24mm or 28mm Sigma lens for Lumix S5 - landscapes

fuji_phil_e · Aug 9, 2023

Good day to you all. I am now running a Lumix S5 alongside my Fuji system. My rationale for having both is that I wanted something a bit more malleable file wise than the Fuji system for landscape. I also wanted to have a less convoluted processing flow than Fuji RAFs can sometimes put on me, not to mention fighting off 'worms'. Anyway, that's all subjective stuff: right now I'm trying to choose my workhorse landscape lens. I have the 20-60mm already but do enjoy the prime experience. I'm not looking to get into what constitutes a decent focal length for landscape (the answer to that is simply all focal lengths, depending how they're used). I have 60mm reach with my zoom for tighter work as well as 20mm at the UWA end should I wish it, and can still fall back on some nice adapted/vintage lenses on both Fuji and Lumix with the adapters I have if I want to do something different. This post is about the offerings from Sigma that sit in the 24mm to 28mm bracket. I've ruled out the Panasonic 24mm f1.8 straight off as I expect it is going to be a little pricier. I am looking to buy one of the following as borrowed from Panasonic's compatibility list (green marked):

The first 24mm f1.4 is an Art lens but designed for DSLR. I can get my hands on this quite easily and for a reasonable price. It's going to be big, but I don't care overly about that. It has a great rep.

Second 24mm f1.4 is again an Art lens but designed for mirrorless. I expect this might be stepping outside of my price range. It is supposed to be very good.

Third is the 24mm f2, part of the I-series. Seems to be a good performer according to reviews. I'd be buying new but at a quite reasonable price. I love aperture rings and the build looks very impressive. A little more compact is nice, though again I'm not too hung up on size. A very handsome lens.

Fourth is the 24mm f3.5, again an I-series lens. Dinky, attractive, decent IQ. Whilst I'm more about landscape, I might miss the brighter apertures others have.

Finally the 28mm f1.4 Art, DSLR build. I have read good things about this lens. I'm happy that 28mm can be used without the worry of pronounced distortion, and I'm also happy to do panos to make up for the lack of width. I can source this at a reasonable price. Pretty interested in this to be fair.

...

24mm or 28mm are both good for me. I have most recently used a 16mm on the crop sensor on my Fuji X-T3, so 24mm FF is familiar. However, I do find that even for general hill walking and environmental portraits-cum-landscapes, my hiking pals can get lost in the image a bit, or else distorted elsewhere if I bring them closer. That could be more my positioning of subjects, but it is a bit of a nuisance at times. I have used a 21mm on the crop sensor and quite enjoyed it. However it strayed into not wide enough at times. 28mm on FF might actually be the sweet spot for my preferences. I have looked a lot on Flickr and Insta to see how these lenses are used. The 28mm especially tends to be used more for street that i can see, so I'm not getting quite the feedback I need. But my hunch is 28mm will work for me. But I like how the 24mm f2 I-series (Contemporary of course) looks and it does perform well from what I have read. And the 24mm f1.4 Art (not the dedicated mirrorless version) might do a bit more again than the f2. It's becoming clear that I am choosing between 1, 3 and 5 in the list, but would like some feedback for usage in landscape photography if anyone has that experience. Any images would be greatly appreciated too. Final word - I have a zoom already so would not consider another. Thank you.

Jonathan Mac · Aug 9, 2023

I currently have both I-series 24mm lenses, though the f/3.5 has been sold and I need to ship it off in the next couple of days. I've done some quick comparisons here:

Loading…

l-mount-forum.com

In summary, in terms of sharpness, colour, contrast, rendering and aberrations they're both very similar, which is to say superb. The build of the I-series lenses is fantastic, the aperture ring is very nice to use and manual focus is silky smooth. Reasons to buy the slower lens are small size, close-focusing and price (to a small extent). Reasons to buy the faster lens are the extra speed which allows for shallow DoF and low light shots the other lens simply isn't capable of and the ability to access the aperture ring easily even when the hood is reversed.

Sigma have periodical price reductions on their lenses which can vary by geography but here in Europe the discounts for the I-series lenses (€80 per lens) just finished but they had them last summer too, so you might need to wait a year for them to come around again. Discounts on the Art lenses might come along sooner and you might want to have the weather sealing that the I-series lenses lack.

As I've said, I've sold the f/3.5 and am keeping the f/2 because the speed is more useful to me than the size, close focusing and lack of focus breathing. They are both superb lenses though.

fuji_phil_e · Aug 9, 2023

Some samples of what I tend towards:

Actually shot with 35mm on Fuji, so 50-ish.

12mm on Fuji, so 18mm FF

12mm again I expect

I have lots of shots with 28mm, 135mm and 400mm on crop, also with a 55mm macro on crop. I tend towards longer focal lengths or wide according to what I'm seeing, but I want to do some 'classic focal length' landscape work. 28mm FF might be better for me than 24mm though, from what I'm seeing here. Again, the 20-60mm allows some extra flex, as does the Fuji system and the lenses I can share between the two systems.

fuji_phil_e · Aug 9, 2023

Jonathan Mac said:
I currently have both I-series 24mm lenses, though the f/3.5 has been sold and I need to ship it off in the next couple of days. I've done some quick comparisons here:

https://l-mount-forum.com/community...d-24mm-f-2-dg-dn-contemporary-comparison.283/

In summary, in terms of sharpness, colour, contrast, rendering and aberrations they're both very similar, which is to say superb. The build of the I-series lenses is fantastic, the aperture ring is very nice to use and manual focus is silky smooth. Reasons to buy the slower lens are small size, close-focusing and price (to a small extent). Reasons to buy the faster lens are the extra speed which allows for shallow DoF and low light shots the other lens simply isn't capable of and the ability to access the aperture ring easily even when the hood is reversed.

Sigma have periodical price reductions on their lenses which can vary by geography but here in Europe the discounts for the I-series lenses (€80 per lens) just finished but they had them last summer too, so you might need to wait a year for them to come around again. Discounts on the Art lenses might come along sooner and you might want to have the weather sealing that the I-series lenses lack.

As I've said, I've sold the f/3.5 and am keeping the f/2 because the speed is more useful to me than the size, close focusing and lack of focus breathing. They are both superb lenses though.

Thanks Jonathan - I just read your post on the other forum. You're right about the Sigma cashback. I nearly bought the 24mm f2 on 31 July due to the savings, but held off to prove it's not just GAS I'm suffering. I've done some extra legwork in the reviews department since then, trying to get a feel for which is the best fit for me. Of course, I would like sharpness across the frame at f5. 6 through f11 or so. That's my main priority in this, but I expect that's obvious as I'm after a lens for landscapes! I do like the look of these i-series lenses though. Fact is, I don't think I could go wrong with any of the 24mm f1.4 Art (DSLR build), 24mm f2 contemporary, or 28mm f1.4 Art (DSLR build).

Jonathan Mac · Aug 9, 2023

I don't think image quality with any of these will be a problem (though of course you need to test to make sure you get a good copy, as always), it's just a question of whether or not you want to pay more for speed or in some cases a bit less and get saddled with a larger lens than is necessary on mirrorless.

I would recommend either of these but I think you need to decide if you want f/1.4 and/or weather sealing and that the size and weight are not so much that you end up not using it.

As for focal length, there has been discussion of late of the lack of 28mm options. I think that one or more will appear eventually but there's no way to say when that might happen as 24mm is the default general-use wide-angle these days with 28mm being "out of fashion". You could always try a vintage 28mm to see if you like the field of view - there are plenty of good ones available and manual focus on mirrorless is far better than on a DSLR.

fuji_phil_e · Aug 9, 2023

Jonathan Mac said:
I don't think image quality with any of these will be a problem (though of course you need to test to make sure you get a good copy, as always), it's just a question of whether or not you want to pay more for speed or in some cases a bit less and get saddled with a larger lens than is necessary on mirrorless.

I would recommend either of these but I think you need to decide if you want f/1.4 and/or weather sealing and that the size and weight are not so much that you end up not using it.

As for focal length, there has been discussion of late of the lack of 28mm options. I think that one or more will appear eventually but there's no way to say when that might happen as 24mm is the default general-use wide-angle these days with 28mm being "out of fashion". You could always try a vintage 28mm to see if you like the field of view - there are plenty of good ones available and manual focus on mirrorless is far better than on a DSLR.

I've seen the rumblings about a 28mm. Quite interesting reading to be fair. About 28mm being out of fashion, that acts as a challenge to me. I like the underdog. I'm a Fuji and Lumix shooter, so have form. 28mm being overlooked makes me fancy it that little bit more! I did have a Pentax 28mm f3.5 for a bit, but I'm not sure it made sense on the crop so I sold it. Mr Reeve(s) website is a great help for lenses of that kind for adapting.

The good thing in all this is that if I don't like whatever lens I plump for I can sell it on and recoup most of what I paid out. I treat these forays as extended rentals

.

georgehudetz · Aug 9, 2023

I have the Sigma 28mm. F1.4 in L-mount; it's a top-notch lens from an IQ standpoint, and has a wonderful mechanical manual focus ring that is much nicer to use than the modern, digital MF mechanisms.

That said, It's HUGE and heavy. I primarily bought it to use with astro, for which it works wonderfully. But I almost never reach for it for landscape - which is my primary genre - because of it's weight. I simply do not want that much weight in my pack for a single focal length. And I have a reasonably high tolerance for weight - use an S1R, normally have a tele with me, etc.

So I'd suggest one of the smaller 24mm DG DN lenses. Looking at Jonathan's comparison, the F3.5 lens would be tempting for me, based on it's closer minimum focusing distance.

Or, if you like longer - as you said above - perhaps Sigma's 35mm F2 DG DN lens.

Of course, if you also want to do astro, and/or really want the speed, then one of the F1.4 lenses would deliver. I do seem to recall that the older 24mm F1.4 DG OSM lens was not one of Sigma's best lenses - the new 24 F1.4 is supposed to be much better.

BTW, Lenstip has excellent & detailed reviews of the various Sigma lenses, albeit on a Sony body.

FWIW, I also came from Fuji. The S5 files are indeed very malleable.

--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
Capture One LUMIX FF feature request thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4658107#forum-post-66298057

2ndact scene1 · Aug 9, 2023

georgehudetz said:
georgehudetz wrote:

I have the Sigma 28mm. F1.4 in L-mount; it's a top-notch lens from an IQ standpoint, and has a wonderful mechanical manual focus ring that is much nicer to use than the modern, digital MF mechanisms.

That said, It's HUGE and heavy. I primarily bought it to use with astro, for which it works wonderfully. But I almost never reach for it for landscape - which is my primary genre - because of it's weight. I simply do not want that much weight in my pack for a single focal length. And I have a reasonably high tolerance for weight - use an S1R, normally have a tele with me, etc.

So I'd suggest one of the smaller 24mm DG DN lenses. Looking at Jonathan's comparison, the F3.5 lens would be tempting for me, based on it's closer minimum focusing distance.

Or, if you like longer - as you said above - perhaps Sigma's 35mm F2 DG DN lens.

Of course, if you also want to do astro, and/or really want the speed, then one of the F1.4 lenses would deliver. I do seem to recall that the older 24mm F1.4 DG OSM lens was not one of Sigma's best lenses - the new 24 F1.4 is supposed to be much better.

BTW, Lenstip has excellent & detailed reviews of the various Sigma lenses, albeit on a Sony body.

FWIW, I also came from Fuji. The S5 files are indeed very malleable.

georgehudetz · Aug 9, 2023

2ndact scene1 said:
2ndact scene1 said:

georgehudetz wrote:

I have the Sigma 28mm. F1.4 in L-mount; it's a top-notch lens from an IQ standpoint, and has a wonderful mechanical manual focus ring that is much nicer to use than the modern, digital MF mechanisms.

That said, It's HUGE and heavy. I primarily bought it to use with astro, for which it works wonderfully. But I almost never reach for it for landscape - which is my primary genre - because of it's weight. I simply do not want that much weight in my pack for a single focal length. And I have a reasonably high tolerance for weight - use an S1R, normally have a tele with me, etc.

So I'd suggest one of the smaller 24mm DG DN lenses. Looking at Jonathan's comparison, the F3.5 lens would be tempting for me, based on it's closer minimum focusing distance.

Or, if you like longer - as you said above - perhaps Sigma's 35mm F2 DG DN lens.

Of course, if you also want to do astro, and/or really want the speed, then one of the F1.4 lenses would deliver. I do seem to recall that the older 24mm F1.4 DG OSM lens was not one of Sigma's best lenses - the new 24 F1.4 is supposed to be much better.

BTW, Lenstip has excellent & detailed reviews of the various Sigma lenses, albeit on a Sony body.

FWIW, I also came from Fuji. The S5 files are indeed very malleable.

Click to expand...

I briefly toyed with getting an S5 recently but decided not to proceed, which means I am sticking with Canon RF and EF for now. But I do have a question (the OP stated he is not looking for a zoom, so this is a general question). I recently rented a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 along with an S5 from Lensrentals. I was very impressed with both the lens and the sensor of the S5 (but not the autofocus). The 28-70 gets great writeups and my brief experience was good. Would this lens be a candidate for landscape photography that is competitive with the various prime options being discussed here (particularly the f/3.5)?

I am historically a prime lens shooter. My most used Canon EF prime over many years is the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS. It has been useful in so many ways - travel, events, urban landscape, club outings etc. But I am becoming more open to modern zoom lenses.

I don't have the 28-70, but I do have the Sigma 24-20 F2.8. DG DN Art, which *should* be a little bit sharper than the 28-70.

I just did a basic Landscape comparison between the 24-70 and the Sigma 28mm F1.4 DG HSM, both at 28mm, F8, base ISO, tripod mounted, on the S5. Focused more-or-less at the hyperfocal distance. In the center of the image, the prime *might* be a little sharper, but at the edge of the frame (at the same distance as the center) you can more easily see that the prime is indeed sharper. Same in the foreground corners. Not by a huge amount, but you can see it.

This matches my other tests I've done - basically, the heavier & more expensive a lens is, the less fall-off you will see, even at F8. This isn't universally true, of course, but I'd expect - at the periphery of the frame - the 28-70 to be a little less sharp than the 24-70 Art , which is in turn a little less sharp than the 28mm Art prime.

Note that to see these differences, I am zooming in to 200% on my MacBook Pro, using raw files, with all sharpening settings in Capture One at the default. I've found that the pixel density of high-resolution displays tend to mask sharpness issues when images are viewed at 100%, so I tend to zoom into 200% if I am trying to assess the performance of a lens, or sharpening an image for a large print.

It's also worth noting that some PP packages have sharpness profiles on a lens-by-lens basis; this can help overcome softness in the corners, if you have a well-centered lens.

Having said all that, I'm sure the Sigma 28-70 would make a fine landscape lens, unless your goal is the absolute best IQ, HR mode, etc. so that you can print large. In which case it pays to step up a bit.

--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
Capture One LUMIX FF feature request thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4658107#forum-post-66298057

2ndact scene1 · Aug 9, 2023

georgehudetz said:
2ndact scene1 said:

georgehudetz said:

georgehudetz wrote:

I have the Sigma 28mm. F1.4 in L-mount; it's a top-notch lens from an IQ standpoint, and has a wonderful mechanical manual focus ring that is much nicer to use than the modern, digital MF mechanisms.

That said, It's HUGE and heavy. I primarily bought it to use with astro, for which it works wonderfully. But I almost never reach for it for landscape - which is my primary genre - because of it's weight. I simply do not want that much weight in my pack for a single focal length. And I have a reasonably high tolerance for weight - use an S1R, normally have a tele with me, etc.

So I'd suggest one of the smaller 24mm DG DN lenses. Looking at Jonathan's comparison, the F3.5 lens would be tempting for me, based on it's closer minimum focusing distance.

Or, if you like longer - as you said above - perhaps Sigma's 35mm F2 DG DN lens.

Of course, if you also want to do astro, and/or really want the speed, then one of the F1.4 lenses would deliver. I do seem to recall that the older 24mm F1.4 DG OSM lens was not one of Sigma's best lenses - the new 24 F1.4 is supposed to be much better.

BTW, Lenstip has excellent & detailed reviews of the various Sigma lenses, albeit on a Sony body.

FWIW, I also came from Fuji. The S5 files are indeed very malleable.

Click to expand...

I briefly toyed with getting an S5 recently but decided not to proceed, which means I am sticking with Canon RF and EF for now. But I do have a question (the OP stated he is not looking for a zoom, so this is a general question). I recently rented a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 along with an S5 from Lensrentals. I was very impressed with both the lens and the sensor of the S5 (but not the autofocus). The 28-70 gets great writeups and my brief experience was good. Would this lens be a candidate for landscape photography that is competitive with the various prime options being discussed here (particularly the f/3.5)?

I am historically a prime lens shooter. My most used Canon EF prime over many years is the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS. It has been useful in so many ways - travel, events, urban landscape, club outings etc. But I am becoming more open to modern zoom lenses.

Click to expand...

I don't have the 28-70, but I do have the Sigma 24-20 F2.8. DG DN Art, which *should* be a little bit sharper than the 28-70.

I just did a basic Landscape comparison between the 24-70 and the Sigma 28mm F1.4 DG HSM, both at 28mm, F8, base ISO, tripod mounted, on the S5. Focused more-or-less at the hyperfocal distance. In the center of the image, the prime *might* be a little sharper, but at the edge of the frame (at the same distance as the center) you can more easily see that the prime is indeed sharper. Same in the foreground corners. Not by a huge amount, but you can see it.

This matches my other tests I've done - basically, the heavier & more expensive a lens is, the less fall-off you will see, even at F8. This isn't universally true, of course, but I'd expect - at the periphery of the frame - the 28-70 to be a little less sharp than the 24-70 Art , which is in turn a little less sharp than the 28mm Art prime.

Note that to see these differences, I am zooming in to 200% on my MacBook Pro, using raw files, with all sharpening settings in Capture One at the default. I've found that the pixel density of high-resolution displays tend to mask sharpness issues when images are viewed at 100%, so I tend to zoom into 200% if I am trying to assess the performance of a lens, or sharpening an image for a large print.

It's also worth noting that some PP packages have sharpness profiles on a lens-by-lens basis; this can help overcome softness in the corners, if you have a well-centered lens.

Having said all that, I'm sure the Sigma 28-70 would make a fine landscape lens, unless your goal is the absolute best IQ, HR mode, etc. so that you can print large. In which case it pays to step up a bit.

georgehudetz · Aug 9, 2023

2ndact scene1 said:
georgehudetz said:

2ndact scene1 said:

2ndact scene1 said:

georgehudetz wrote:

I have the Sigma 28mm. F1.4 in L-mount; it's a top-notch lens from an IQ standpoint, and has a wonderful mechanical manual focus ring that is much nicer to use than the modern, digital MF mechanisms.

That said, It's HUGE and heavy. I primarily bought it to use with astro, for which it works wonderfully. But I almost never reach for it for landscape - which is my primary genre - because of it's weight. I simply do not want that much weight in my pack for a single focal length. And I have a reasonably high tolerance for weight - use an S1R, normally have a tele with me, etc.

So I'd suggest one of the smaller 24mm DG DN lenses. Looking at Jonathan's comparison, the F3.5 lens would be tempting for me, based on it's closer minimum focusing distance.

Or, if you like longer - as you said above - perhaps Sigma's 35mm F2 DG DN lens.

Of course, if you also want to do astro, and/or really want the speed, then one of the F1.4 lenses would deliver. I do seem to recall that the older 24mm F1.4 DG OSM lens was not one of Sigma's best lenses - the new 24 F1.4 is supposed to be much better.

BTW, Lenstip has excellent & detailed reviews of the various Sigma lenses, albeit on a Sony body.

FWIW, I also came from Fuji. The S5 files are indeed very malleable.

Click to expand...

I briefly toyed with getting an S5 recently but decided not to proceed, which means I am sticking with Canon RF and EF for now. But I do have a question (the OP stated he is not looking for a zoom, so this is a general question). I recently rented a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 along with an S5 from Lensrentals. I was very impressed with both the lens and the sensor of the S5 (but not the autofocus). The 28-70 gets great writeups and my brief experience was good. Would this lens be a candidate for landscape photography that is competitive with the various prime options being discussed here (particularly the f/3.5)?

I am historically a prime lens shooter. My most used Canon EF prime over many years is the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS. It has been useful in so many ways - travel, events, urban landscape, club outings etc. But I am becoming more open to modern zoom lenses.

Click to expand...

I don't have the 28-70, but I do have the Sigma 24-20 F2.8. DG DN Art, which *should* be a little bit sharper than the 28-70.

I just did a basic Landscape comparison between the 24-70 and the Sigma 28mm F1.4 DG HSM, both at 28mm, F8, base ISO, tripod mounted, on the S5. Focused more-or-less at the hyperfocal distance. In the center of the image, the prime *might* be a little sharper, but at the edge of the frame (at the same distance as the center) you can more easily see that the prime is indeed sharper. Same in the foreground corners. Not by a huge amount, but you can see it.

This matches my other tests I've done - basically, the heavier & more expensive a lens is, the less fall-off you will see, even at F8. This isn't universally true, of course, but I'd expect - at the periphery of the frame - the 28-70 to be a little less sharp than the 24-70 Art , which is in turn a little less sharp than the 28mm Art prime.

Note that to see these differences, I am zooming in to 200% on my MacBook Pro, using raw files, with all sharpening settings in Capture One at the default. I've found that the pixel density of high-resolution displays tend to mask sharpness issues when images are viewed at 100%, so I tend to zoom into 200% if I am trying to assess the performance of a lens, or sharpening an image for a large print.

It's also worth noting that some PP packages have sharpness profiles on a lens-by-lens basis; this can help overcome softness in the corners, if you have a well-centered lens.

Having said all that, I'm sure the Sigma 28-70 would make a fine landscape lens, unless your goal is the absolute best IQ, HR mode, etc. so that you can print large. In which case it pays to step up a bit.

Click to expand...

I figured you would have a definitive answer! So there is still a (slight?) penalty for the convenience of a zoom, even with modern designs. Just as with most things in photography, there is a compromise involved - but with modern optics and modern software - and dare I say AI, the IQ cost of some compromises may be coming down?

thanks

Kevin

Possibly, but I would expect advances in lens design to benefit both zooms and primes, although possibly to different degrees.

See Lenstip's review of Sony's new 50mm F1.4 for an example of what a modern prime can do.

Jonathan Mac · Aug 10, 2023

I looked into both the 28-70/2.8 and the 24-70/2.8 before settling on the latter for my general purpose zoom. The main reason was the extra 4mm at the wide end but the improved sealing was also factored into the decision. The 28-70mm seems to be optically very good and is significantly smaller and lighter than the 24-70mm but I wouldn't expect there to be any visible difference at all at typical landscape apertures. A good modern prime will probably be slightly better at wider apertures but again, I doubt it would be very much.

fuji_phil_e · Aug 10, 2023

Man alive, my thread has been hijacked!

Bringing matters back on track, I was surprised to read up the responses that the 24mm f1.4 Art (DSLR version) is not so good a performer as the DG DN version. That - if it's true - puts me at either the huge but also hugely impressive 28mm f1.4 (DSLR) or the sexy i-series 24mm f2. But now all this standard zoom talk is frying my brain. I could go for the 24-70mm and take perhaps the most minor of hits on IQ whilst benefitting from the flexibility that lens allows. That'd mean saying au revoir to the 20-60mm, which is fine as we've not fully bonded yet (early days still). This is what forums do - start at one place then end up in another entirely, wearing different trousers and everything! Clarity was almost upon me till the zoom talk came about, even though I said I wasn't after a zoom. Alas.

Jonathan Mac · Aug 10, 2023

I haven't used either extensively but I definitely prefer the 24/2 to the 24-70/2.8 at 24mm. The images seem more vibrant, but that could just be the result of me preferring primes and being more inspired to photograph when using one.

pdk42 · Aug 10, 2023

Maybe I got lucky, but I found the 20-60 an absolutely fantastic performer for landscapes. Framing with landscapes is always best with a zoom IMHO. But I do have the Sigma 35/2 I series and just its build and performance.

Matthew39 · Aug 11, 2023

Looking at your images, maybe the 16-35 f4 would be good for you. It's lighter than the Sigma 28 and gives you a nice 24, too. You probably wouldn't miss apertures bigger than f4.

Jonathan Mac · Aug 11, 2023

pdk42 said:
Maybe I got lucky, but I found the 20-60 an absolutely fantastic performer for landscapes. Framing with landscapes is always best with a zoom IMHO. But I do have the Sigma 35/2 I series and just its build and performance.

I agree entirely. The 20-60mm is a superb lens and far, far better than any other kit lens out there. The term "kit lens" really doesn't do it justice. If I don't need the speed I take it with me and leave the big Sigma 24-70mm at home.

I do prefer the prime experience though.

fuji_phil_e · Aug 11, 2023

20mm on the 20-60mm is useful and covers off - albeit with a loss of a mm and a bit - the 12mm I use on my Fujis. I should really lean on the 20-60mm for flexibility and pick up either a 24 or 28 for critical IQ.

fuji_phil_e · Aug 18, 2023

Update time - I have taken the plunge on a 'like new' Sigma 28mm f1.4 DG HSM Art. I was expecting to pay about £550, but found an ex-display for under £500, 3yr warranty. However, I then stumbled on a summer sale with a reputable dealer here in the UK, selling the above-mentioned 'like new' copy at £340, 6 month warranty. I couldn't say no to that. I can use the 20-60mm for wider and standard focal lengths, plus aforementioned adapted lenses for standard and telephoto. I've previously said that I'd treat this purchase as an extended rental and feel it out, though I am very happy with reviews here and online, so weight aside I'm sure I've got a potential winner on my hands. As an aside, I had also identified a well regarded legacy lens to adapt for landscape, also 28mm. I have an offer in place for that, and if I win it (don't expect to) then I'll have to run them off against each other and recoup on one. Fun and games.

Jonathan Mac · Aug 21, 2023

fuji_phil_e said:
Update time - I have taken the plunge on a 'like new' Sigma 28mm f1.4 DG HSM Art. I was expecting to pay about £550, but found an ex-display for under £500, 3yr warranty. However, I then stumbled on a summer sale with a reputable dealer here in the UK, selling the above-mentioned 'like new' copy at £340, 6 month warranty. I couldn't say no to that. I can use the 20-60mm for wider and standard focal lengths, plus aforementioned adapted lenses for standard and telephoto. I've previously said that I'd treat this purchase as an extended rental and feel it out, though I am very happy with reviews here and online, so weight aside I'm sure I've got a potential winner on my hands. As an aside, I had also identified a well regarded legacy lens to adapt for landscape, also 28mm. I have an offer in place for that, and if I win it (don't expect to) then I'll have to run them off against each other and recoup on one. Fun and games.

Glad to read that you have made a choice you're happy with. Personally I don't think I'd ever go with one of the lenses designed for DSLR but with an adapter built in unless it was something really special that I didn't expect to see in a native version for quite some time, but everyone makes their own choices, such is the greatness of the ILC.

Let us know how you find the lens.

24mm or 28mm Sigma lens for Lumix S5 - landscapes

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts