Sigma 24-70 2.8 OS Art Initial Impressions

umphotography wrote in post #18404784
Not sure WHY OS is such a big deal to everyone at this focal point. Set the minimum shutter at 1/160 in your camera and use ISO. The sensors are so clean now that its a non starter point for anyone with a newer body camera. I have read the initial reports. I would not touch this 24-70 art......glad I got the L while it was on sale.

I liked this idea...I think I got it from you originally. I set mine to 1/125-1/60 or even 1/30 with good results, depending on the lighting/subject.

But I'm still a big fan of IS. Heck, I love it on my 35mm f2.0 prime!

umphotography wrote in post #18404784
Not sure WHY OS is such a big deal to everyone at this focal point. Set the minimum shutter at 1/160 in your camera and use ISO. The sensors are so clean now that its a non starter point for anyone with a newer body camera. I have read the initial reports. I would not touch this 24-70 art......glad I got the L while it was on sale.

VIDEO WORK


if you can get away without a gimbal, the focal length is great for video. Unlike photography, video needs are slightly different, and not having to crop in post and stabilize in post is why zooms are super nice in video compared to primes.

umphotography wrote in post #18404784
Not sure WHY OS is such a big deal to everyone at this focal point. Set the minimum shutter at 1/160 in your camera and use ISO. The sensors are so clean now that its a non starter point for anyone with a newer body camera. I have read the initial reports. I would not touch this 24-70 art......glad I got the L while it was on sale.

It helps during video. While not perfect combine in lens OS with the additon of a gimbal and you get amazing smooth video.

But I just wanted OS for the hand held video on vacation with a lens that is optically better than the 24-105 and does 2.8 as a compromise to carrying multiple primes.

Ask yourself why is the 16-25 F4 IS so popular? Well on vacation you can take 1/2 second handheld shots. Is it a replacement for a tripod?... NO... but it serves a useful purpose.

Charlie wrote in post #18404811
VIDEO WORK

if you can get away without a gimbal, the focal length is great for video. Unlike photography, video needs are slightly different, and not having to crop in post and stabilize in post is why zooms are super nice in video compared to primes.

I like to record the birthday cake moment. Sitting there holding the camera after taking photos and trying to hold it still for video the IS/VC/OS makes a huge difference on that moments bouncing around. My wife is worse since she doesn't have steady hands... her 18-135 video looks really really good. Prime... eh bounces around alot.

Talley wrote in post #18404849
I like to record the birthday cake moment. Sitting there holding the camera after taking photos and trying to hold it still for video the IS/VC/OS makes a huge difference on that moments bouncing around. My wife is worse since she doesn't have steady hands... her 18-135 video looks really really good. Prime... eh bounces around alot.

indeed, had a birthday cake moment not too long ago, captured the singing and back to photography after, ibis does simplify things (shooting with primes)

downside is that 24-70 f2.8's are massive regardless of brand

can I get away with shooting primes? probably yes, I have some very nice video from primes, wont deny it, but I also have nice video from a slower 24-240, but that doesnt work particularly well in low light.

spending 2K for a 2.8 zoom? that's pretty insane, very tough to warm up to that idea.

Charlie wrote in post #18404876
indeed, had a birthday cake moment not too long ago, captured the singing and back to photography after, ibis does simplify things (shooting with primes)

downside is that 24-70 f2.8's are massive regardless of brand

can I get away with shooting primes? probably yes, I have some very nice video from primes, wont deny it, but I also have nice video from a slower 24-240, but that doesnt work particularly well in low light.

spending 2K for a 2.8 zoom? that's pretty insane, very tough to warm up to that idea.

Ya the video of the 18-135 on the fuji does NOT work well indoors or low light.

I find the 24-70II is not heavy and massive. It's only like 28.5oz which is rather decent comparatively.

The OS on this lens to me is top notch better than the Tamron 24-70 VC. Auto focusing also better.

umphotography wrote in post #18404784
Not sure WHY OS is such a big deal to everyone at this focal point. Set the minimum shutter at 1/160 in your camera and use ISO. The sensors are so clean now that its a non starter point for anyone with a newer body camera. I have read the initial reports. I would not touch this 24-70 art......glad I got the L while it was on sale.

Though high-ISO noise is reducing, it's still there and you still lose dynamic range as you increase ISO. There's no free lunch and there never will be. Actually, with the current generation of cameras, the reduction in dynamic range is a bigger downside than the increase in noise. It's always sad how much of a contrast problem there is, on ALL sensors at (just randomly picking an example) ISO 1600 vs ISO 100.

So VR/OS/VC/IS helps you preserve dynamic range, which is a very big deal.

cseybert wrote in post #18404914
The OS on this lens to me is top notch better than the Tamron 24-70 VC. Auto focusing also better.

What specifically is "this lens", the Sigma 24-70 Art that the OP found fault with?

John from PA wrote in post #18405093
What specifically is "this lens", the Sigma 24-70 Art that the OP found fault with?

He has a 24-70OS too...I believe a rental
From lensrentals.com

umphotography wrote in post #18404784
Not sure WHY OS is such a big deal to everyone at this focal point. Set the minimum shutter at 1/160 in your camera and use ISO. The sensors are so clean now that its a non starter point for anyone with a newer body camera. I have read the initial reports. I would not touch this 24-70 art......glad I got the L while it was on sale.

Yeah, I wanted IS for my 70-200. But for 24-70? Maybe if I was doing panning at close range, but I'm nowhere near that steady. Those shots are in bright light and SS is usually over 1/200. Plenty sharp.

fplstudio wrote in post #18404554
Initial impressions suggest that this lens is overall disappointing.

Looking at the Art series for primes, 14, 20, 24, 35, 85, 135 are matching or outmatching the respective top Canikons.

This 24-70 should have been tagged "Contemporary" and be sold at a lower price similar to the 100-400 C approach. Or most would have preferred a stabilized 24-70 outmatching the IQ of the Canon ii even if sold at nearly the same price. This lens seems neither here nor there.

It seems the "Art" zooms have still a long way to go.

Bah, I don't agree with that. I don't think it's reasonable for the lens to be sold cheaper just because of an Art vs Contemporary label, it's about design and the suchlike. Inversely, it's pointless for Sigma to match Canon on IQ and only marginally surpass it with OS and match the price. I don't think that this approach is workable. So far Sigma's Global Vision have largely all delivered very superior optics to the Canon equivalent at a lower price.

Most of the Art zooms, to my knowledge, don't have equivalents, with the 24-105A (which I own) being the only exception. It is also an exception that it was a bit more expensive than the Canon equivalent (the 24-105 mkI), but likely mostly only because the model was becoming quite long in the tooth at the time the 24-105A came out and had been used by Canon as a kit lens for quite some time, so the market was flooded with them. (Now, the mkII and the Sigma are pretty much matched in pricing and weight, not sure about the IQ of the mkII, but the Sigma's is certainly top notch.)

Apricane wrote in post #18407087
Bah, I don't agree with that. I don't think it's reasonable for the lens to be sold cheaper just because of an Art vs Contemporary label, it's about design and the suchlike.

It is all about expectations and cheating customers. When you set a high standard with an "Art" branding - as Sigma certainly did - you are setting expectations. When you are exploiting customer expectations to get more money for a mediocre lens with an undeserved "Art" label you are simply screwing up people and destroying all the great work good Sigma engineers have been doing for years.

Always blame the marketing monkeys. The world would (will) be a better place without them.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18407127
It is all about expectations and cheating customers. When you set a high standard with an "Art" branding - as Sigma certainly did - you are setting expectations. When you are exploiting customer expectations to get more money for a mediocre lens with an undeserved "Art" label you are simply screwing up people and destroying all the great work good Sigma engineers have been doing for years.

Always blame the marketing monkeys. The world would (will) be a better place without them.

the art label is really just a category...it includes prime lenses, ultra wide angle lenses, wide angle lenses, lenses with fast apertures, macro lenses...their previous releases have been what has set the expectations...but the art label really isn't the reason the previous lenses have been good...most all of sigma's lens introduced since the global vision announcement have been good...some are just labeled sport, or contemporary...

All,

The lens is a GOOD lens. It has really stellar optics for center... The corners are eh wide open but clean up nicely. The distortion is a tad heavy but can be corrected in camera easily. Honestly I think the distortion matches the mk2 closely.

Build is great, it's heavier than the other options though. My OS def was not working like it should after talking to other people who have used the lens now. I sent it back for that reason.

I'll probably see what the G2 can do on the AF/VC department because I was ok with those optics and the optics has remained unchanged. I know I won't like the optics after being a prime guy for so long and I'm sure the Art beats it but something I gotta get use to for the compromise.