Sigma Art lenses - whats all the fuss about..?

S

stevewestern

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,472
Edit My Images
Yes
For a long time I have not been looking at what's out there, but a recent new camera has got me paying a little more attention and I keep on seeing the Sigma Art lenses being highly thought of.

So, what is it that makes them so special ?
 
They are very sharp, and significantly undercut the Canon/Nikon 1.4 offerings despite being on a par, quality wise

What's not to like? :)
 
Yeah I had the 35mm Art and bought it used for a wedding as it was so much cheaper than the Nikon alternative. Got some cracking images from it. Sold it after the wedding and regret doing so as it's a great landscape lens too.
 
They are not always cheaper than the Canon / Nikon equivalent. E. G. Sigma 50mm f1.4 is more expensive than the Canon 50mm f1.4. However the 50mm is deemed to be almost as good as the zeiss 50mm which is much more expensive. Ie the lenses are brilliant quality
 
mike_6480 said:
They are not always cheaper than the Canon / Nikon equivalent. E. G. Sigma 50mm f1.4 is more expensive than the Canon 50mm f1.4. However the 50mm is deemed to be almost as good as the zeiss 50mm which is much more expensive. Ie the lenses are brilliant quality
Click to expand...
True, it was the Canon 1.2 I was thinking of!
 
I have the 35mm 1.4 and it's pin sharp wide open but there is a "look" the lens gives wide open that I can't quite put my finger on but it's super fantastic !!!
 
I think the fuss is because 3rd party lenses, with the odd exception, have always been second best to OEM lenses.. the new ART series looks like that's now changed and with the big price difference against many of the OEN competitors they look really excellent value. Great to see, about time!

Simon
 
mike_6480 said:
They are not always cheaper than the Canon / Nikon equivalent. E. G. Sigma 50mm f1.4 is more expensive than the Canon 50mm f1.4. However the 50mm is deemed to be almost as good as the zeiss 50mm which is much more expensive. Ie the lenses are brilliant quality
Click to expand...
A terrible comparison the Canon 50mm f1.4 is prehistoric and in comparison to the sigma is totally rubbish it is pretty much unusable wide open as it looses so much contrast while the sigma is tack sharp from wide open and arguably the best AF 50mm made to date! Talking about comparing apples and oranges!

Back on topic the fuss is about incredibly sharp very fast primes that would have been unthinkable for sigma a couple of years ago, there are also two interesting zoom the EF-S 18-35mm f1.8 and the EF 24-35mm f2 the fastest ever zoom lenses for crop and full frame respectively! there are also some much more ordinary lenses like the 24-105mm f4 which I no better than the ancient Canon equivalent.

Sigma have come a long long way in a couple of years and it is going to be interesting to see the OEM response starting with the imminent Canon 35mm f1.4 L II.
 
What's the AF like though? All the Sigma lenses I've owned have had very ropey AF - slow to focus and woefully inaccurate compared to the Nikon equivalents.
 
The23rdman said:
What's the AF like though? All the Sigma lenses I've owned have had very ropey AF - slow to focus and woefully inaccurate compared to the Nikon equivalents.
Click to expand...

Fast, silent and accurate wide open ime. I have the 24 / 35 and 50 ARTs, the Sigma 85 was also very good.
 
twist said:
Fast, silent and accurate wide open ime. I have the 24 / 35 and 50 ARTs, the Sigma 85 was also very good.
Click to expand...
Cheers. I may have to go and try one or two.
 
a1ex2001 said:
A terrible comparison the Canon 50mm f1.4 is prehistoric and in comparison to the sigma is totally rubbish it is pretty much unusable wide open as it looses so much contrast while the sigma is tack sharp from wide open and arguably the best AF 50mm made to date! Talking about comparing apples and oranges!
Click to expand...

Love it when people either don't read the whole thread or take things out of context...

I was mearly responding to another post, that the sigma lenses are necessarily cheaper and the poster has already confirmed that they were thinking of the Canon f1.2 not the f1.4.

You also seem to have missed my comment on the quality of the sigma 50mm and that it is rated almost as highly as the much more expensive zeiss lens.

Anyway I point was that the sigma art series are one of the first set of 3rd party lens that are not just being marketed as cheaper that 1st party lenses. They are actually getting a great reputation for the quality of the lens even against 1st party lenses
 
a1ex2001 said:
A terrible comparison the Canon 50mm f1.4 is prehistoric and in comparison to the sigma is totally rubbish it is pretty much unusable wide open as it looses so much contrast while the sigma is tack sharp from wide open and arguably the best AF 50mm made to date! Talking about comparing apples and oranges!
Click to expand...

Love it when people either don't read the whole thread or take things out of context...

I was mearly responding to another post, that the sigma lenses aren't necessarily cheaper that 1st party lenses and the poster has already confirmed that they were thinking of the Canon f1.2 not the f1.4.

You also seem to have missed my comment on the quality of the sigma 50mm and that it is rated almost as highly as the much more expensive zeiss lens.

Anyway I point was that the sigma art series are one of the first set of 3rd party lens that are not just being marketed as cheaper that 1st party lenses. They are actually getting a great reputation for the quality of the lens even against 1st party lenses
 
mike_6480 said:
Anyway I point was that the sigma art series are one of the first set of 3rd party lens that are not just being marketed as cheaper that 1st party lenses. They are actually getting a great reputation for the quality of the lens even against 1st party lenses
Click to expand...

I think that this has been building for some time. Even before that Art's there were very well regarded Sigma lenses. I had their old 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 and both were/are very good as was the 150mm f2.8 and 12-24mm I had. Sigma has been ramping up the quality for quite a few years.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
1:1 24mm @ 1.4, straight from RAW no PP, no flash, lo res screengrab from LR preview

Click to expand...
Yeah, I know that they're sharp. It's accurate they have to be to interest me. :)
 
Sigma lenses have a fantastic output, It's just they're rather heavy for a prime (somewhere in the region of a 24-70 F2.8 weight). It's the only reason i sold mine to the chap above! :-)
 
rich_ said:
Sigma lenses have a fantastic output, It's just they're rather heavy for a prime (somewhere in the region of a 24-70 F2.8 weight). It's the only reason i sold mine to the chap above! :)
Click to expand...

The 24 and 35 aren't to bad tbh, the 50 is on the heavier side.
 
stumac said:
I have the 35mm 1.4 and it's pin sharp wide open but there is a "look" the lens gives wide open that I can't quite put my finger on but it's super fantastic !!!
Click to expand...

Totally agree. It's an awesome lens. Would love to try the 50 and 24 aswell.

My 35mm ART is also very fast to focus. It's as sharp as anything else I own, including the macro's.
 
I must admit I love my 35 and 50. I've not used the Nikon 35 1.4 but the 50 is much sharper lens than the Nikon equivalent. I'm just hoping now they will introduce an 85.
 
When I had the Sigma 50 and 85mm f1.4's I couldn't imagine wanting better lenses. I can see how both could be sharper at their widest apertures and the CA, vignetting and other optical nasties could no doubt be improved too with more modern materials and coatings but these subtle little improvements come with a few other updates... cost, bulk and weight.

Overall I'd settle for merely very good rather than SOTA if accepting slightly less optical and even build quality means less bulk and weight and paying less. I'm pretty sure that some of the optical improvments we get with updated kit will never be noticed by real people... only us geeks will notice or care.
 
The 35mm is my current most used lens. And yes the AF is up there with my Canon USMs.

And should the AF need adjusting? There's the dock which makes even the best software tweaks look like a bodge.
 
they needed to go high end to stay in japan instead of going to china, and with the foveon sensors, you need great optics
the new dp0 gets sharper if you stop down, but only by a 400th or something insane, its near perfect wide open :o
 
Out of all the lenses I've ever owned the Sigma 35mm 1.4 is without a doubt my favourite ever. And my most missed.

I currently have a Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 but part of me is seriously contemplating getting rid of them both in favour of a sigma 35, 85 combo (with a Nikon 24 mm 2.8 thrown in for good measure). I'm trying to do more weddings so primes wouldn't necessarily make that easier but the images those Sigmas can produce are something special.
 
Well, thanks for all the replies.
I have never really used primes, despite owning a few over the years, as I need to be able to zoom in or out, and usually the leg option is not feasible.
However, the idea of trying again, with something fast, is appealing. I am struggling to choose between either the 35, 50 or 85mm and there is a 50 up in the for sale section...

I sort of feel that the 35 has to be the one to try though the 85 length is more in my usual territory.....

Hmmm...
 
Last edited:
stevewestern said:
Well, thanks for all the replies.
I have never really used primes, despite owning a few over the years as I need to be able to zoom in or out, and usually the leg option is not feasible.
However, the idea of trying again, with something fast, is appealing. I am struggling to choose between either the 35, 50 or 85mm and there is a 50 up in the for sale section...

I sort of feel that the 35 has to be the one to try though the 85 length is more in my usual territory.....

Hmmm...
Click to expand...

The 35 is more 'useful' because IMO its more of a do it all.
 
guess a silly question after reading the posts but you would recommend the Sigma over the 35mm canon F2 IS?
 
Carlo said:
I really don't know why Canon have just released a Mk II 35mm 1.4L at THREE!!! times the price of the ART!! :thinking:
Who's going to buy it over the Sigma?
Click to expand...

The same people that think the Nikkor is so much better than the ART. Branding goes a long way for some.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top