Sharpest lenses for SD Quattro

[Tyranator]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

 

[Ceistinne]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

Tyranator,

It's not a prime but I find the 17-70 f2.8-4 C more than adequate on my sd Quattro, as good as if not better than the 24-105 f4 on my sd Quattro H.

The 30mm f1.4 is quite a capable lens also.

I'm sure others will have plenty more to say.

S

 

[xpatUSA]

I already got a SIGMA [dp2] Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA [sd] Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would go to this site, or one like it, and pick the ones I like. For example:

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art - Imaging Resource

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Review by Imaging Resource | Posted April 4, 2014 When we sat down with Sigma at this year’s CES, we got some hands-on time with the lens. The build quality was exceptional, but what really got our attention was Sigma’s off-handed remark that they weren’t looking to surpass...

www.imaging-resource.com

The blur widget is very informative and there's usually a whole paragraph on sharpness. No widget means they haven't lab-tested the lens.

Remember that Global Vision lenses (Art, Contemporary, Sport) work best on sd Quattros. Make sure that a lens of interest is available with SA mount.

HTH.

 

[D Cox]

I have a 50mm f/1.4 Art which is very sharp. The Auto focus also works on the fp with Sigma's adapter.

My guess is that any of the Art series will be excellent (but heavy).

Don

 

[mike earussi]

Check out this lens test site:

Sigma lenses - LensTip.com

Best digital cameras and lens reviews. If you are looking for the information about digital cameras and lenses you are in a right place. We have many professional tests of digital photography equipment.

www.lenstip.com

but the best lenses are the 40mm f1.4 A, 70mm f2.8A macro, the 105 f1.4 A and the 135 f1.8A. Their drawback is that they are all large, heavy and expensive, except for the 70mm macro which is the one I would recommend you start off with.

 

[xpatUSA]

Check out this lens test site:

https://www.lenstip.com/index.html?producent=73&obiektyw=all&typ=0&moc=0&szukaj=Search&sort=1

but the best lenses are the 40mm f1.4 A, 70mm f2.8A macro, the 105 f1.4 A and the 135 f1.8A.

Agreed, Mike.

Their drawback is that they are all large, heavy and expensive, except for the 70mm macro which is the one I would recommend you start off with.

The 105 gets top MTF marks here:

More Ultra High-Resolution MTF Experiments

GEEK ALERT!! Let’s be absolutely clear; this is not a practical or useful article. It won’t help your photography or cinematography become better. It won’t help you choose equipment any time in the next couple of years. It won’t provide any fodder for your next Forum War. It’s just a geek...

www.lensrentals.com

 

[rick decker]

There are so many options with more than sufficient sharpness available from Sigma that I would focus on picking a set that will cover your needs. The subject matter and weight issue are two very important issues that you should take into account. Yes the 50 f1.4 Art; and the 85 f1.4 older and newer; the 70 macro; the 105 f1.4 are superb. Right down to 1.4. And there are some very good zooms - in particular the 24-35 f2.0. Most of these are heavy beasts.

With advances in lens design, automation, and production of high-quality lenses, the L-mount lenses offers a lot of choices. I am not aware of any reverse-mount adapters to go from L to SA so they may not be an option. SA to L are available.

I remember a comment by a friend of mine, a pro who taught golf at a high-end resort. "These people come in with the most expensive equipment or wanting to upgrade to the latest. I tell them "Focus on your improving your game." Just buying another set of clubs is not going to do it."

 

[mike earussi]

There are so many options with more than sufficient sharpness available from Sigma that I would focus on picking a set that will cover your needs. The subject matter and weight issue are two very important issues that you should take into account. Yes the 50 f1.4 Art; and the 85 f1.4 older and newer; the 70 macro; the 105 f1.4 are superb. Right down to 1.4. And there are some very good zooms - in particular the 24-35 f2.0. Most of these are heavy beasts.

With advances in lens design, automation, and production of high-quality lenses, the L-mount lenses offers a lot of choices. I am not aware of any reverse-mount adapters to go from L to SA so they may not be an option. SA to L are available.

I remember a comment by a friend of mine, a pro who taught golf at a high-end resort. "These people come in with the most expensive equipment or wanting to upgrade to the latest. I tell them "Focus on your improving your game." Just buying another set of clubs is not going to do it."

Marketing heresy. Be careful Rick, you might get banned from dpreview for saying that. Having the latest equipment is everything! Haven't you noticed?

 

[xpatUSA]

I am not aware of any reverse-mount adapters to go from L to SA so they may not be an option.

Definitely not, Rick. All to do with registration distance from flange to sensor.

 

[rick decker]

Checking around I found that (supposedly) no manufacturers are making new lenses for DSLR's...it is all mirrorless now.

 

[David Eastwood]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I only have the one prime, the 30/1.4 ‘kit’ lens that came with my sdQ. I’m quite partial to it - it’s the lightest lens I have, and therefore has its uses in certain circumstances.



So, obviously I’m not qualified to comment on primes, so I’ll put in a word for zooms. The 18-35/1.8 and 50-100/1.8 are superb, but heavy. I’ll put up with the weight for the quality.



I’ve also got a 10-20/3.5, and an 18-300/3.5-6.3. The former satisfies the super wide itch quite nicely, but it’s a tad soft in the corners. The 18-300 punches way above its weight - it’s light, compact, stabilized, and makes a great carry-around lens with the sdQ. Its only drawback is that it’s slow, and thus needs good light to shine, particularly at the longer end of its range.



The other thing you should consider is availability. For example, B&H currently has 6 SA mount lenses in stock, and only one of them is a prime - the 35/1.4. The rest are all ‘special order’ with various degrees of lead time. Sigma’s not making any more, and new ones are going to be scarce soon. There don’t seem to be many around on the used market either - but if you’re vigilant, there are some great deals to be had. Thankfully

 

[Doppler9000]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

 

[xpatUSA]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

What is a "vestigial mirror box ffd"?

 

[Doppler9000]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

What is a "vestigial mirror box ffd"?

The SA mount was developed for film SLR cameras, which have mirrors that are used to compose and focus, and then moved out of the way to take the photo. These cameras had a flange focal distance (ffd) of 44mm, sufficient to accommodate the mirror, placing the rear of the lens significantly farther from the film plane compared to a rangefinder or mirrorless digital camera.

Vestigial refers to a remnant of a now-obsolete system. The appendix, for example. Or, a spacer for a non-existent mirror box in a mirrorless camera, like this abomination.



Designing lenses for the SA mount entails making optical compromises that are simply unnecessary if one designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless designs, like the L Mount, E Mount, etc.

The newest Sigma lenses are designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless cameras, so buying an SA mount camera is buying into an evolutionary dead end.

Is the price of the body low enough that this makes sense?

 

[xpatUSA]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

What is a "vestigial mirror box ffd"?

The SA mount was developed for film SLR cameras, which have mirrors that are used to compose and focus, and then moved out of the way to take the photo. These cameras had a flange focal distance (ffd) of 44mm, sufficient to accommodate the mirror, placing the rear of the lens significantly farther from the film plane compared to a rangefinder or mirrorless digital camera.

Thanks, it was the lower-case "ffd" that had me puzzled more than "vestigial"

Vestigial refers to a remnant of a now-obsolete system. The appendix, for example. Or, a spacer for a non-existent mirror box in a mirrorless camera, like this abomination.

Truly horrible, I must agree. And then I seem to recall some earlier Sigma lenses for mirrorless that had long snouts because the elements were not changed from the DSLR arrangement.

Designing lenses for the SA mount entails making optical compromises that are simply unnecessary if one designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless designs, like the L Mount, E Mount, etc.

The newest Sigma lenses are designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless cameras, so buying an SA mount camera is buying into an evolutionary dead end.

Correct.

Is the price of the body low enough that this makes sense?

I have no idea.

--
It's all in the numbers ...

 

[Doppler9000]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

What is a "vestigial mirror box ffd"?

The SA mount was developed for film SLR cameras, which have mirrors that are used to compose and focus, and then moved out of the way to take the photo. These cameras had a flange focal distance (ffd) of 44mm, sufficient to accommodate the mirror, placing the rear of the lens significantly farther from the film plane compared to a rangefinder or mirrorless digital camera.

Thanks, it was the lower-case "ffd" that had me puzzled more than "vestigial"

My apologies. FFD would have been clearer.

Vestigial refers to a remnant of a now-obsolete system. The appendix, for example. Or, a spacer for a non-existent mirror box in a mirrorless camera, like this abomination.

Truly horrible, I must agree. And then I seem to recall some earlier Sigma lenses for mirrorless that had long snouts because the elements were not changed from the DSLR arrangement.

Designing lenses for the SA mount entails making optical compromises that are simply unnecessary if one designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless designs, like the L Mount, E Mount, etc.

The newest Sigma lenses are designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless cameras, so buying an SA mount camera is buying into an evolutionary dead end.

Correct.

Is the price of the body low enough that this makes sense?

I have no idea.

 

[Tyranator]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

I have been pondering the same thing and my guts tells me to wait for the full frame foveon camera and invest in lighting equipment and L-mount lenses instead.

 

[danski0224]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

Reliable and accurate autofocus on the SDQ requires Global Vision lenses.

And even then, the SDQ will not autofocus as quickly or as reliably as almost any other non-Sigma DSLR out there- even if you go back 10 years or more. That said, the SDQ autofocus is a HUGE improvement over the SD1(M).

The only non Global Vision lenses that seem to reliably autofocus are the last generation EX series macro lenses (105mm, 150mm, 180mm). Everything else (just about) will be manual focus only.

I'd also venture to say that with the exception of the even older Sigma extending macro lenses (50mm, 70mm, 105mm), very few Sigma lenses will perform well on the SDQ. None of those extending macro lenses will autofocus at all on the SDQ. Part of the poor performance is likely tied to the difficulty of manual focusing an autofocus lens accurately.

 

[danski0224]

The SA mount was developed for film SLR cameras, which have mirrors that are used to compose and focus, and then moved out of the way to take the photo. These cameras had a flange focal distance (ffd) of 44mm, sufficient to accommodate the mirror, placing the rear of the lens significantly farther from the film plane compared to a rangefinder or mirrorless digital camera.

Vestigial refers to a remnant of a now-obsolete system. The appendix, for example. Or, a spacer for a non-existent mirror box in a mirrorless camera, like this abomination.



Designing lenses for the SA mount entails making optical compromises that are simply unnecessary if one designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless designs, like the L Mount, E Mount, etc.

The newest Sigma lenses are designed for the shorter ffds of mirrorless cameras, so buying an SA mount camera is buying into an evolutionary dead end.

Is the price of the body low enough that this makes sense?

If the SDQ didn't have that "snout", I suspect that people would be complaining about poor image quality and color shift. Some wide angle lenses do not play well with standard Bayer sensor mirrorless cameras.

Yes, the lenses for the fixed lens cameras are much closer to the sensor, but those lenses are specific to the application and who knows what is being done to the raw file.

Unless there is something really special, I plan to use those old and obsolete DSLR lenses on any future mirrorless camera with an adapter. Resale values of SA lenses tanked with the L mount announcement and Canon EF lens values tanked with the RF mount.

--
Moments in Time, a work in progress.... https://www.flickr.com/gp/142423236@N08/965cs3

 

[Tom Schum]

I already got a SIGMA DP2 Quattro but am thinking about selling all my gear for a SIGMA SD Quattro instead. It seems fun and is reasonably priced and full frame probably doesn't matter as much anyway.

But what set of prime lenses would be the sharpest? Wide, normal, tele?

I would consider carefully whether it makes sense to invest money in good lenses for an obsolete mount. The best Sigma lenses, particularly going forward, will not be made for the SA, with the inherent compromises of designing to a vestigial mirror box ffd.

I have been pondering the same thing and my guts tells me to wait for the full frame foveon camera and invest in lighting equipment and L-mount lenses instead.

I was going to suggest you look at the Sigma fp or fp L, and you have already been thinking about a L mount solution.

I have a fp L, and I'm finding I can get very close to Foveon rendering when I downsize the images to 1/4 original pixels (=15mp) after processing the raws in SPP. Many others on this forum will disagree of course. These cameras are not much larger than the dp2 Quattro, but heavier.

The Sigma lenses for L mount are really nice. I have the 45mm F2.8 DG DN | C but mostly I use third party manual primes such as the TTartisan 50mm F1.4 at $225:

TTArtisan 50mm f/1.4 Manual Focus Lens for Leica L A09B-L B&H (bhphotovideo.com)

If you like to do art, the adapter scene is wide open with L mount. If you have lenses for older cameras this can be a real advantage. With the sd Quattro, you are basically limited to M42 if you can find an adapter (they are very thin things and can be very hard to use). With any L mount you can adapt Leica M lenses and numerous others, and many different adapters are available. Here is the selection on just one website (select L mount if you like):

lens mount adapters | B&H Photo Video (bhphotovideo.com)