October 01, 2014, 12:53:59 AM

Author Topic: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS  (Read 5744 times)

Canon Rumors

  • Administrator
  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2671
    • View Profile
    • Canon Rumors
Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 08:28:48 AM »
canonrumors.com

canon rumors FORUM

Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 08:28:48 AM »

Canon Rumors

  • Administrator
  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2671
    • View Profile
    • Canon Rumors
Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2014, 08:34:48 AM »

Justin has completed our review of the Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS. As expected, the lens is a real winner when compered to the Canon equivalent and is priced exceptionally well. Sigma’s quality, warranty and pricing are going to ensure that they’re worth your consideration at certain focal lengths.


Says Justin

“My opening line said it all: Sigma is absolutely killing it with these new lenses. They perform, look and are priced better than the Canon equivalents. …….. Their attention to industrial design and optics makes me think more of the even higher-end Zeiss lenses than it does a Canon, which is smart, because the cost difference between a Zeiss lens and Sigma is even greater, creating an even more compelling price gap in Sigma’s favour.”


Read the full review | Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS $899


cr


canonrumors.com

tianxiaozhang

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2014, 09:25:30 AM »
Makes me want one...


traveller

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 657
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2014, 09:37:46 AM »
Why do people insist on posting images of bookshelves to demonstrate how "sharp" a lens is? There was not one detail in those images that was resolved differently by either lens, mainly due to the dearth of any high frequency detail that might show up resolution differences. If it wasn't for the distortion differences, I might have actually thought that they were samples from the same lens.

I think I'll wait for the results from Roger Cicala to decide whether the Sigma is a worthwhile upgrade. I would recommend that in future, you either do reviews properly or stop publishing this rubbish as CR's "official" review.

TAF

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2014, 09:41:14 AM »
If my L version ever breaks, this will be its replacement, but I'm not certain I would head out right now to by one.

However, should someone comes out with a more interesting choice, such as a 24-105 f2.8, or a 28-135 f2.8, either of those would part me from my money much sooner.

(and no, the 24-70 is not acceptable; the long end is simply too short to be useful for me)

Thank you for the excellent review.


Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1919
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2014, 09:42:14 AM »
I'm surprised that there wasn't more difference on the samples posted in the review at f4. Maybe there is more obvious visual benefit at other focal lengths.

If people howl about the price difference between the 24-105 and 24-70 IS not being worth it I can't see that this would stack up for those people either when you can buy the Canon version so cheap.

I stick to what I thought when I first heard the rumour; this lens is targeted at Nikon / Sony users. However anything that keeps Canon on their toes is good for Canon users.

JVLphoto

  • Administrator
  • EOS M2
  • *****
  • Posts: 221
  • Whatever clicks
    • View Profile
    • JVLphoto
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2014, 09:46:28 AM »
Why do people insist on posting images of bookshelves to demonstrate how "sharp" a lens is? There was not one detail in those images that was resolved differently by either lens, mainly due to the dearth of any high frequency detail that might show up resolution differences. If it wasn't for the distortion differences, I might have actually thought that they were samples from the same lens.

I think I'll wait for the results from Roger Cicala to decide whether the Sigma is a worthwhile upgrade. I would recommend that in future, you either do reviews properly or stop publishing this rubbish as CR's "official" review.

Out of 23 "reviews" this is the first and *only* time we posted photos of my dusty bookshelves. I certainly don't insist on it, or like it, but it does show difference of detail in the corners, vignetting and other real-world variables.

Roger is an incredible technical reviewer with all the right tools to measure and analyze lenses and I too look forward to his reviews and articles. I just pay less attention to the charts and more to how it works for me professionally. The final image is what matters to me and my clients.  I'm also open to hearing your take on what entails a "proper" review for my future rubbish.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2014, 09:46:28 AM »

JVLphoto

  • Administrator
  • EOS M2
  • *****
  • Posts: 221
  • Whatever clicks
    • View Profile
    • JVLphoto
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2014, 09:49:22 AM »
I'm surprised that there wasn't more difference on the samples posted in the review at f4. Maybe there is more obvious visual benefit at other focal lengths.

If people howl about the price difference between the 24-105 and 24-70 IS not being worth it I can't see that this would stack up for those people either when you can buy the Canon version so cheap.

I stick to what I thought when I first heard the rumour; this lens is targeted at Nikon / Sony users. However anything that keeps Canon on their toes is good for Canon users.

I agree, there wasn't a huge difference until I started pixel peeping. Corners were a big difference and that's even a highlight in Sigma's own marketing material. Without being too detail focused, the Sigma seemed to perform better at 50mm than the Canon, but I don't measure this stuff *too* much. At SRP, the Sigma is cheaper than the Canon, but we all know how to get the Canon for less these days... still, holding the Sigma mattered, it's a lovely lens even for a little bit more (but not a lot).

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2014, 09:50:10 AM »
If my L version ever breaks, this will be its replacement, but I'm not certain I would head out right now to by one.

However, should someone comes out with a more interesting choice, such as a 24-105 f2.8, or a 28-135 f2.8, either of those would part me from my money much sooner.

(and no, the 24-70 is not acceptable; the long end is simply too short to be useful for me)

Thank you for the excellent review.
There is an old Tamron 28-105 f/2.8 no IS though...

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2976
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2014, 09:52:20 AM »
For balance, read the review at photozone:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/864-sigma24105f4eos

... or to put it simply, it doesn't fix any of the problems that the Canon 24-105/f4L has in a significant fashion. I had such high hopes for this lens. Pity.

JVLphoto

  • Administrator
  • EOS M2
  • *****
  • Posts: 221
  • Whatever clicks
    • View Profile
    • JVLphoto
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2014, 09:56:04 AM »
Nobody tell my wife I posted high res photos of my dusty and messy bookshelf okay?  :-X

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2014, 09:57:58 AM »
Nobody tell my wife I posted high res photos of my dusty and messy bookshelf okay?  :-X
It can be worse: We can tell her that you posted high res photos of your dusty and messy bookshelf with a fresh new expensive lens  ;D

JVLphoto

  • Administrator
  • EOS M2
  • *****
  • Posts: 221
  • Whatever clicks
    • View Profile
    • JVLphoto
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2014, 09:58:43 AM »
Nobody tell my wife I posted high res photos of my dusty and messy bookshelf okay?  :-X
It can be worse: We can tell her that you posted high res photos of your dusty and messy bookshelf with a fresh new expensive lens  ;D

*blocked*

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2014, 09:58:43 AM »

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2976
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« Reply #13 on: February 17, 2014, 10:03:07 AM »
All images from www.photozone.de

Vignetting

SigmaCanon


MTF

SigmaCanon



Chromatic Abberation

SigmaCanon


Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1252
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2014, 10:06:32 AM »
For me the lens is just too heavy. I'm sure it would make an ideal lens for a lot of people though its just not really a travel lens, is it?

I also don't like the way it zooms, it looks weird.

I've only had my 24-105L for less than a year but it's already my most used lens. Yeah it has it's faults but damn that thing is just so useful. Kudos to Sigma for making a cracking lens though.
5D II | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2014, 10:06:32 AM »