Super Duper Sigma

...And speaking of Sigma, as we were in the last post, the lensmaker has just introduced the latest in its lineup of full-frame statement "Art" lenses. The 24mm ƒ/1.4 DG HSM Art lens will soon be joining the existing 50mm ƒ/1.4 DG HSM Art for Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Sony, and the 35mm ƒ/1.4 DG HSM Art, which is available in Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Sony, and Pentax mounts.

The flagship Art series lenses have been popular among photographers who want less expensive alternatives to the major brands' own premium lenses without sacrificing state-of-the-art performance.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Jim Richardson: "You really to have to commend Sigma for these lenses. I got the 35mm ƒ/1.4 last year for an assignment and it replaced my OEM lens after a couple of weeks comparison. Has a larger critically sharp area wide open and one stop down. I also tested it against the Zeiss, which is a nice lens, but a little less sharp than the Sigma. I also found the Zeiss very difficult to get in critical focus in any type of real world field work. They both have very good bokeh."

[Our friend Jim is a National Geographic photographer. —Ed.]

MarkB: "Kazuto Yamaki is truly making Sigma his own company. Unlike his father's Sigma, the focus is quality over quantity, which is commendable, as it still keeps his staff in Aizu gainfully employed because we consumers want as many of their new designs as we can get!"

Larry Gephardt: "I've been using the 35mm Art and I bought it over the Nikon version for the image quality, not the price. Though the price is less for initial purchase I'm not sure about the long term. I've usually made money selling my used Nikon lenses (I try to buy when the rebates are in place and sell when they are not). I'm not sure what to expect if I were to sell the Sigma, but I suspect it won't hold its value like the genuine Nikons. But as I said, I bought it for the image quality. I simply like it more than the Nikon 35mm ƒ/1.4. I'm hoping the 24mm lives up to the 35mm's quality. If it does I may add one to the bag."

Comments

[Ray Hudson]

Those you mention are the full frame Arts?? Cause Amazon lists the 19 and the 60 as 'Art'.

Thx

Ray H.

[Dalton]

I have the 35mm version of this lens, I never take it off my D800. It's a fabulous lens. Take a look at my homepage for a recent example!

[Fazal Majid]

"The flagship Art series lenses have been popular among photographers who want less expensive alternatives to the major brands' own premium lenses without sacrificing state-of-the-art performance."

No. The flagship Art series of lenses have been popular among photographers fed up with the mediocrity of OEMs' allegedly premium lenses, and who don't have to lose autofocus as you do with Zeiss lenses. The reasonable prices are just icing on the cake.

[Patrick Dodds]

"No. The flagship Art series of lenses have been popular among photographers fed up with the mediocrity of OEMs' allegedly premium lenses, and who don't have to lose autofocus as you do with Zeiss lenses. The reasonable prices are just icing on the cake."

No. The flagship Art series of lenses have been popular among photographers who know that OEMs make very good lenses that cost a lot of money but who want better lenses for less money, and who don't have to lose autofocus as you do with Zeiss lenses.

[Joe Holmes]

After early experimentation, I've long had a policy of sticking with good, pro Nikon lenses. It's been a safe policy. But last fall I needed a better 50mm, and Nikon's new high-end 58mm didn't seem to be getting the reviews to justify the hefty price. So I tried Sigma's 50mm f/1.4 Art lens -- and it blew me away.

It's shockingly good wide open. At f/1.4 it's really sharp and has amazingly low chromatic aberration. Only the weight is an issue, at almost two pounds (including rear cap, hood, and lens cap), almost triple the weight of my Nikon 50mm f/1.4G, and almost as much as my heavy Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom.

So I've become a convert.

Now I want to check out this new Sigma 24mm, and I'm crossing my fingers that Sigma's working on an 85. (That one may depend on the quality of the bokeh, which is gorgeous on my Nikon 85.)

[Nigel Robinson]

I'm sure this will be a good lens for APS-C systems too.

[Carsten Bockermann]

The Sigma 35/1.4 is not only "a less expensive alternative". I compared it to my Nikon AF-S 35/1.4 and sold the latter. Technically it's also better than the Zeiss 35/1.4 (definitely more contrast wide open), but the Zeiss produces a certain look that I like.

[Thomas Paul Mc Cann]

Rats. It appears to be only Sony 'A' so won't suit my '7'

[Oskar Ojala]

I wonder how popular this lens will become as 24/1.4 is not the first focal length most people will consider. The competition is tough though, I conder the Zeiss 25/2 a sleeper since it doesn't get mentioned often, but the image quality is great. That lens really converted me to thinking that Zeiss really has a touch for balancing all the aspect of a lens.

I have the Sigma 35/1.4 Art for my Nikon and what I like about it is its dependability: it's sharp, focuses well, and doesn't have any obvious weaknesses. It's thus my go-to lens for all sorts of candid and event photography. However, I consider the rendering of it somewhat clinical and I only like 35 mm when I'm close to people, so for other subjects I don't use it so much (it's big and heavy too!) It gets a lot of raves on the net and I always think it's a competent tool that I use often, but I rarely get excited about it.