Review: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS Art by Lensrentals.com

[Canon Rumors]

<p>Zach at <a href="http://www.pntrs.com/t/TUJGRktHSkJGRk5HSklCRkpOSkVN?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lensrentals.com%2Frent%2Fphoto%2Fcanon">Lensrentals.com</a> has completed his review of the brand new Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS Art. Zach came away impressed with the lens, but maybe not impressed enough to buy one.</p>
<p>From the review:</p>
<blockquote><p>Much to my surprise, I fell in love when using this lens. However, that love I felt was for the focal range itself and not the lens. In short, 24-70mm is a fantastic focal length and makes for an exceptional all-around lens to use on the go. And by all accounts, Sigma does a good job showing off this focal length. However, Canon and Nikon both show it off better, and so when I’m looking for a 24-70mm lens to use as my next all around lens, I’m opting for the <a href="http://www.pntra.com/t/TUJGRktHSkJGRk5HSklCRkpOSkVN?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lensrentals.com%2Fblog%2F2017%2F07%2Flensrentals-com-review-the-new-sigma-24-70mm-f2-8-dg-os-hsm-art-series-lens%2F">Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II</a> over the<a href="http://www.pntra.com/t/TUJGRktHSkJGRk5HSklCRkpOSkVN?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lensrentals.com%2Fblog%2F2017%2F07%2Flensrentals-com-review-the-new-sigma-24-70mm-f2-8-dg-os-hsm-art-series-lens%2F"> Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Art Series</a>. <a href="http://www.pntra.com/t/TUJGRktHSkJGRk5HSklCRkpOSkVN?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lensrentals.com%2Fblog%2F2017%2F07%2Flensrentals-com-review-the-new-sigma-24-70mm-f2-8-dg-os-hsm-art-series-lens%2F">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p>I haven’t use the lens yet, but I look forward to doing so in the future.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I'm in the process of testing the lens myself, and I am seeing a lot of similar things to Zach. The lens actually has beautiful color rendition and very nice bokeh, but sharpness (surprisingly), isn't all that fabulous.

I'm very interested in putting the lens head to head with the Tamron G2 version.

 

[bsbeamer]

I have the Tamron G1 and was looking at this Sigma before the Tamron G2 was announced. Ultimately, I'd much rather have a Canon 24-70 F2.8 with IS/VC/OS, but been waiting for that for way too long...

 

[-1]

Seems to be softer on the top than the Canon but with OS. Are your hands steady?

Images linked from LensRentals.com . Sorry 'bout the scaling...

 

[aceflibble]

First up, holy hell does that writer abuse commas like there's no tomorrow. Somebody needs to get a copy editor, pronto.

Second, this is all about what you should expect. Third-party zooms with additional features (in this instance, IS) are almost always a touch softer than simpler first-party equivalents. As it is, you can look at this either as swapping a little image quality for IS when compared to the Canon f/2.8 version, or simply gaining a stop with no trade compared to the Canon f/4 IS.
In real-world use I've not noticed the end results being any worse with the Sigma; test targets and MTF charts don't tell you as much as simply using a lens does. That said, I've not spent a huge amount of time with it and as a prime user predominantly I am unlikely to buy one, but I'll happily keep renting one when required.

 

[SecureGSM]

Dustin,

Would you please pay attention to the CA levels as you evaluate the Sigma lens.
Zach found the lens CA free whilst I see aweful lot of CA in DPReview provided lens sample RAW files at 24mm end. LensTip also found CA levels of the lens to be out of control and worse than average.
please see images attached.

#1 image - carefully corrected for CA and jpg rendered RAW file.
#2 image - crop of the original RAW file, no CA correction was applied.

I'm in the process of testing the lens myself, and I am seeing a lot of similar things to Zach. The lens actually has beautiful color rendition and very nice bokeh, but sharpness (surprisingly), isn't all that fabulous.

I'm very interested in putting the lens head to head with the Tamron G2 version.

 

[hmatthes]

Cameras are replaced every few years but great glass is forever. I'm still using two Canon "L" lenses that are more than 20 years old. The others were replaced when better versions were worth it.
Ouch, my 24~70/2.8L-II was pricy but I don't need IS in these focal lengths AND it may be the best lens I've ever used. It is always attached to the camera in my hands.
Third party lenses are often very good and, in my mind, make sense for those rarely used focal lengths. For a main lens, those savings may be false economy.
24~70 is bread and butter... I sold a wonderful 24-105/4.0L IS to upgrade to the Canon 24-70/2.8L

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Cameras are replaced every few years but great glass is forever. I'm still using two Canon "L" lenses that are more than 20 years old. The others were replaced when better versions were worth it.
Ouch, my 24~70/2.8L-II was pricy but I don't need IS in these focal lengths AND it may be the best lens I've ever used. It is always attached to the camera in my hands.
Third party lenses are often very good and, in my mind, make sense for those rarely used focal lengths. For a main lens, those savings may be false economy.
24~70 is bread and butter... I sold a wonderful 24-105/4.0L IS to upgrade to the Canon 24-70/2.8L

Try using some of the 20 year old Sigma lenses. I had 5 of them, they became paperweights when Canon DSLR's came out. I hear that someone has hacked the chip in them 20 years too late, mine are long gone.

 

[Jopa]

Cameras are replaced every few years but great glass is forever.

So true!

Try using some of the 20 year old Sigma lenses. I had 5 of them, they became paperweights when Canon DSLR's came out.

You still can MF them, especially on a mirrorless body

 

[AJ]

Try using some of the 20 year old Sigma lenses. I had 5 of them, they became paperweights when Canon DSLR's came out.

You still can MF them, especially on a mirrorless body

Unlike Canon FD which doesn't even mount

 

[IglooEater]

Try using some of the 20 year old Sigma lenses. I had 5 of them, they became paperweights when Canon DSLR's came out.

You still can MF them, especially on a mirrorless body

Unlike Canon FD which doesn't even mount

They will mount on a mirrorless. (With the correct adaptor) Canon at the time of the switch produced an FD to ef adaptor with the optical conversion built in. Apparently there is not enough demand to warrant that any more... Wonder why- it's not as if optics have progressed any in the last 40 years. :