Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS ART

http://www.canonrumors​.com …ma-24-105-f4-dg-os-outed/

The specs have it as being bigger and heavier than the 24-105L, with a 82mm filter thread and a more complex optical design. If the recent Sigma trend holds up, this could be to the 24-105L what the Sigma 35mm was to the 35L (cheaper yet better).

Sigma have yet to release a zoom that matches the best of Nikon/Canon - the Nikon 14-24 and 80-400 II, and the Canon 24-70 II and 70-200 II, as well as the Canon or Nikon 200-400 lenses.

They've been releasing very good primes, but haven't released a top-level zoom yet.

With the 24-105L lenses going for under $900 and even $650 here an there, it's going to be tough for Sigma to sell this at a higher price knowing Canon users would probably pay a little bit more for the L version and not worry about focus issues.

If it turns out to be sharper than the 24-105, with less distortion at the wide end and better bokeh (not hard), it could sell very well. Only thing is that, at that weight, it will be competing against the 24-70 II as well.

It may find a bigger niche among NIkon shooters, though - the 24-120 VR is nowhere near as good as the 24-105L.

Shadowblade wrote in post #16368502
Sigma have yet to release a zoom that matches the best of Nikon/Canon - the Nikon 14-24 and 80-400 II, and the Canon 24-70 II and 70-200 II, as well as the Canon or Nikon 200-400 lenses.

They've been releasing very good primes, but haven't released a top-level zoom yet.

The 18-35 is sharper than the f/2.8 APS-C zooms from Canon/Nikon. Not really in the same zoom range, but given that it's 1.33 stops faster in aperture and also sharper than the Canon or Nikon 17-55s, I'd say that more than "matches" Canon and Nikon. Of course it's just 1 lens so far, but there you have it.

The way the 24-105 marks on the right hand picture go up towards the right rather than following the curve of the focus ring suggest some PS was done...

Sigma is really becoming an interesting choice. The previously anounced lenses scored rave reviews and at the offered price are simply a great choice. While a 24-105 f4 does have to compete with the Canon L equivalent, it offers a unique choice in other mounts. In the A-mount this is exactly what I am missing and will just match a hole I have in my lineup. The Nikon 24-120 f4 will most likely not be a match against it either, so for Nikon and Sony this will most likely become a stellar choice. We will see how this will compete against the Canon version, but if priced decently, it can sell well.

Neilyb wrote in post #16369295
The way the 24-105 marks on the right hand picture go up towards the right rather than following the curve of the focus ring suggest some PS was done...

Well, if so, blame Sigma...looks like this thing is legit.

http://www.sigma-global.com …s/product/art/a​_24_105_4/


As for me, I agree with others, I'm not sure I'd be ready to trade my sharp, lightweight, weather-sealed 24-105L that I got for $600 for one of these. Especially as this would be an outdoor "walkaround" lens for me, which means size/weight/weather sealing is important. Nevermind that my filters are all 77mm size, which enables me to use them on both my 24-105L and 17-40L.

While I hope it's a good lens, I guess I just see bigger opportunities for Sigma to take a bite out of Canon's lens sales. Good news is that all indications are that they plan to do just that in the coming year.

An interesting proposition for me on Nikon, depending on price point. The 82mm filter is almost devastating, though. Sigh.

I cant see sigma being profitable with these. The 24-105L is dirt cheap as is, and highly doubt sigma can match the AF speed. It can beat the optics for sure, but there's a certain price for brand name items, and if it's less than third party, it will be very hard to sell.

The price drops (via discounts) are a beautiful effect of Sigma kicking Canon lenses' ass.

This is Canon's way of saying, we still think our lenses are the best, so no change in the list price, but here's a discount.

Ah beautiful beautiful competition.

Charlie wrote in post #16370016
I cant see sigma being profitable with these. The 24-105L is dirt cheap as is, and highly doubt sigma can match the AF speed. It can beat the optics for sure, but there's a certain price for brand name items, and if it's less than third party, it will be very hard to sell.

The 24-105L only works on Canon cameras.

The Nikon 24-120 VR isn't much of a lens...

brettjrob wrote in post #16370008
The 82mm filter is almost devastating, though. Sigh.

It's probably a sign that they took vignetting seriously, though.

My 15-85 (24mm equivalent) only has a 72mm filter and it vignettes like mad.

Here is the MTF chart for the Sigma 24-105. Based on this MTF chart alone, it certainly doesn't look like the Sigma will be really be all that amazing, esp. at 24mm.

996gt2 wrote in post #16370087
Here is the MTF chart for the Sigma 24-105. Based on this MTF chart alone, it certainly doesn't look like the Sigma will be really be all that amazing, esp. at 24mm.

[GIFS ARE NOT RENDERED IN QUOTES]

vs. the MTF for the Canon 24-105L:

[GIFS ARE NOT RENDERED IN QUOTES]

[GIFS ARE NOT RENDERED IN QUOTES]

It also looks like this lens uses 2 extending tubes for zooming, whereas most pro-grade lenses use just 1 for better durability:

So maybe not as amazing as it initially seemed

You cannot compare MTF charts between different companies. It just doens't work like that.

See the Sigma 35 vs Canon 35 and you will see they should be similiar but the Sigma spanks it (in IQ) but you can see they both show basically the same.

Sigma 35