• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Sigma 14-24 mm f/2.8 DG HSM | Art coming ...


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,545 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 08 February 2018 - 12:34 PM

... it seems.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#2 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 12:40 PM

At least you save a couple of hours in the gym with the Sigma bricks.



#3 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 08 February 2018 - 12:40 PM

No e-mount, too bad...


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#4 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,897 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 08 February 2018 - 01:04 PM

At least you save a couple of hours in the gym with the Sigma bricks.

You need to put in hours in the gym weekly, to be able lug those Sigma bricks around...


  • josa likes this

#5 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,897 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 08 February 2018 - 01:05 PM

No e-mount, too bad...

Canon adapters (Sigma makes one?)



#6 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 01:26 PM

Yes, Sigma makes adapters between Canon or Sigma mount to Sony. They are also transferring AF and EXIF, I believe.

 

For lugging Sigma lenses around, a golf caddy might be the right choice to carry all lenses at all times. Alternatively I can think which lens I really want to use and limit myself... 



#7 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 08 February 2018 - 02:05 PM

I own the MC-11, and it probably works with the new lens (Sigma should tell us whether they match). But... adding stuff to a lens that isn't neither small nor light?


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#8 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 02:14 PM

Sigma should not, Sigma already does tell us  ^_^

 

https://www.sigma-gl...ount-converter/



#9 obican

obican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 436 posts

Posted 08 February 2018 - 02:31 PM

No e-mount, too bad...

 

Why bother when there is Sony 12-24?



#10 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 02:41 PM

True. The price of the Sigma with MC11 is nearly the same (1779.- Sony, 1796.- Sigma incl. adapter).

 

But for someone with Canon bodies, trying Sony E-mount and preferring Sigma lenses, the adapter might be a way to go.



#11 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 08 February 2018 - 02:43 PM

True. The price of the Sigma with MC11 is nearly the same (1779.- Sony, 1796.- Sigma incl. adapter).

 

I'm not personally interested (too heavy and I'm fine with the SEL1018), it's just that a friend recently bought some Sony stuff and asked for advice. Having competition would hopefully lower prices, even though they start at the same level.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#12 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 04:55 PM

The Sony weighs less than half of the Sigma (without MC11). So, there's hardly a reason to go the Sigma way.



#13 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,897 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 08 February 2018 - 05:03 PM

I am guessing the talk switched from the coming Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 to the Sigma 12-24mm f4?



#14 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,641 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 08 February 2018 - 05:22 PM

If we're still talking about the rumored 14-24, maybe some people are dead set to have the f/2.8 aperture, so for them the extra size and weight is a necessary evil.



#15 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 05:42 PM

I am guessing the talk switched from the coming Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 to the Sigma 12-24mm f4?

 

Yes, you're guessing right. My bad, I thought it will come soon into da lab.



#16 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 05:46 PM

If we're still talking about the rumored 14-24, maybe some people are dead set to have the f/2.8 aperture, so for them the extra size and weight is a necessary evil.

 

If it's this lens https://nikonrumors....px/#more-119537

 

then the weight is exactly the same as from the 12-24/4 Art.

 

Strange, Sigma. Why are they making a zoom lens which is only f/2.8, one stop faster than their 2 mm shorter 12-24? and 1 1/3 stops slower than the 14/1.8 mm

 

*ordering a second golf caddy*  :wacko:



#17 miro

miro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 455 posts
  • LocationI am here

Posted 08 February 2018 - 07:27 PM

At least you save a couple of hours in the gym with the Sigma bricks.

Come on guys, the golden standart nowadays is 

1. Weight              -1kg++

2. similar for price -1k$++

 

* higher numbers means beter



#18 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,641 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 08 February 2018 - 07:48 PM

Not necessarily. Look at the Sony 12-24 which is half the weight and as good (if not better) when you consider the sum of its qualities.

 

The Canon 16-35/4L is a pretty compact and lightweight lens (less than 650 grams), brakes for nobody in the IQ department and has very effective IS. I love mine to bits.



#19 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,973 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 08 February 2018 - 08:20 PM

Yes, it's good to see the Sony can be lighter and simpler designed if the lens designer doens't have to consider a mirror. More of that, please.  ^_^



#20 borisbg

borisbg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 457 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 08 February 2018 - 08:33 PM

4 options now in 1kg category:

Sigma 14-24

Nikon 14-24

Tamron 15-30

Tokina 16-28






3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de