Sigma Art primes on Z system?

[Aston Senna]

Hi all, I'm putting together a shopping list for the Z6 II that I'm going to buy this month, and while I want want WANT the 20 1.8 S, it's just priced a little too far out considering i'm already definitely grabbing a 14-30.

So I started looking at something like the Sigma 24 1.4 art, but am curious how these big, heavy sigma primes handle with an adapter let alone how they behave with an FTZ - if they autofocus reliably on the Z system.

I also like that it'll be good for the video work i'll end up doing, too, with the smooth manual focus ring instead of focus by wire. But, if sigmas have trouble focusing for photos, i don't want to deal with that. I've read before they work really quite fine adapted on canon R, but just checking if anyone has any experience with them here, let it be the 24 1.4, the 40 1.4, 50 1.4 etc.

otherwise, i've seen some pretty impressive testing on some of the viltrox primes

Thanks!

 

[LTheWafflePWN]

I know you didn't name either the Art 35mm 1.4 or the Art 24-70mm 2.8 that I have experience with on the Z's, but I believe that they perform well. I still use the 24-70, but plan on replacing it at some point, and I have since gotten the Z 35mm f1.8.

As you alluded to, it's really the handling of the lenses on the camera that made up my mind. Well, that and the fact the Z lenses are so good. But they are definitely front heavy in my opinion. For a session or a couple minis, not a big deal to me. But after about 1.5 hours I can start feeling it in my wrists. At the end of long wedding days I feel like I'm starting to lose my tendons But again, the lenses perform just as good as they ever have on my DSLR's, it's just that the handling/balance is off.

 

[anotherMike]

I'm a dual system shooter in that I shoot DSLR (D850) and Z7 side by side (although for different tasks). I love Sigma Art glass for my DLSR (although not so much the 24/1.4 Art).

But on a Z? The Art glass plus the FTZ just feels too bulky and out of place. Ergonomically, "feel" wise, which I know is subjective, it just doesn't do it for me. Focus when I've tested it has been fine.

I'd be trying to get as much native Z glass as you can afford and skip the 3rd party and FTZ options. And keep in mind, I have nothing against Sigma Art - in my entire F mount kit, I own exactly one Nikon brand lens (the 105/1.4E) and everything else is Zeiss or Sigma art, so I'm not a sigma basher. But in Z? I'm likely going to be majority Nikon S line except for possibly a manual focus Voigtlander 35 and 50 when they come out, more for size reasons than anything else. I have been known to be *very* critical of Nikon branded F mount glass, but the S line in Z mount is an entirely different situation and while not every lens is a home-run, most of the line is really good and occasionally fantastic.

Just my take anyway.

And skip the 24/1.4 Art. There are better options these days, including the 24/1.8S, or the 24 range on the 14-24/2.8S zoom. And I'd save up for the 20/1.8S for the future if you can't hack it now.

 

[Cat Nip]

I use my Z6ii with the 24-70/f4 and avoid using my f1.4 F-mount primes because I don't like the handling on the compact Z body.

They handle great on a D850, not so much on a Z6(ii). Otherwise they perform just as well.

 

[Aston Senna]

I'm a dual system shooter in that I shoot DSLR (D850) and Z7 side by side (although for different tasks). I love Sigma Art glass for my DLSR (although not so much the 24/1.4 Art).

But on a Z? The Art glass plus the FTZ just feels too bulky and out of place. Ergonomically, "feel" wise, which I know is subjective, it just doesn't do it for me. Focus when I've tested it has been fine.

I'd be trying to get as much native Z glass as you can afford and skip the 3rd party and FTZ options. And keep in mind, I have nothing against Sigma Art - in my entire F mount kit, I own exactly one Nikon brand lens (the 105/1.4E) and everything else is Zeiss or Sigma art, so I'm not a sigma basher. But in Z? I'm likely going to be majority Nikon S line except for possibly a manual focus Voigtlander 35 and 50 when they come out, more for size reasons than anything else. I have been known to be *very* critical of Nikon branded F mount glass, but the S line in Z mount is an entirely different situation and while not every lens is a home-run, most of the line is really good and occasionally fantastic.

Just my take anyway.

And skip the 24/1.4 Art. There are better options these days, including the 24/1.8S, or the 24 range on the 14-24/2.8S zoom. And I'd save up for the 20/1.8S for the future if you can't hack it now.

I'm worried about the front heaviness, too.

I also have a D7500 and am picking up a D4S actually tonight as its replacement. So i'll end up having a z6 ii and D4s combo.

So that's where it gets tricky, because i'd like to have something to use on the dslr when needed, like if duel wielding, having say a 24 1.4 on one, and a 50 prime on the other. if i do all Z mount, then i couldn't do that.

I do have the 135 f2D DC that i won't part with yet, so that might be the permanent mount on the dslr then.

 

[Aston Senna]

and the reason for mostly bringing up sigmas 24 1.4 in specific was a semi local used deal i found for just $400. just an absolute bargain.

 

[dcc2020]

Hi,

I have the Sigma 24mm F1,4 art which I bought to combine with my D500 and stil do so. I also used it occasionally with FTZ on my Z6ii and it's not a bad combo. Good AF and IQ, a bit bulky, but the Sigma is bulky on its own. I took it out for a night event and it did not disturb me.

Having said that, if I would have Z only and buying new glass, I woud rather go fo Z lenses, like the Z20 or Z24 f1,8

Good luck with your decision

Alain

 

[wildblanket]

My sigma Art 35mm f1.4 works perfectly with my Z7ii and Z5 (and D850) , it might be considered heavy, not really all that suitable as a walkaround lens but perfectly useable.

You could always get the Viltrox 24mm Z f1.8 at around £350 which is nice and light (and functional).

--
Like any dealer he was watching for the card that is so high and wild he'll never need to deal another.

 

[Escaping]

You could always get the Viltrox 24mm Z f1.8 at around £350 which is nice and light (and functional).

Since moving to the Z bodies, I am building my line of Z lenses and try not to carry over the F lenses to be used with the FTZ. Among the primes, I am not sure when Nikon will have something to replace the 105/1.4E in the Z mount, so that one is used often enough.

About the 24mm focal length, I used to shoot with the Nikon 24/1.4 G with my DSLR's but I am not bringing this one over to the Z. I am mostly very happy with the 24mm from my 24-70/4.0 S for the events and non critical shots. Since there are those occasional situations, I need a faster 24mm but I am not willing to mount the 24/1.4G with the FTZ. I was contemplating the Z 24/1.8 S and almost pulled the credit card when I had the chance to pick up an almost brand new Viltrox 24/1.8 AF for about $300. I went for the Viltrox, (saving the money for the eventual Z 20/1.8 S) and for now I am happy enough with that Viltrox but it does not give me the same satisfaction of the older F 24/1.4G.

Sorry if I dont have much to contribute and to comment about the Sigma 24 ART, but I hope this helps somewhat about my experiences regarding this 24mm focal length.

 

[FKS]

I picked up a used 50mm Art, and so far it's been a good experience. AF is spot on with my Z bodies. In comparison, I had to dial in +11 (or so, can't remember the exact number) on my D3. No surprise that it balances much better on the Z9 than on the Z7.

There is more LOCA than expected after reading all the reviews, and the lack of weather sealing is a drawback, compared to all my Z lenses that have it. But overall I'm liking the lens.

adapted on canon R, but just checking if anyone has any experience with them here, let it be the 24 1.4, the 40 1.4, 50 1.4 etc.

 

[Dan_168]

Hi all, I'm putting together a shopping list for the Z6 II that I'm going to buy this month, and while I want want WANT the 20 1.8 S, it's just priced a little too far out considering i'm already definitely grabbing a 14-30.

So I started looking at something like the Sigma 24 1.4 art, but am curious how these big, heavy sigma primes handle with an adapter let alone how they behave with an FTZ - if they autofocus reliably on the Z system.

I also like that it'll be good for the video work i'll end up doing, too, with the smooth manual focus ring instead of focus by wire. But, if sigmas have trouble focusing for photos, i don't want to deal with that. I've read before they work really quite fine adapted on canon R, but just checking if anyone has any experience with them here, let it be the 24 1.4, the 40 1.4, 50 1.4 etc.

otherwise, i've seen some pretty impressive testing on some of the viltrox primes

Thanks!

I don't have the Sigma 24 but I have been using the Sigma 35 F1.4 Art on my Z9 and it works just as great as it was on my D850. I also use the 50 F1.4 Art as well, both working great. Focus just about same as it was on D850, I don't notice any difference in speed, in fact, for tracking , it works even better than it was on D850 due to the better tracking capability of the Z9, I noticed a lot less "jumping around" in 3D tracking, it sticks to the target a lot better. all in all, I do not see any issue with the 3 Sigma Art lens i own when using it on my Z9 with adapter, I will continue to use them until the fast 35 1.2 85 1.2 Z is available.

To be honest, despite all the all the talks of how great the Z lenses are, I really don't have a lot of desire for them, besides the great 50 1.2 Z, ( which is not the focal length I care for), I still don't see those fast primes that I used everyday, so I will keep on shooting with the F mount and even those Sony G Master ( such as 14 F1.8, 35F1.4, 85 1.4, 135 1.8) on my Z9, waiting for my Canon to Z adapter to arrive , once it arrived, I can use all my Canon L glasses on the Z9 too, hate to give up those 16-35 F4L IS, TSE 17, TSE 24 II, and 35 1.4 L II, 85 F1.2LII.....yes, I am not afraid of adapters and use it opens up my lens selection big time, so I use it regularly everyday.

I do not own the 40 F1.4 Art because I am not big fan of 40/50mm, but my friend does and I have the chance to play with that on the Z7 II and Z9 and worked out beautifully too, I would probably call it the best 40mm or or best Art-series lens ever made.

I can't comment on video because I don't do that at all.

 

[Aston Senna]

thank you for all the help and suggestions everyone!

 

[Andre Yew]

20mm and 24mm are two very different focal lengths. If a 20 is what you want, a 24 won't be a good stand-in.

My suggestion if you need dual-system use and a 24mm is to get a Nikon 24/1.8G, which is an underrated lens available for cheap. I tested it at landscape distance against the Sigma 24/1.4 and Zeiss 2/25 a while ago, and it more than held its own. It has a more even performance than the Sigma across the frame, and you hopefully won't have to deal with autofocus issues. It's also lighter and smaller than the Sigma.

The Nikon 20/1.8G is pretty good too, but not as good as the 24, and has a more forgiving rendering: it's not a clinical detail monster.

The 20/1.8S Z lens on the other hand has nothing to apologize for. It's pretty great in every respect except maybe size. It's one of the great lenses in the Z lineup, which is a pretty high bar.

 

[Aston Senna]

honestly the sigma 24 i found is such a good deal i may as well buy it just to try it, if it doesn't work then no big deal.

I will say i have nikon's 28 1.8 g now, which i don't plan on keeping just because it has a tendency for nasty green and purple fringing and the autofocus flat out doesn't work through the viewfinder from focus shift and curvature issues. works a lot better in live view but still hard to have anything sharp at wide apertures that isn't dead center. I do like the field of view of it on DX which is why i'm drawn to 40mm , either in the 40 f2 z or to pony up for the sigma 40 which would be such a nice pairing on a big body like the d4 (luckily, i go to the gym quite frequently lol), but would be awkward as heck with an ftz.

right now where i'm with this kit in my head is

14-30 z

85 1.8 z

24-70 f4 z

a 40/50mm of some sort

and then i have an f mount 135 f2 and sigma 150-600 (likely will swap for a 200-500)

and want to buy an f mount 70-200 f4

so the one missing component to this is when i want a wide and fast prime in that 20-24 range. when I use a 10-24 on my dx camera, i do find myself using 14 and 16 a lot, which are the equivalents of 20 and 24, so one or the other doesn't really matter to me, I think I could adapt and make whichever my own.

 

[Lance B]

I'm a dual system shooter in that I shoot DSLR (D850) and Z7 side by side (although for different tasks). I love Sigma Art glass for my DLSR (although not so much the 24/1.4 Art).

But on a Z? The Art glass plus the FTZ just feels too bulky and out of place. Ergonomically, "feel" wise, which I know is subjective, it just doesn't do it for me. Focus when I've tested it has been fine.

I'd be trying to get as much native Z glass as you can afford and skip the 3rd party and FTZ options. And keep in mind, I have nothing against Sigma Art - in my entire F mount kit, I own exactly one Nikon brand lens (the 105/1.4E) and everything else is Zeiss or Sigma art, so I'm not a sigma basher. But in Z? I'm likely going to be majority Nikon S line except for possibly a manual focus Voigtlander 35 and 50 when they come out, more for size reasons than anything else. I have been known to be *very* critical of Nikon branded F mount glass, but the S line in Z mount is an entirely different situation and while not every lens is a home-run, most of the line is really good and occasionally fantastic.

Just my take anyway.

And skip the 24/1.4 Art. There are better options these days, including the 24/1.8S, or the 24 range on the 14-24/2.8S zoom. And I'd save up for the 20/1.8S for the future if you can't hack it now.

Adding to Mike's comments above, you mentioned that you will be doing video. Will focus breathing be an issue for your video work? Some of the Nikon Z mount lenses are designed for minimal focus breathing but I do not know what the Sigma lenses are like for focus breathing.

Camera Labs specify that the 24 f1.8S is free of focus breathing. Camera Labs specify that the 20 f1.8S has a small 3% of focus breathing.

--
Lance B
https://www.flickr.com/photos/35949907@N02/?
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

 

[Andre Yew]

The 28/1.8G is a mediocre lens. Don't judge the 20 and 24 by it.

 

[Terrible Photographer]

Just buy everything used, then you’ll be able to afford everything.

I bought both my Z6’s for just under $2000, my 14-24Z for $1800, 24-70/4 for $400, and did the 35/50/85 primes on Xmas sale plus trade in on my old gear.

Total was around $5k out of pocket for two bodies and 5 lenses, not bad….

 

[Aston Senna]

The 28/1.8G is a mediocre lens. Don't judge the 20 and 24 by it.

hahaha i know. i have made good images with it, but it's always tougher to than it should be

 

[Aston Senna]

Just buy everything used, then you’ll be able to afford everything.

I bought both my Z6’s for just under $2000, my 14-24Z for $1800, 24-70/4 for $400, and did the 35/50/85 primes on Xmas sale plus trade in on my old gear.

Total was around $5k out of pocket for two bodies and 5 lenses, not bad….

i only buy used ever

 

[jjz2]

Too big.

But if you are considering 20, 14-30, or 24... I don't think the 24 will cut it. Even 20 vs 24 is a big difference to me in framing stuff like landscapes and interiors.

"Andre Yew wrote:

20mm and 24mm are two very different focal lengths. If a 20 is what you want, a 24 won't be a good stand-in."

Yep, agreed.

Here's another curveball if on a budget and plan to use an FTZ, the 18-35 3.5-4.5 G.