Sigma 24-105 f4 Art lense vs. Nikon 24-120 f4

[Truman Prevatt]

Any thoughts?

 

[jtan163]

Any thoughts?

You have time on your hands?

Expect a storm.

See this thread: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54383388

Not only about your question, but your question was explored with a LOT of contention.

 

[Bene Placito]

Any thoughts?

--
Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

I have both and much prefer the Sigma variant. It gives much better frame to frame sharpness at every focal length and every aperture. A very nice piece of kit.

 

[michaeladawson]

Any thoughts?

 

[Truman Prevatt]

Any thoughts?

 

[Benjamin Kanarek]

The Nikkor 24-120 f/4.0 lens is a great all rounder. I have used it for Harper's BAZAAR, ELLE and GLAMOUR magazines.

Go for it!

 

[egk4260]

I had seen your post on the Sigma site

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54428240

The images and in camera histogram consistenly shows underexposure with matrix metering, aperture priority with my Sigma. I see some of same tendency with the 35 art.

 

[Truman Prevatt]

I had seen your post on the Sigma site

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54428240

The images and in camera histogram consistenly shows underexposure with matrix metering, aperture priority with my Sigma. I see some of same tendency with the 35 art.

I did see your post over there. It was interesting what you said about the OS buzz. It is a bit surprising the amount the metering difference since the metering is done after the lens and the light hitting the meter sensor should be the same as the light hitting the sensor. Coating difference?

Other than that, you are satisfied with the Sigma? A long time ago, I got burned by Sigma not being able to deliver a decent lens after they replaced one I bought three times and would not answer my letters or calls after the fourth copy was worse than the other three. I've tended to avoid them since. My assumption is their art series is much better and their QC is better with these new lenses.

 

[Scott McMorrow]

well, according to Sigma, 105 was the limit that they could design to and keep the image quality that they were targeting. It' s a very nice lens. The difference in FOV is 19 degrees vs 17 degrees for a 120mm lens. Not huge. Considering the better sharpness of the Sigma, it's probably a wash across a 17 degree FOV

 

[egk4260]

Yes, I am overall satisfied with the Sigma.

In regards to the exposure issue; after seeing your post I took quick shots into an area of our yard (grass, trees, flowers, etc) with the Sigma 24-105, Nikon 24-70, and Nikon 70-200 f/2.8. Set to 5.6, center point, matrix aperture priority, and at 24, 35, 70, 105mm. The histogram only began to appear similar from the Sigma at +1 EC, and images were noticeably darker without compensation. I cannot explain it, but it has been consistent with the two Nikons I use.

I will try to figure how to upload the images and exif.

 

[Nexu1]

I had seen your post on the Sigma site

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54428240

The images and in camera histogram consistenly shows underexposure with matrix metering, aperture priority with my Sigma. I see some of same tendency with the 35 art.

That's the scary part of 3rd party lenses. A couple Sigma lenses cause problems on the D7100 and the Tokina 12-28 has been known to have some problems on the D7100 too. The 24-105 should be compatable with the Sigma dock, I wonder if there is a firmware update that can be done to fix it. If Sigma works some magic with that dock so all Art lenses are pretty much guaranteed to work flawlessly with Nikon it'd really help their cause (IMO).

 

[Nexu1]

I'm curious how much better either lens is to the 24-85vr, a lens which can be found refurbished for $289.

 

[Truman Prevatt]

Yes, I am overall satisfied with the Sigma.

In regards to the exposure issue; after seeing your post I took quick shots into an area of our yard (grass, trees, flowers, etc) with the Sigma 24-105, Nikon 24-70, and Nikon 70-200 f/2.8. Set to 5.6, center point, matrix aperture priority, and at 24, 35, 70, 105mm. The histogram only began to appear similar from the Sigma at +1 EC, and images were noticeably darker without compensation. I cannot explain it, but it has been consistent with the two Nikons I use.

I will try to figure how to upload the images and exif.

The only thing I can think of is the Sigma lens is not setting the shutter speed to high. Maybe Sigma has not got the communications on the Nikon cameras down pat. This can always be an issue with third party lenses.

 

[Bene Placito]

The histogram only began to appear similar from the Sigma at +1 EC, and images were noticeably darker without compensation.

That is exactly my experience. Otherwise, a sharper lens than my Nikon 24-120 f4

B

 

[greenmanphoto]

Truman,

One thing to keep in mind with the Sigma is that the rings turn in the "opposite" direction from Nikon and Tamron lenses. So, if you're used to turning one direction to zoom out, with a Sigma, you'll have to turn in the opposite direction. You can learn to adjust to this, over time, but it may make a difference to you.

I have the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and am really happy with it. I'm seriously considering the Tamron 24-70 f2.8, as well. I'm also considering the 24-105 and the 24-120. The advantage to the Tamron is the f2.8 aperture. Even if I don't use that, most lenses improve at a stop or two down from max, so shooting at f4 on an f2.8 lens is typically better than shooting at f4 on an f4 lens.

One last thing, Tamron apparently has a $100 rebate on the 24-70, running until October 31, according to my local store.

Good luck!

Sam

 

[Michael Harvey]

The histogram only began to appear similar from the Sigma at +1 EC, and images were noticeably darker without compensation. I cannot explain it, but it has been consistent with the two Nikons I use.

Sorry if I missed this information earlier, but - what Nikon camera are you using?

I'm wondering if this effect is "model-specific".

 

[westerner]

That's the scary part of 3rd party lenses. A couple Sigma lenses cause problems on the D7100 and the Tokina 12-28 has been known to have some problems on the D7100 too. The 24-105 should be compatable with the Sigma dock, I wonder if there is a firmware update that can be done to fix it. If Sigma works some magic with that dock so all Art lenses are pretty much guaranteed to work flawlessly with Nikon it'd really help their cause (IMO).

What are the known problems with the Tokina 12-28 and the D7100? I have them and use them all the time together. I even used the 12-28 on my D810 a couple days ago. It works from 19-28mm in FX mode, 16-28 in 1.2x crop. And I have never had any problem with either combo...

 

[egk4260]

The cameras I use are the D4 and the D700.

Here are a few quick shots from the D4 (with no artistic merit or pixel peeler value) out a bedroom window with the three lenses I mentioned. The first four are with the Sigma 24-105 at 24, 35, 70, and 105mm (6842-6845). Next three are the Nikon 24-70 at 24, 35, and 70 (6846-6848). The next are the Nikon 70-200 VRII at 70 and 105 (6849-6850). The final three images are the Sigma at 24,35,70 with +1.0 exp comp(6851-6853).

They were all shot at f/5.6 in aperture priority, ISO 200, center point focus, matrix metering, auto white balance. Outside conditions bright and overcast. Shot raw with jpeg uploads from LR here into my gallery, which filed them in reverse order. No further processing. It seems the light colored roof affects exposure more with the Sigma, but even when excluded there is comparative underexposure with all the Sigma images. I have not posted images here in a long while and have not figured how to get the smaller image size or exif automatically included with upload (hint: someone can tell me or PM me, thanks )

 

[PK24X36NOW]

Any thoughts?

A pet peeve of mine is having different ergonomics on different lenses, so I wouldn't want either of these, both of which switch the positions of the focusing ring and the zoom ring, relative to every other zoom lens in my collection.

Since the Sigma lens further upsets the apple cart by making the zoom ring turn in the opposite direction compared with every other zoom I own, that would move it below the Nikon lens on a relative basis.

Since I don't want either based on ergonomic issues, their relative performance isn't something meaningful to me.

YMMV

 

[Albert Silver]

The cameras I use are the D4 and the D700.

Here are a few quick shots from the D4 (with no artistic merit or pixel peeler value) out a bedroom window with the three lenses I mentioned. The first four are with the Sigma 24-105 at 24, 35, 70, and 105mm (6842-6845). Next three are the Nikon 24-70 at 24, 35, and 70 (6846-6848). The next are the Nikon 70-200 VRII at 70 and 105 (6849-6850). The final three images are the Sigma at 24,35,70 with +1.0 exp comp(6851-6853).

They were all shot at f/5.6 in aperture priority, ISO 200, center point focus, matrix metering, auto white balance. Outside conditions bright and overcast. Shot raw with jpeg uploads from LR here into my gallery, which filed them in reverse order. No further processing. It seems the light colored roof affects exposure more with the Sigma, but even when excluded there is comparative underexposure with all the Sigma images. I have not posted images here in a long while and have not figured how to get the smaller image size or exif automatically included with upload (hint: someone can tell me or PM me, thanks )

To keep EXIF do not use the Save for Web, but rather Save as...

BTW, where are the pictures? Are they coming in a later post?