Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS ART Production on Hold?

[Rudeofus]

Yes, Tamron's lens doesn't cost $2400 and it's a pretty good performer optically with the handy inclusion of VC.

The minor issues I have with mine are:
1) I find the zoom action isn't as smooth as I'd like
2) The focus ring is narrow and the focus throw is also a bit short so not great for manual focusing
3) Autofocus is inconsistent on the 5D-III, so I use it for deep dof shots (f/5.6-f/11) or on my 60D or 6D.

Are these issues worth more than a 1000$ dollars? Not to me.

As you probably noted, none of these issues require a filter thread larger than 82mm to solve. Apart from that, whether you get the Tamron or not seems to depend on whether you truly benefit from its features. If you really need F/2.8 and IS in that focal length range, the issues you listed sound pretty minor (except for poor focusing with 5DIII, that's a show stopper).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I think there is little doubt the Sigma holds an edge at a few points, notably the 24mm range, and the 75-85mm f/4, an odd gap in both the Canon and Nikkor lenses. Still, the biggest problems are:

1) Weight! Frankly at 2 pounds or 880g this is a heavy lens and is roughly 200g heavier than the rivals. For the super primes they put out, where it is quality above all, this might be acceptable, but for a do-it-all lens that is designed to be taken everywhere always, it is a problem. In fact, the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 Mark II is 10% lighter even.

2) No weather sealing. For the same reason as above, for a lens that is designed to be your everyday lens taken everywhere, this is a rather serious oversight.

3) Price. The rivals may not meet it for sharpness at all points, but overall it is not so clear cut so the higher price compared to the kit lenses is impossible to justify. Sure at MSRP it looks good, but both Nikkor and Canon can be purchased for $700 or so, which is $200 cheaper. The Nikkor may lose in sharpness a bit, but it has weather sealing, greater reach, and is lighter and cheaper. The Canon has weather sealing, is in between the Nikkor and Sigma in sharpness, is built like a tank, and is the lightest and cheapest.

The 24-105L can be found for $600 and the 24-70 f/4 IS for not that much mroe than the sigma. Unless you MUST have 71-105mm I can't see getting Sigma over the 24-70 f/4 IS since the 24-70 f/4 IS is much better stopped down for landscapes at the wide end, better at long end too for that and as good everywhere else other than maybe right at 50mm wide open and it's so much smaller and lighter.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

We must remember that recently launched another competitor, the Canon 24-105 STM, when the market was already flooded with 24-105L.

In this current scenario, it is difficult to sell many units of the Sigma 24-105, because the quality does not exceed the Canon L, and the price does not match the Canon STM. :

Maybe Sigma had some information (wrong?) that Canon would stop manufacturing 24-105L, and such a thing was not confirmed. ??? :-\

The quality DOES exceed the Canon, no one ever said it does not, they just disagree in varying amounts

But not than the 24-70 f/4 IS which doesn't cost that much more.

 

[LovePhotography]

Just for the record, I agree with everything slclick has said. I have the Sigma 24-105 mm Art, and I really love it. Maybe I got a particularly good copy, but I really like it. I also have the Sigma 50 mm 1.4 Art, EF 70-200mm 2.8 ii, and the Canon 300 mm 2.8 ii, So I know what a sharp photograph is supposed to look like. And, the 24-105 has saved me money, because shortly after I bought the 24-105, I bought a Canon 24mm 1.4 to have a wide prime, but I sent it back because, except for the bokeh at 1.4 (obviously) and vignette, the Sigma was sharper at 24 then the Canon (particularly in the corners) and just produced a better overall image, even though I was comparing an expensive L prime with an all-purpose zoom at just one focal length. Here is a picture I took with the 24-105 of a building that is 22 stories high and was about two blocks away. I have cropped it down to nearly 1:1. And, if they will upload, here is another building at 24mm, and the same building zoomed in on some detail at 105mm. I can't imagine a better all purpose walking around lens for the money. (Shot on a 6D, hand held).

 

[LovePhotography]

Building at 24mm

 

[LovePhotography]

Detail on building at 105mm.

 

[JPCanonUser]

If its true, it could mean a production issue, or a shift of internal resources. With Japan spiraling into a depression, the cost of raw materials and employees demands for higher wages may force low profit products out of production.

Most economic signs point that we are improving and ending decades of stagnation. While raw materials are getting more expensive because of the yen, I don't think spiralling into a depression is quite the right term. Most people are quite optimistic. Unfortunately, wages remain low.

I think your other suggestions are more realistic (shifting internal resources).

 

[donn]

I wanted to have an all around zoom that reaches a bit over 70mm when I travel. I went to a local dealer and tried both Canon and Sigma's 24-105, I find the Sigma sharper at 24mm and at 105mm. Then again, no AFMA done with the Canon upon testing, perhaps the copy needed AFMA on my camera body.

I am very impressed with the Sigma.