powered down to f/8. I would often take to gear up my desired aperture every fourth dimension, fifty-fifty if was the same aperture that I had previously been shooting with. I also got an occasional blackout in the viewfinder for a split second that seemed to be related to the aperture closing and opening. Sigma may demand a secondary firmware update on either the MC-11 or the lens itself to stop the job. There was nothing that was a "deal breaker" here, though; more of a mild badgerer.

The lens feels very well made with the typical Sigma alloy of a lightweight and durable thermally-stable composite (engineered plastic) over a metal frame. The lens mount is fabricated from contumely. The lens feels just equally skilful (if non improve) than premium Canon and Nikon lenses, and I prefer the build and blueprint to the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.viii VC that I've used for the past three years.

Sigma seems to exist figuring out how to exercise conditions sealing amend, and both the sealing and Sigma'south confidence in that sealing as shown by the linguistic communication they use to describe information technology seems much improved. On the 12-24mm f/4 Art, they spoke only about the mount having dust and splash-proof construction. On the 14-24 Fine art they say, "Dust and splash-proof construction with weather sealing". No mention of just the mount; now the weather sealing encompasses the lens itself. In fact, the overview on Sigma's website says this, "Outdoor shooters will appreciate the grit- and splash-proof construction with special sealing at the mount connection, manual focus band, zoom ring, and cover connection." In that location are three more than sealing points specifically mentioned. While I'm only evaluating the exterior of the lens, I can attest that fifty-fifty the gasket at the lens mount felt more substantial than previous Sigma lenses, and I could tell that the weather condition sealing was more complete on the fourteen-24 ART.

There is only one switch on the lens butt, and that is a simple on/off switch for the AF (though total time manual override is available with Sigma's HSM focus motor). There is also a distance window to help with manual or prefocus.

The lens feels heavy, substantial, and well made – definitely professional grade. It is a slight bit front end heavy on my Canon 5D Mark Iv that I used as the primary examination body, but nifty.  The balance is obviously a little poorer if you move over a Sony trunk and the MC-11 (and this will be true of the FE version of the lens when it arrives, too).

Sigma 14-24 Art Focus Observations

In times past autofocus has been a sore indicate for me with Sigma lenses. While I've rarely had issues with focus speed from their HSM (Hypersonic Motor) motors, I have had issues with focus accurateness and consistency. Fortunately things have improved on that forepart with recent lenses, and my focus accurateness has been improving. A lens similar this one (very broad focal range and only moderately big maximum aperture) puts a lot less stress on a focus organization, every bit depth of field for virtually shots will be pretty large. At 24mm, f/two.viii, and a distance of simply half-dozen anxiety from camera to subject field, depth of field is already iii ½ feet (effectually a meter). If you are using the 14mm finish of the focal range in that aforementioned scenario, depth of field jumps to over 24 feet! My betoken is that nailing focus isn't particularly difficult for a lens similar this, and, accordingly, I really didn't take any issues with focus on the 14-24 Fine art.

As mentioned, the lens is compatible with the Sigma USB dock, and, if I were to purchase this lens, I would certainly calibrate the focus farther, simply for the nature of my review flow I felt no need. I was happy with the focus accuracy of my test shots right out of the box.

When using the MC-11 adapter, focus accuracy is fifty-fifty better on Sony bodies. Proprietary technologies like Centre AF and DMF work fine, though, dissimilar the Metabones Fifth Generation adapter that I reviewed here, the MC-11 doesn't seem to enable automatic zooming of the image when using DMF, though if I turn the switch on the lens barrel to MF, it volition automatically zoom when I starting time turning the focus ring.

While focus accuracy was splendid, focus speed and "confidence" wasn't perfect. The lens was much more prone to pulsing via the adapter, and thus it would take longer to settle on a focus area. I plant this was improved past selecting a "FlexiPoint" (smaller focus area) then that the focus system had fewer options to cull from. I noted just a little more focus noise that many native lenses (a small audio of elements shuffling), which is no doubt due the fact that the HSM focus motor wasn't really designed for mirrorless. Native mirrorless lenses typically utilize some kind of stepping motor instead.

Dorsum on Catechism EF, I did test focusing with outer points (peculiarly because Bryan Carnathan had reported some focus problems with the lens), but I didn't see anything that concerned me. I seemed to get reliable focus results, and when going through my catalog of real globe photos, I didn't come across any focus mishaps.  Just Bryan is a cracking reviewer, so know that the take a chance is there fifty-fifty if I didn't personally experience it.  I tin can merely report on what I saw, even so, and so it's a positive picture show in my heed on the autofocus front. I have nothing negative to report hither.

Sigma 14-24mm Fine art Prototype Quality

I had an opportunity to practise some comparisons of the xiv-24 ART with iii other lenses – the Tamron 15-30mm f/two.8 VC on Canon EF (perhaps the most natural competition there), and then with the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/two.8 and Laowa 15mm f/ii Zero D lens on Sony (I as well through the Tamron into the mix there). I also used the lens extensively while researching and shooting for an article on the amazing Fairmont Chateau Laurier in Ottawa (Ottawa's Castle), which I detailed in this commodity hither:  That gave me a great opportunity to evaluate the lens for both architectural and interior work along with mural shooting.

I got a lot of amazing pictures equally a part of this review cycle. You tin get a thorough breakup of the prototype quality operation in this video:

Resolution Tests

I tested the resolution of the fourteen-24 Art at two different focus distances. I did the brick wall examination at close focus distances, and then more than of a landscape test at infinity. The quondam examination gives me an opportunity to evaluate things similar distortion, contrast, chromatic aberration, and resolution in a controlled style. The latter allowed me to evaluate how the lens resolves at infinity and how information technology handles the higher dynamic range of the lighting in existent globe scenarios.

I will annotation here that what I covered in reference to the in-camera lens corrections on Canon made a huge difference in the brick wall exam. I looked at the JPEGs (corrected) equally compared to the uncorrected RAW files, and was pretty surprised by just how well corrected and optimized the images were. The lens exhibits very low levels of chromatic abnormality anyhow, and thus contrast is already exceptional, but what really stood out to me was how uniformly illuminated the whole frame was. Vignette was, to my eye, perfectly corrected.

I'll circle dorsum to distortion a flake more in a moment, just I did want to note that sometimes I test wide bending lenses that exhibit enough field curvature that at close focus I tin't really get the edges and center of the image circumvolve in focus at the aforementioned time. Prototype quality on the edges takes a hit not because the lenses isn't abrupt there, just rather because the edges aren't actually perfectly in focus. In that location is no such upshot hither. Baloney is well plenty controlled that the focal plane is nice and apartment, with even sharpness beyond the frame.  I took this shot through a window, for example, and so shot at f/ii.8 to brand sure that nothing on the window (specks or dirt) showed on the prototype.  Look at the crop of the item from the lower left corner.

And that is really what stood out to me. At all tested focal lengths (14mm, 18mm, 20mm, 24mm), sharpness and contrast across the frame was really exceptional. I made a comment in the video review that it about felt like this lens was engineered for a big image circle than the 35mm total frame image circumvolve. It was like testing a full frame lens on APS-C, in that in that location was then little image degradation at the extreme edges of the frame. That may be a slight exaggeration, only I'm definitely accustomed to seeing weaker corner functioning than what I saw on the 14-24 ART, and real world images are beautifully detailed.

Here's a look at each of these focal lengths, wide open up, with the center and edge functioning compared at shut focus distances (an area that can be tough on wide angle lenses). All tests are done on a Catechism 5D Mark IV mounted on a tripod, mirror lockup, with a 2 second delay.

At 14mm:

The 14mm center of the frame is excellent, with depression levels of CA enabling excellent contrast, and high resolution meaning that fine details are crisply rendered. There is some marked barrel distortion at shut focus distances (more on this in a moment), so in that location is some field curvature to fence with at this shut focus altitude, and in that location is likewise some obvious vignette wide open up. Despite this the absolute corners notwithstanding look quite practiced, though perhaps not as good every bit they await at infinity.

At 18mm:

The 18mm center operation is flawless. Well-baked, detailed, and not marred by whatsoever defect that I can see. Vignette is milder than 14mm, which keeps textures in the corners from getting muddied. You can tell that in the extreme corners resolution isn't quite as high equally the perfect center, simply it is at a very high level.

At 20mm:

The 20mm eye performance is once once again substantially flawless. Excellent levels of dissimilarity, very crisp resolution, and no detectable levels of CA. Vignette is probably the mildest hither of whatsoever focal length, with the corners non much more a stop darker wide open. While resolution isn't quite at the exceptional level of the center, it is at a very, very adept level, and consistently so all effectually the epitome frame.

At 24mm:

The eye continues to be remarkably crisp, with excellent contrast and no detectable levels of CA. The corners are held dorsum somewhat by vignette, though information technology's more than balmy than at wider focal lengths. Resolution isn't as stiff at the edge, but information technology is even so very good. There is no moment near the edge where resolution suddenly fails, bur rather a very slight softening.

Stopping the lens down has little effect in the eye of the frame, as there aren't actually whatever epitome quality gains to be reached. You would be hard pressed to detect any improvement in this f/2.8 vs f/v.6 example at 14mm:

An advantage tin can come across on the edges, yet, where both the elevator of vignette along with a minor uptick on resolution can be seen, leaving the edges now in the excellent level.

Infinity Tests

The 14-24 ART is a bit interesting in that Sigma claims a near naught caste of distortion…at infinity. At shut distances (and 14mm), the barrel distortion is actually very pronounced. You lot tin see here both the uncorrected RAW file and too the JPEG that has received in camera corrections.

The latter is ameliorate only still not perfect. Distortion levels at other focal lengths are much more than moderate, just at close to medium focus distances the 14-24 ART lags behind the 12-24mm f/iv ART, which may exist the preferred lens for those that shoot architecture and/or interiors for that reason (see more than in the section below).

Having depression baloney levels at close focus distances is definitely more important to my mind than at infinity, so while the 14-24 ART is far from the worst offender I've seen in terms of distortion, I also view the "zero distortion at infinity" claim to be more than marketing hyperbole than annihilation.

I bring this up at this juncture to signal out that my infinity results look even stronger due to the fact that distortion (and thus field curvature) doesn't take a negative impact on image quality on the edges anymore, and thus edge functioning is actually very, very strong.  I've chosen to view corrected images for this segment, every bit whether you lot shoot JPEGs or run the RAW files through your editing software of choice, this is almost certainly the outcome that you are going to see.

If you look at the wide open up example here, you will find that sharpness is nearly perfect across the frame. Border performance is excellent at infinity; equally practiced as what I've always seen.

In fact, when I compared the stopped down functioning at f/five.half-dozen, I saw only the slightest comeback on the edges as they were already first-class.

If anything, performance at 18mm is even stronger, with near perfect levels of sharpness beyond the frame:

When stopping downward to f/5.6 the improvement even on the edges is very, very mild. Things were already near perfect.

20mm is a footling harder to written report on. Resolution levels across the frame are still excellent, only they are ever-so-slightly inferior to 18mm. It seems petty to say anything negative, as they are infrequent, but I did find a little less wide-open contrast and resolution:

Equally a byproduct, I did see a little more than improvement than has been typical when stopping down to f/5.six. The contrast, in particular, stands out a piffling chip more.

At 24mm the aforementioned truth remains, though to a slightly lesser caste. I call up the overall IQ is stronger than 20mm, merely non quite at the levels of the 18mm focal length.

Stopping down makes but a very balmy improvement, which tells me that the lens may not exist capable of reaching the stratospheric levels it reached at 18mm even when stopped down.

At the same, however, this is one of the strongest performances I've ever seen across the focal range of a zoom lens. It truly is first-class at any focal length and any aperture value. Very, very impressive.

Compared to the Tamron 15-30mm f/ii.viii VC

I would recommend that you lookout the epitome quality video for a more thorough examination, every bit time does not permit me to fully explore those results here.

Essentially you could sum up my findings by saying that the Tamron is roughly as good as the Sigma in the middle of the frame, just the Sigma easily leaves the Tamron behind along the edges. This was true at all tested focal lengths to varying degrees. The Tamron has excellent centre sharpness and contrast, but the border functioning looks fairly soft by comparison, equally seen in this 18mm comparison:

A few other observations were that the Tamron rendered a trivial cooler than the Sigma. The Tamron also showed more lateral chromatic aberrations than the Sigma. The Tamron does have the reward of having VC (Paradigm Stabilization), just I recall if I were choosing between the two correct now, I would probably choose the Sigma. It is delivering really excellent results.

Compared to the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/two.8 and Laowa 15mm f/2 Cipher D (on Sony Iron)

I would recommend that you watch this follow-up video where I highlight the functioning of all these lenses (and the Tamron) on Sony Iron. I used the Sigma MC-xi for both the Sigma and Tamron. Some have asserted that using adapters erodes edge performance, merely if that is the case, y'all won't know it from these comparisons!

First up is the Laowa 15mm f/2 Zero D lens, which isn't quite as wide but has a wider maximum discontinuity. Information technology's claim to "cipher distortion" bears out at closer focus distances, where it definitely has notable advantage barrel distortion. It besides has much higher vignette, however, and has a little more than lateral chromatic aberration.

In the eye of the frame at that place is little to distinguish the lenses save color, of which the Laowa is considerably warmer.

At the edge of the frame the Sigma has a definite advantage at the f/two.eight comparison, which belies the conventional wisdom that adapters erode edge performance, as this is a very wide lens. I also noted that the 14mm Sigma focal length is definitely a expert bit wider on both sides of the frame than the 15mm prime lens, which speaks to the Sigma being shut to a true 14mm.

With both lenses stopped downwardly to f/5.half dozen at that place is petty difference to exist seen at either eye or on the edge other than a slight reward in dissimilarity to the Sigma due to non having the lateral CA event.

The xiv-24 ART has taken on its first challenger and came out looking pretty good!

Adjacent, I compared the 14-24 Fine art to the outstanding Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.eight. I constitute that information technology delivered the sharpest center of the frame performance I've seen in a recent review, only I also plant that the Sigma is strongest at 18mm. Ane area Sigma cannot compete (few can) with Zeiss is in color rendition, which was but that extra bit of special in these comparisons.

In that location was little departure between the two lenses in the center of the frame, merely once again the Sigma had a definite edge at the extreme edges of the frame (despite the adapter "disadvantage").

Stopping down the lens delivers a fairly similar issue, with the Sigma giving a slightly better border performance but with really higher levels of microcontrast.

All in all, this is a pretty impressive functioning, equally the Zeiss is an fantabulous lens, and the Sigma is being used on a not-native organization. I don't know that I've seen a stronger functioning from any wide angle lens.

I did annotation that the combination in general shooting delivered excellent, crisp results. I noted that the autofocus would pulse a little fleck, merely focus accurateness was excellent and the image themselves await fantastic. This is a definitely a cracking combination optically.

Blackout, Flare Resistance, Vignette, and Bokeh

I've rarely walked away from a Sigma review where I felt overly impressed with the coma performance, and while I'm not almost to say that this is the best lens for astrophotography I've e'er seen, the moving picture is amend than typical. The best lens that I've used for astrophotography (dark sky) is the Samyang/Rokinon XP 14mm f/2.4 lens due to the excellent comatic aberration command. While the Sigma isn't as good at that lens, the corporeality of comatic distortion is fairly low. There's a bit of a bulge in star points on the edge of the frame, but they don't get-go to "grow wings", and I felt the look was fairly non-offensive.

Most of all I felt that there was a definite improvement over previous Sigma options. I wouldn't hesitate to use this lens for astro work, as the high resolution of the lens makes for impressively crisp results like this:

The lens also earns excellent marks for its amount of flare resistance. I found minimal ghosting and veiling at both ends of the focal range. Here's a look at 14mm and 24mm wide open up:

When stopping the lens down to f/11, the flare resistance continued to concord up nicely. No nasty ghosting artifacts appeared. Note the nice-looking sunburst issue with the lens stopped downwardly.

This is another area where it trumps the performance of the Tamron 15-thirty VC, as this is a bit of a sore spot with it (particularly with side lighting).

I've dealt with vignette somewhat in the resolution section, merely it certainly does exist, particularly at 14mm.  Fortunately the profile corrections hateful that JPEGs (on Canon cameras) volition automatically correct for this on JPEGs, and it is an easy fix in post for RAW files.  Here's a await at uncorrected/corrected RAW results:

Bokeh quality on wide angle lens is non almost as important every bit on telephoto lenses, only the 14-24 Art does have a useful magnification figure of 0.19x, which means that you can focus down quite closely and throw a background reasonably out of focus. Bokeh quality isn't bad in a number of situations, though neither does it stand out as infrequent:

What is excellent, notwithstanding, is that resolution and contrast remains splendid even at shut focus distances:

I was pleased with the prototype quality out of the fourteen-24 Art. It's an amazingly sharp lens, and a very versatile wide option for a wide multifariousness of subjects.

You can see many more than photos in the image gallery here, and can also read my article near covering the astonishing Fairmont Chateau Laurier in Ottawa, Canada using this lens here.

What Most the 12-24mm f/4 ART?

Some may question Sigma releasing two lenses with such a serious focal length overlap, although it isn't unusual for start political party lens makes to accept both f/two.8 and f/iv variants of their major zoom lenses. I see these two lenses as having two dissimilar audiences, however. The 12-24 Fine art (which I reviewed hither) has two primary selling points compared to the fourteen-24 ART. The first is lower distortion where it matters (at close to medium focus distances). I was very surprised when I reviewed that lens and compared it to the Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero D (distortion) lens, which does have next to no butt distortion, and discovered that the Sigma was very close to matching the operation of the Laowa.

The second advantage is a significantly wider focal length. The 2mm betwixt 12mm and 14mm may not seem significant, but in practice information technology is a big departure. The combination of these two elements makes the 12-24 f/4 lens, in my mind, the preferred lens for shooting interiors or compages. If yous are a real-estate photographer, for example, the Sigma 12-24 ART lens is an excellent option for giving you different framing options and the ability to add space to your interior photos.

Ironically 12mm is not oftentimes a very good focal length for mural shooting. Information technology's simply besides wide, and unless you lot are working with the perfect scene you will be left with quite an empty, lifeless shot. Yous take the rest of the zoom range, of course, but my point is for landscape, photojournalists, wedding and event shooters, etc…the 14mm of 14-24 Fine art is enough broad.

The 14-24 Art is the more than versatile lens for shooting events and in places like churches due to having the twice every bit broad maximum aperture of f/2.8. It will office as a ameliorate low light lens both in lite gathering and focus, and I shot a lot with it in dark weather with quick, accurate focus results. Also desirable for landscape shooters is the more robust grade of atmospheric condition sealing, which makes it a more than willing companion for shooting in the various conditions that true mural photographers often discover themselves in.

So, if y'all are a real estate photographer, or shoot a lot of interiors where space can exist tight, the 12-24mm f/4 ART is a bully selection due to the broad focal length and low levels of distortion. If you are a landscape photographer, travel lensman, or an event shooter, the 14-24 ART is probably the lens for you.

Decision

I'm very impressed with the Sigma fourteen-24mm f/2.8 HSM Art lens. I experience like Sigma has washed a great job of creating a very versatile lens that checks essentially all the boxes that one could ask for. It'southward a large lens, yes, merely no more and so than its direct competitors. It undercuts the primary competitors from Nikon and Canon in toll while offering great conditions sealing, amazing sharpness, and quality focus. I'm very tempted by this lens myself, as it shined in the various situations I put it in during the grade of my review. The 14-24 Art's list of flaws is a very short ane, and Sigma should be commended for standing to abound as a lens maker and refining their arts and crafts. This may be the most complete lens I've seen from Sigma yet, and for that it receives high marks from me.

Pros

• Excellent build with vastly improved weather sealing
• Fantastic sharpness beyond the frame and focal length
• Very well controlled chromatic aberrations
• Strong flare resistance
• Quality autofocus
• Excellent contrast
• Proficient color rendition

Cons

• Big and heavy
• A little more than barrel baloney than expected at shut to medium focus distances

Gear Used:

Purchase the Sigma fourteen-24mm f/2.eight ART @ B&H Photo  | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon Uk | Ebay
Canon EOS 5D Mark Four (5D4): B&H Photograph | Amazon.com | Amazon Canada  | Amazon UK
Sony a7R III Camera: B&H Photograph | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon Great britain  | Ebay
Sigma MC-11 Adapter:  B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
Summit Design Slide Light:  Tiptop Pattern Store | B&H Photograph | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon Great britain

BenQ SW271 4K Photograph Editing Monitor – B&H Photo  | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Artistic Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Pare Exposure X2 (Apply Code "dustinabbott" to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Yous can besides brand a donation here if you would like.  Visit my Amazon folio for some of my gear of selection! Thanks for your back up.

Great News! I can at present offering a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada'southward Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter disbelieve code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. Information technology is skilful for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, also! It will take 5% off your entire lodge! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Bank check me out on:

Keywords: Sigma 14-24mm, f/2.8, f2.8, two.eight, 14-24, 14-24mm, Art, Sigma, Sigma 14-24 Fine art, Sigma xiv-24 Fine art Review, Sigma 14-24 2.8, Review, Dustin Abbott, Sigma 14-24 Review, Sigma xiv-24mm f/ii.8 Art, Sigma 14-24mm f/ii.8 Fine art Review, Resolution, Contrast, Distortion, Sigma MC-11, Canon 5D Mark IV, Sony a7R3, Autofocus, Nikon fourteen-24mm, Nikon fourteen-24, Tamron xv-thirty, Tamron xv-30mm f/2.8, 2018, 1424ART

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains chapter links, which means that if you lot click on one of the product links, I'll receive a pocket-sized commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

balcomneverly.blogspot.com

Source: https://dustinabbott.net/2018/04/sigma-14-24mm-f-2-8-art-review/

Share this post