Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Sample Images

[Canon Rumors]

Tweet

Sample images

Sample images from the upcoming Sigma 24-105 f/4L DG OS Art lens have appeared over at lenstip.com.

The sample images look good to me and the $899 price tag for the lens more than justified.

View sample images here | Preorder: Sigma 24-105 f/4 OS at B&H Photo

cr

[ajfotofilmagem]

In 24mm barrel distortion seems imperceptible. But vignette remains even at F8.

[CarlTN]

The shots look nice but just as I thought, I'm not bowled over.  In this one for example...

http://pliki.optyczne.pl/sig24-105OS/sig24-105_fot25.JPG

This is f/5.6?  I am almost thinking my Canon 24-105 is sharper.  Certainly the Canon looks to have a bit more barrel distortion, but I knew that was going to be the case.  It's possible the Sigma has less CA than the Canon, but as for ultimate resolution...I'm glad I bought the Canon.  Again though, I like Sigma's products in general.  I don't think this particular lens is as good a value as many of Sigma's other lenses, however...at least based on these samples.

[bchernicoff]

I am a big fan of Sigma and WANT to love this lens, but these images don't look any better than Canon 24-105 images...in fact they look worse. Maybe a bad copy?

[duydaniel]

I am a big fan of Sigma and WANT to love this lens, but these images don't look any better than Canon 24-105 images...in fact they look worse. Maybe a bad copy?

Agree, images iq look bad.
I doubt Sigma give bad copy to first testers

[jrbdmb]

I am also a fan of the "new" Sigma, but I just don't get this lens.  I'll give it the benefit of the doubt as far as IQ, but when I see that the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC is about the same size, lighter (!), and about $200 more than this Sigma 4.0 lens, I pick the Tamron in a heartbeat. 

[Pi]

I think lenstip keeps the sharpening at zero with their tests.

[RomainF]

Could be really more interesting for a Nikon ; Pentax ; Sony guy, don't forget that.

[ajfotofilmagem]

The sharpness in the center looks good but the corners are not at the level of "NEW QUALITY STANDARD" Sigma.

[distant.star]

.
Something must be wrong. They look awful to me. Very surprising.

[Harv]

To put it as succinctly as I can... I'm underwhelmed.

[Pi]

Never been a Sigma fan - but most of those shots should have been taken at f/8 - f/11, with standard sharpness settings. There might be filed curvature problems as well.

[Normalnorm]

Maybe its harder to make a 24-105 than it looks.

[androiduk]

Those pics are actually softer than the ones from my Tamron 18-270.

[dafrank]

The cyan-red lateral chromatic aberration is very obvious in all of the 5 or 6 shots I looked at full-size. It does not look up to the recent standards established by the faster Sigma "art' lenses in general with the LCA and soft corners at wider angles, etc. I would definitely pass unless the lens sold for under $500.00, and was used as a fun walk -around only. Not up to professional standards, especially for an f/4.0 lens. Canon's 24-70 f/4.0 is also flawed, but I think that, if memory serves me, the Canon 24-105 is better than this. This figures, as Canon appears ready to soon replace their 24-105, as a kit lens, with the substandard 24-70 f/4.0. Perfect.

Regards,
David