Sigma 24-70 2.8 OS Art Initial Impressions

(all opinions based on 2.8 only)
Corners soft, lots of hard vignetting in corners.
AF speed is actually VERY fast almost right there with the mk2
distortion is high imho
OS seems non existent although me sitting controlled I get about 2.5-3 stops during images but viewfinder/video doesn't show much if any affect maybe 1-2 stops
weight for the size of it it's pretty heavy. I mean the 85A is heavier by 4oz but the size of the 85A is huge so it just "feels" lighter
balance is ok on 5D4... slightly front heavy, I prefer the mk2 balance as it's just right
focusing is dead silent and super smooth... doesn't even get picked up on the internal mic which is amazing
center sharpness is outstanding and matches the mk2 but the sharpness falls off quick and extreme corners are ugly
found a bad piece of lint in a brand new lens right in the center of the element inside... no likey
lens weighs 36.08oz w/ no caps and 37.38oz w/ hood on no caps
gasket is nice like any other L gasket on the rear
size is around same as the Tamron VC model
build is very nice... zoom ring is very smooth yet firm just right
ghosting if focus is missed slightly... under brighter conditions at 70mm 2.8
ZERO options in dock menu to adjust OS!!! None... none existent
bokeh and colors are typical ART... very good.


Mind you I had owned two copies of the Tamron VC version and used that lens for 3 years... the VC on that lens is way better already and the new G2 is suppose to have a VC upgrade to 5 stops. Honestly the sharpness I can't really judge well... I've been spoiled with really good primes and I'm use to prime corners. The Mk2 appears to have strong sharpness falloff on the TDP test charts so I bet anything it's probably pretty close. AF is really fast I'm impressed... much faster than the Tamron.. this thing snaps right to it but I still think the mk2 has the edge. I bought this lens to have a main video lens/vacation lens. I demand GOOD OS/IS/VC. I'm 85% sure I'm sending this back and getting the Tamron G2 lens for this need.

This was with about 1.5hours of messing around w/ the lens and 138 images taken.

EDIT: Just wanted to add my comment from my post below... you guys KNOW I am a Sigma fanboy so for me to post this is 100% unbiased facts by me... Unless Sigma comes out with OS adjustments via dock to lock it better I'll pass.

it's a shame to hear about the performance. I may keep the mk ii if I dont get top dollar on it, the sony 24-70 f2.8 is ridiculously expensive, even on the used market. I can see how the Sigma A primes can set new standards, the 135 is ridiculous

It's a shame there is no zoom lock... even canon added this. It's boxed up already. There is my impression...

I'm not sure if it's my hatred toward zooms or what but at the price level it is I expected better OS. I mean... it's really not that good. I'd rather save the $100 and have much better VC option.

You guys all know my love toward sigma arts too... You guys KNOW I'm partial.... but I just cannot keep this lens because I bought it for video use and this lens is not for it (handheld w/ OS).

Here is the distortions:

That's terrible!

Thanks for the impressions. I'll stick to my 24-105 STM a bit longer. Can't beat it for $300!

Bassat wrote in post #18395842
Thanks for the impressions. I'll stick to my 24-105 STM a bit longer. Can't beat it for $300!

Yup... Good lens for video being silent. I never had any issues w/ the IQ from the tamron VC so I will be patient and wait for a good combo buy that will include the snap in and buy when its sub 1100 new.

For this sort of impression and (probable) length of ownership I'd have just used the other thread.

I had the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC. Completely unimpressed by it.

Bassat wrote in post #18395852
I had the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC. Completely unimpressed by it.

which part... IQ I thought it was pretty good. AF was always accurate and silent but slow. VC worked great.

LonelyBoy wrote in post #18395848
For this sort of impression and (probable) length of ownership I'd have just used the other thread.

I'd rather punch you in the face w/ the impressions on the first post of the thread for newcomers.

Talley wrote in post #18395859
which part... IQ I thought it was pretty good. AF was always accurate and silent but slow. VC worked great.

Generally unimpressed. IQ was quite good. Focus was along the lines of the 50II, changed in every different type of light (lens was used, maybe that is why it was sold, or defective). Too big, too heavy, too slow. Zooms (to me) are for convenience. I prefer my 24-105 STM for zooming. If I need aperture, I'll mount a prime. I don't get the fascination with f/2.8 zooms. That's my thing, though.

Bassat wrote in post #18395876
Generally unimpressed. IQ was quite good. Focus was along the lines of the 50II, changed in every different type of light (lens was used, maybe that is why it was sold, or defective). Too big, too heavy, too slow. Zooms (to me) are for convenience. I prefer my 24-105 STM for zooming. If I need aperture, I'll mount a prime. I don't get the fascination with f/2.8 zooms. That's my thing, though.

I keep wanting to disagree with you but I think your right. For my needs the video option would be the STM version and I've actually come across that lens for 250-300 multiple times. Just 5.6 eek...

I had some expectations on this lens to replace my 24-105 v1. It seems we are left with the $$ of the 24-70 ii for a jump in IQ other than marginal ☹️

After further testing this morning I've concluded the OS in this lens just simply doesn't work. Looking through viewfinder or video switching it on or off makes no difference. Yes you hear it engage when you flip the switch on but it makes no difference at all

none.

Talley wrote in post #18395860
I'd rather punch you in the face w/ the impressions on the first post of the thread for newcomers.

Fair point. Be interesting to see if you just got one with a bad OS mechanism (which isn't really an excuse at this price point, not to the degree you're describing) or if Sigma actually things this is acceptable. Which seems out of line for them.