Review: Sigma 12-24mm f/4 DG HSM Art

[Canon Rumors]

The-Digital-Picture has completed their review of the Sigma 12-24mm f/4L DG HSM Art.</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Image Quality</strong></p>
<p>From the always-important image sharpness perspective, this lens is a very good performer with a caveat that I will of course explain. At f/4, this lens is quite sharp in the center of the frame over the full focal length range aside from performance becoming modestly softer from 20mm through 24mm. Stopping down to f/5.6 brings sharp center of the frame results to the entire focal length range……….</p>
<p>……… I mentioned the caveat. What I didn’t notice during this shoot was focus shift. As this lens is stopped down, the plane of sharp focus shifts farther away. Because Canon cameras focus with a wide open aperture, this change is not accounted for during either viewfinder or Live View-based focusing (AF or MF). Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change, but … this is not how we typically focus. <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-12-24mm-f-4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p>It looks like Sigma has another winner on their hands with the 12-24mm f/4 DG HSM Art series lens, especially when you factor in the fact it costs about $1000 less than the Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L.</p>
<p>Sigma 12-24mm f/4 Art $1599: <a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1282159-REG/sigma_205955_12_24mm_f_4_dg_hsm.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/2gkZVGC">Amazon</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/SG1224AEOS.html?KBID=64393">Adorama</a> | <a href="https://mpex.com/sigma-12-24mm-f4-dg-hsm-art-lens-canon.html?acc=3">Midwest Photo</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[privatebydesign]

Depends on how you look at it. To me the $1,000 extra for in focus shots trumps pretty much anything. I held on to my 16-35 f2.8 MkI for so long because it focused like a heat seeking missile, I could live with the other IQ limitations because I could 100% trust focus. Now I shoot with the Canon 11-24 and never give focus a thought with that lens either.

Now before we get the usual dof covers miss-focus/focus shift when using UWA lenses I'd like to point out that is simply wrong. Getting subject separation even with wide f4 lenses isn't that difficult if you know what you are doing.

P.S. Has anybody else noticed how much brighter the Canon f4 is in the center of the frame than the Sigma at f4?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=1084&Camera=979&LensComp=977

I make that 20 points on a 256 scale, or over 2/3rds stop.

 

[LordofTackle]

…… I mentioned the caveat. What I didn’t notice during this shoot was focus shift. As this lens is stopped down, the plane of sharp focus shifts farther away. Because Canon cameras focus with a wide open aperture, this change is not accounted for during either viewfinder or Live View-based focusing (AF or MF). Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change, but … this is not how we typically focus.

So basically every shot with a slower aperture than f/4 will be OOF??? Did I get that right?? please correct me if not but that's how I read that part....

 

[privatebydesign]

…… I mentioned the caveat. What I didn’t notice during this shoot was focus shift. As this lens is stopped down, the plane of sharp focus shifts farther away. Because Canon cameras focus with a wide open aperture, this change is not accounted for during either viewfinder or Live View-based focusing (AF or MF). Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change, but … this is not how we typically focus.

So basically every shot with a slower aperture than f/4 will be OOF??? Did I get that right?? please correct me if not but that's how I read that part....

Not quite, at some point the dof covers the focus shift. Normally this phenomena is limited to the first two or three stops before dof takes over.

 

[LordofTackle]

…… I mentioned the caveat. What I didn’t notice during this shoot was focus shift. As this lens is stopped down, the plane of sharp focus shifts farther away. Because Canon cameras focus with a wide open aperture, this change is not accounted for during either viewfinder or Live View-based focusing (AF or MF). Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change, but … this is not how we typically focus.

So basically every shot with a slower aperture than f/4 will be OOF??? Did I get that right?? please correct me if not but that's how I read that part....

Not quite, at some point the dof covers the focus shift. Normally this phenomena is limited to the first two or three stops before dof takes over.

OK, thanks for the explanation PBD

I just fast-read the review and had a look at his sample pictures for this phenomenon. They look pretty bad...(in terms of shifting focus plane with slower aperture)

-Sebastian

 

[privatebydesign]

You're welcome.

All the time Sigma lenses were in the hundreds of dollars range and Canon much more expemsive I could see the attraction of them, but at $1,500 vs $2,500 I just don't. Yes $1,000 is a lot of money but the Canon lens is sublime, $1,500 seems like a ton of money for a lens with issues off the bat!

 

[LordofTackle]

True, and that's even before you run into the "usual" AF problems with sigma lenses....

 

[Alex_M]

Unless we are looking at review of somewhat faulty copy of the lens, I think that Sigma dropped the ball this time. I believe that Sigma would be hesitant releasing a lens with such a drammatic focus shift properties. Not such an expensive and unique lens that performs that poor in that regard. I am dissapointed :'(

 

[Antono Refa]

You're welcome.

All the time Sigma lenses were in the hundreds of dollars range and Canon much more expensive I could see the attraction of them, but at $1,500 vs $2,500 I just don't. Yes $1,000 is a lot of money but the Canon lens is sublime, $1,500 seems like a ton of money for a lens with issues off the bat!

I bought both earlier versions of the Sigma 12-24mm, but this time I bought the Canon for two reasons.

The first reason is the price. Its high enough that I went the extra $1,000 and bought the Canon 11-24mm.

The other is that it becomes harder and harder to sell Sigma lenses. As example, the last store in my town that bought used third party lenses (which is convenient when upgrading), has recently closed.

Sure, I can sell lenses myself, and could probably get better prices, but I'm neither good at it or enjoying it.

 

[timotheus]

Yeah, if people run into this, it should be fixable if you tune the lens with the USB dock. My 18-35 had varying front-focus issues on different focal lengths, after tuning it works like a charm, consistently.

 

[privatebydesign]

Yeah, if people run into this, it should be fixable if you tune the lens with the USB dock. My 18-35 had varying front-focus issues on different focal lengths, after tuning it works like a charm, consistently.

No that is not true. Focus shift varies by aperture so unless you can AFMA for multiple apertures and focal lengths the dock will not help.

 

[Alex_M]

No, you cannot address this issue by tuning the AFMA on the Sigma USB dock.
fair enough, you can compensate for the focus shift for a single distance/aperture combination but thats no help unless you are always shooting stopped down to a specific aperture all the time.

As far as I remember, Reikan Focal is capable of running the AFMA tune up at a specific aperture. Therefore you can adjust at 4 distances to subject + aperture points. Does not sound like a solution to me.
I have made an enquiry with Australian Sigma distributor today in regards to this issue and asked for clarification.

Yeah, if people run into this, it should be fixable if you tune the lens with the USB dock. My 18-35 had varying front-focus issues on different focal lengths, after tuning it works like a charm, consistently.

... It looks like Sigma has another winner on their hands with the 12-24mm f/4 DG HSM Art series lens..

Not really... :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

 

[chrysoberyl]

LensTip also noted this focus shift problem.

TDP states 'Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change'. Did he mean 'will correct' the change? I assume so.

Then he states 'but ... this is not how we typically focus.' Oh dear, yet another thing I do wrongly - because that is how I do it for landscapes, caves, wildflowers.

 

[ooF Fighters]

I depend solely on the commissions received from you using the links on this site to make any purchase. I am grateful for your support! - Bryan

A rock & a hard place when you literally can't afford to be too critical in a review.

 

[Random Orbits]

I depend solely on the commissions received from you using the links on this site to make any purchase. I am grateful for your support! - Bryan

A rock & a hard place when you literally can't afford to be too critical in a review.

I don't think so -- that is more his personality than anything else. Otherwise, why wouldn't he tear the $1600 Sigma apart in his review to get you to buy the more expensive Canon 11-24?

 

[LordofTackle]

LensTip also noted this focus shift problem.

TDP states 'Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change'. Did he mean 'will correct' the change? I assume so.

Then he states 'but ... this is not how we typically focus.' Oh dear, yet another thing I do wrongly - because that is how I do it for landscapes, caves, wildflowers.

I guess if you use it just for landscape and do alle the focussing manually in live view, this Lens is totally Fine and a good alternative for the Canon. But if you want to Walk Around with it and use af you might be disapointed....

 

[chrysoberyl]

I guess if you use it just for landscape and do alle the focussing manually in live view, this Lens is totally Fine and a good alternative for the Canon. But if you want to Walk Around with it and use af you might be disapointed....

Actually, I was poking a bit of fun at the notion that he speaks for all of us ('but ... this is not how we typically focus.').

I do use AF sometimes; family shots, portraits, wildlife. But I won't be purchasing the Sigma or the Canon because they are too slow. And the focus shift does put me off. I am glad this was brought up and the first thing I did was check to see whether my lenses have this problem.

 

[Jopa]

I'm wondering if the 85Art has also this issue. I've noticed my images shot at f/4 are not as sharp as those shot at f/1.4. Never bothered to check, but now I'm very curious about it.

 

[Antono Refa]

Unless we are looking at review of somewhat faulty copy of the lens, I think that Sigma dropped the ball this time. I believe that Sigma would be hesitant releasing a lens with such a drammatic focus shift properties. Not such an expensive and unique lens that performs that poor in that regard. I am dissapointed :'(

The EF 50mm f/1.2, which costs about the same, is known for having focus shift as well, and it costs about the same.

And the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 mk1 had its faults as well. E.g. it is famous for having internal reflections, as in the attached photos.

 

[chrysoberyl]

I'm wondering if the 85Art has also this issue. I've noticed my images shot at f/4 are not as sharp as those shot at f/1.4. Never bothered to check, but now I'm very curious about it.

Here's what LensTip says about the 85 Art:

Spherical aberration

First photos of this chapter don’t feature any noticeable “focus shift”. Still if you look closely you can see a slight shift of the depth of field toward the greater distances when you pass from f/1.4 to f/2.0. Looking at the circles of light you can also perceive vestigial spherical aberration. Overall the image looks very nice but the circle in front of the focus has soft edges and the circle behind the focus – a delicate outline.

Both these effects mean the spherical aberration is not corrected in a perfect way but its influence remains slight so it would be difficult to consider it a serious flaw. That verdict is additionally confirmed by high resolution values across the frame by f/1.4 and lack of characteristic mist in photos.