Uncle Rog @ LR tests the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 OS

[ahsanford]

Sadly, good but not great:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/07/sigma-24-70mm-f2-8-dg-os-hsm-art-sharpness-tests/

- A

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

 

[Khalai]

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

Seeing those 24-70 with IS systems lately (Nikkor, Sigma or Tamron), I now fully understand why Canon left IS out. 24-70 II is awesomely sharp lens and it seems that tailoring IS for such wide focal range is bringing some optical compromises. I'm absolutely happy with my 24-70 II copy and practically never missed IS there.

 

[BeenThere]

I guess Sigma had to fill a spot in their lens offerings and this is the best they could do. Sometimes it may be better to just hold off releasing a disappointing design.

 

[SecureGSM]

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

 

[Jopa]

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

Edit: a slightly grayish new Canon is under $1600! https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=canon%2024-70%202.8%20ii&_dcat=3323&rt=nc&LH_ItemCondition=1000&_trksid=p2045573.m1684, it makes decision even harder...

 

[SecureGSM]

If the new Tamron 24-70 G2 will be what I expect from it to be : improved, glitch free, fluent image stabilisation, improved sharpness away from centre and refined bokeh quality, then this Sigma offering will have a very difficult time impressing event shooters. Very high chances that Tamron will deliver a very strong performing 24-70 workhorse this time round. That said, my 24-70 / 70-200 combo is Canon II L glass. I come to realization that shooting an event with mix of glass from 2 different vendors results in vastly non-uniform colours in the output files.
Put simple : it looks awkward when colours are unmatched from one image to enother. It can be fixed, but not always to my absolute satisfaction.

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

 

[privatebydesign]

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

Edit: a slightly grayish new Canon is under $1600! https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=canon%2024-70%202.8%20ii&_dcat=3323&rt=nc&LH_ItemCondition=1000&_trksid=p2045573.m1684, it makes decision even harder...

CPW had genuine USA ones for $1,599 yesterday.

 

[Jopa]

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

Edit: a slightly grayish new Canon is under $1600! https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=canon%2024-70%202.8%20ii&_dcat=3323&rt=nc&LH_ItemCondition=1000&_trksid=p2045573.m1684, it makes decision even harder...

CPW had genuine USA ones for $1,599 yesterday.

I'll take a few more days to make up my mind Greentoe is also a good option.

 

[Jopa]

If the new Tamron 24-70 G2 will be what I expect from it to be : improved, glitch free, fluent image stabilisation, improved sharpness away from centre and refined bokeh quality, then this Sigma offering will have a very difficult time impressing event shooters. Very high chances that Tamron will deliver a very strong performing 24-70 workhorse this time round. That said, my 24-70 / 70-200 combo is Canon II L glass. I come to realization that shooting an event with mix of glass from 2 different vendors results in vastly non-uniform colours in the output files.
Put simple : it looks awkward when colours are unmatched from one image to enother. It can be fixed, but not always to my absolute satisfaction.

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

Do you think they can improve sharpness using better coatings?

 

[SecureGSM]

If 70-200 G2 is anything we can go by, then we can expect improved sharpness away from center, better IS, etc.
I do not have a crystal ball at my disposal nor I am keen to make any unsubstantiated claims, but there is a reasonable chance for new Tamron 24-70 G2 lens to be a substantially better performer than the original.

If the new Tamron 24-70 G2 will be what I expect from it to be : improved, glitch free, fluent image stabilisation, improved sharpness away from centre and refined bokeh quality, then this Sigma offering will have a very difficult time impressing event shooters. Very high chances that Tamron will deliver a very strong performing 24-70 workhorse this time round. That said, my 24-70 / 70-200 combo is Canon II L glass. I come to realization that shooting an event with mix of glass from 2 different vendors results in vastly non-uniform colours in the output files.
Put simple : it looks awkward when colours are unmatched from one image to enother. It can be fixed, but not always to my absolute satisfaction.

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

Do you think they can improve sharpness using better coatings?

 

[Jopa]

If 70-200 G2 is anything we can go by, then we can expect improved sharpness away from center, better IS, etc.
I do not have a crystal ball at my disposal nor I am keen to make any unsubstantiated claims, but there is a reasonable chance for new Tamron 24-70 G2 lens to be a substantially better performer than the original.

If the new Tamron 24-70 G2 will be what I expect from it to be : improved, glitch free, fluent image stabilisation, improved sharpness away from centre and refined bokeh quality, then this Sigma offering will have a very difficult time impressing event shooters. Very high chances that Tamron will deliver a very strong performing 24-70 workhorse this time round. That said, my 24-70 / 70-200 combo is Canon II L glass. I come to realization that shooting an event with mix of glass from 2 different vendors results in vastly non-uniform colours in the output files.
Put simple : it looks awkward when colours are unmatched from one image to enother. It can be fixed, but not always to my absolute satisfaction.

Stabilised (small and light) zooms is not Sigma's area of expertise.
CA levels of this lens are truly revolting. They should not really release a lens with Art designation with such a mediocre (not to use a stronger wording) qualities. Well, it happens.

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced size and weight down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

This makes my quest for the best 24-70/2.8 slightly easier. Now Canon's sharpness vs Tamron's IS?

Do you think they can improve sharpness using better coatings?

I had no idea the G2 is also optically the same as the G1, but I remember I read somewhere it has lots of improvements. It gives me a HOPE!

 

[deleteme]

He says the left the "F" off the front of ART.

Its pretty hard to do a great 24-70 lens and also keep the priced down. Canon spent a lot of time and money coming up with their existing one.

I have been saying this for some time.
Everyone has had a swing at this and only Canon seemed to make a success at the expense of a lot of criticism for not having IS.
At the time Canon said that adding IS would reduce IQ.
As no one has been able to prove them wrong, I am guessing they are correct.