Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art announced..
- Thread starter rushfan21122
- Start date
Etienne said:
I will likely try it.
I had the original Canon 24 f1.4 (so compact and wonderful useful-even for flowers) .. and I rented a few times the 24 mk II ...the newer one had lower chromatics, a bit sharper in corners...but bokeh was not as good as original (imo) and shaded in corners worse than original...
so I waited... then I GAVE my brother my original 24 f1.4 ....for his 50D I gave him.....
and just last week I missed it ...so much... when shooting in dark clubs ... wide and fast is so valuable in a dark little club. my 35 A sig performed quite well as usual...but I sure miss the 24mm.... I could stand next to guitarist and yet... get the trio in the photo.
I remember the original Canon 24 f1.4, had focus problems ...especially out at 5-10 feet as described, However, I sent back to Canon and when it returned (they re-electronics it they said) it was just great all over. My sig 35 f1.4 A hardly ever missed focus on 5D2. And I got significantly more reliable focus on my 5D3 with Canon 24mk I, sig 35A and my 85L II....... vast improvement...especially the 85L.
I am getting the 11-24 Canon zoom ($gasp$)- so I am gonna have too much overlap for my normal tastes - but I NEED fast and wide...... for sure focus will be more difficult at 24mm wide open - especially in the 'dark' (imo) ..
but I will try this one....
I hope for good coma, sharp edges, low distortion, low CA and reliable focus...to come with it.
I thought the 85 would be my next sigma....but I kept the 85 f1.2 II .... after a long wait
I am never gonna get another guitar.... I guess... sigh
Upvote
0
If it has NO coma I will not care about autofocus. I would use it fully wide open in manual focus for landscape astrophotography. That way I would be less afraid for future incompatibilities (there were some Sigma old lenses that used to work only fully open in modern digital cameras).dilbert said:
P.S Now, Some virgins - although not sacrificed- would be nice ;D
P.S2 I wouldn't use this lens at a rain dance though as I am pretty sure it wouldn't be weather sealed ;D
Upvote
0
+1, I hope they produce a new 85mm Art, since the current one is actually outstanding and DxO rates it as one of the best.Jesse said:
Upvote
0
Why do people want the 85 art so much? It's the presumption that it will be even sharper than the 85 L mkii? It is it that it still be half the price?... our a faster auto focus system... sure there are plenty of reasons to want it, but it seems like the original sigma 85 isn't that old, and it is already pretty costly... So would an at version only be an extra $100?
Upvote
0
For me it's mostly price. If I'm spending in the range of the Canon 85L then I have lenses like the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS or the Canon 24-70 II. When Sigma didn't announce an 85 ART in September I went ahead and bought the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS. I'd say around $1000 is about the max I'd be willing to pay (not that that is what it should cost just what I'd be willing to pay on sale). I bought my 35 ART for $780 and it's been a great lens. Primes are great but they obviously have a more limited use than zooms so I just can't justify spending $2000 on one when I could put that towards something else. Just my take on things.jdramirez said:
Upvote
0
Indeed, though the 50 and 35mm Art unfortunately have quite poor coma wide open. The press release gives some hope, but I will also wait for a reputable review. A low-coma 24/1.4 would be a dream. The Samyang 24/1.4 seems to be the best so far in that respect (though don't know about the crazy expensive Zeiss).NancyP said:
Upvote
0
Hjalmarg1 said:
Yeah my Sigma 85mm f1.4 is excellent. Not sure how they can improve on it. It did have a hiccup over the summer, began to front focus occasionally and sent it to Sigma in Long Island. Had it back in under a week and it's working great. Sigma reinstalled and/or updated the firmware.
Upvote
0
I heard that wasn't true and they're still producing it. I think why people have a hard time with that lens is it doesn't follow the usual trend of the ART series of either doing something no one else has done (18-35) or does it at least or in most cases better and for a cheaper price. The The 24-105 isn't a bad lens the problem is it's a kit lens so it can easily be found for around $600 giving the Canon an upper hand. I have no issue with it being in the ART category. I'm just not planning on buying it.jcarapet said:
Upvote
0
This and any other Sigma is off my radar until they have fully proven that they have fixed the AF issues. I´ll never go through the pain I had with the 35 and 50 Arts again ... Imagine an 85 f1.4 with that AF ...
Upvote
0
jdramirez said:
85 and 135 are fairly easy lenses to produce and produce well given the field of view. Even the Canon 85mm f1.8 is an extremely solid performer at $400. It even achieves focus faster than the 85mm 1.2 L. So yes, the Sigma EX is already a solid lens, but given the direction Sigma is going they will be updating the 85 to join the ART family. Granted they may not have too much to do to improve it, but since it was made on the older process, they will be giving a fresh update and a new look to match the ART. They went 24mm first because they really didn't have a great lens in that focal length and it's a common one for landscapers. They may even knock out a 135mm before the 85mm too. But at about $1000, the old Canon 135L is still arguably the sharpest lens Canon produces. Sigma has a tall ladder to climb in the EF mount there because I can't see a Sig 135 coming in much less than that Canon. It's 50/50 what comes next. 85 vs 135
Upvote
0
brianleighty said:
That is fair. I got the 85 L mkii and it became my favorite lens, so much so that I tried to show horn it where it didn't belong, sports mostly & a little walk around.
I have four lenses at the moment, each with its specific duty. And I find I'm manually focusing a ton with the 85, that I might as well consider an otus. But I'm happy with it.
Upvote
0
For me this is a very good news. I bought the 35mm very recently and had the chance to test it two weeks ago.
It is in pair with the canon 85mm 1.2, by this I mean if I didn't know I would assume that they were taken with the same zoom lens, just at # focal lengths. Of course I am wrong, but I have no shame in showing my results with it to the same customer against the 85 mm 1.2 (both at f2.0).
With that said, to me it is all about rectilinearity. The new canon 11-24 seem to be the right one for my need (indoor video + fill flash in low light, in very tight area) but I am still scratching my head where to get $3000 for it. If the 24 ART can reach that level of linearity, I would live without 11mm (if I have to) because of the price while gaining ambient light at 1.4 (VS f4).
It is in pair with the canon 85mm 1.2, by this I mean if I didn't know I would assume that they were taken with the same zoom lens, just at # focal lengths. Of course I am wrong, but I have no shame in showing my results with it to the same customer against the 85 mm 1.2 (both at f2.0).
With that said, to me it is all about rectilinearity. The new canon 11-24 seem to be the right one for my need (indoor video + fill flash in low light, in very tight area) but I am still scratching my head where to get $3000 for it. If the 24 ART can reach that level of linearity, I would live without 11mm (if I have to) because of the price while gaining ambient light at 1.4 (VS f4).
Upvote
0
