Jump to content

new Sigma 16-28/2.8 DG DN


MediaFotografie

Recommended Posts

Seeing how Sigma already has a 14-24/2.8 and now 16-28/2.8, I would love to see Sigma come up with something close to a 21-50/2.8 or 21-50/4 that’s relatively compact and light. Basically, something similar to the Panasonic 20-60mm kit lens but of higher optical performance and larger aperture.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the MTF, it seems like this lens cannot compete with the 14-24mm for optical performance (though it is still good!), so it seems like it is geared towards having a slighter more usable zoom range in a lighter body. I guess it will be cheaper as well (though any of them seem inexpensive if you are used to Leica prices!). I agree with Chris that lenses this wide (wider than 21mm...) seldom have much use for me. That said, these super wides can be extremely useful in architectural photography, particularly in interiors. While you have to be careful to not exaggerate spatial relationships too much, sometimes a lens this wide is required to convey a room in a still image. The extra coverage can also be useful to allow for perspective correction, which would otherwise eat up a lot of your image area.

Edited by Stuart Richardson
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chris W said:

Yeah, despite reviewers raving about it, I'm sceptical such a wide lens can be used much on a full frame camera.

21-50mm would be great.

I agree, it would be interesting to see a 21-50mm f2.8 or f4 that had the optical performance of the 14-24mm. I can see using that at times ,particularly if it can be kept small. I still would primarily use the 35mm and 50mm SL primes, but a wider, compact zoom would be useful for the extra range on the wide end, and for things like walks/hikes when trying to keep a compact and light kit. Maybe this is just the 20-60mm Panasonic? I have not tried it, and I was pretty skeptical of the performance, but looking at the MTF, it is better than I thought...

Edited by Stuart Richardson
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Looking at the MTF, it seems like this lens cannot compete with the 14-24mm for optical performance (though it is still good!)

That's one of the points made in Sigma's video presentation: the 14-24 is better, but it weighs 60% more, costs more, and doesn't use regular filters. This new lens seems like a great compromise if those things matter to you.

I am especially intrigued by the fact that it's optimized for sharpness at infinity, and "character" at short distances, like the 45/2.8. No doubt the reviews will be similar: those who shoot resolution charts at close distances will hate it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it seems like Sigma is still killing it. It seems their wide angle zooms are better than Leica's at a fraction of the price and even a fraction of the size. Looking at the Leica MTF charts vs the Sigma, especially for the 14-24 vs the 16-35 do not seem to lean too favorably for Leica. This new 16-28 seems to be comparable or better as well, at 899 dollars vs 6400. The Leica has the 28-35mm range, which is nice, but it is also 1/2 a stop to a stop and a half slower, 990 g vs 450g and an 82mm vs 72mm filter. I love my Leica APO Summicron SL lenses, but these Sigma wide angle zooms seem to be a much better choice than the Leica offerings, not just from a value standpoint, but from a total quality standpoint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Well, it seems like Sigma is still killing it. It seems their wide angle zooms are better than Leica's at a fraction of the price and even a fraction of the size. Looking at the Leica MTF charts vs the Sigma, especially for the 14-24 vs the 16-35 do not seem to lean too favorably for Leica. This new 16-28 seems to be comparable or better as well, at 899 dollars vs 6400. The Leica has the 28-35mm range, which is nice, but it is also 1/2 a stop to a stop and a half slower, 990 g vs 450g and an 82mm vs 72mm filter. I love my Leica APO Summicron SL lenses, but these Sigma wide angle zooms seem to be a much better choice than the Leica offerings, not just from a value standpoint, but from a total quality standpoint.

And the 16-28 is internal zooming.  I don’t use ultra-wides, but I wish the SL zooms all had internal zoom and constant aperture in a compact barrel.

I think L cubed would have been a more exciting announcement.

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

And the 16-28 is internal zooming.  I don’t use ultra-wides, but I wish the SL zooms all had internal zoom and constant aperture in a compact barrel.

I think L cubed would have been a more exciting announcement.

Jeff

What is the L cubed? I don't see any reference on the Sigma site...

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

What is the L cubed? I don't see any reference on the Sigma site...

I am referring to the recent L squared announcement, further linking Leica and Panasonic.  L cubed, which doesn’t exist, is my way of wishing Sigma were included in the partnership.

 

Jeff

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

It seems their wide angle zooms are better than Leica's at a fraction of the price and even a fraction of the size. Looking at the Leica MTF charts vs the Sigma, especially for the 14-24 vs the 16-35 do not seem to lean too favorably for Leica. This new 16-28 seems to be comparable or better as well, at 899 dollars vs 6400.

Based on the diffraction MTF curves from sigma which is most similar to how Leica generates their MTF curves and interpolating between the 20 lp/mm and 40 lp/mm curve on the Leica to compare against Sigma’s 30 lp/mm, they are very similar. That said, this is for infinity focus and lenses may perform very differently at close focus.

 Taking into account cost, size, and weight, the Sigma is extremely good value for money compared to the SL 16-35. It makes me want to get the 16-28 for hiking even though I already have the 16-35 SL as it saves about 500g in weight and only giving up 35mm which I rarely use. I could add a Sigma 90/2.8 DG DN and still carry less weight than the SL 16-35 alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2022 at 7:00 PM, Olaf_ZG said:

Happy to see this as I did not expect any new lens from Sigma after L2….

Why? Leica and Panasonic are just strengthening their partnership, which was very strong even before (see the Panaleica cameras and lenses, "Leica certified" etc), while Sigma has always been a partner of the L mount while also keeping their independence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am 1.6.2022 um 19:12 schrieb beewee:

Basically, something similar to the Panasonic 20-60mm kit lens but of higher optical performance and larger aperture.

Off-topic - but isn‘t this the Sigma 28-70mm? It‘s only 120gr more than the Pana but matches your other criteria (I am using it with S5 and this gives me a good lightweight alternative to my SL2 and Leica glasses at a decent quality) And, the new 16-28 would be a perfect extension at the wider end. Wondering if Sigma comes out next with a classic 2,8/80-200mm in this „contemporary“ I-series with similar advantages in size and weight…Then this could be a real triple crown…

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hofo100 said:

Off-topic - but isn‘t this the Sigma 28-70mm? It‘s only 120gr more than the Pana but matches your other criteria (I am using it with S5 and this gives me a good lightweight alternative to my SL2 and Leica glasses at a decent quality) And, the new 16-28 would be a perfect extension at the wider end. Wondering if Sigma comes out next with a classic 2,8/80-200mm in this „contemporary“ I-series with similar advantages in size and weight…Then this could be a real triple crown…

I would argue that it is certainly not because the 28-70 doesn’t cover 21mm. I predominately shoot on the wide end so 21mm and 24mm are my most used focal lengths for ‘normal’ shooting but it would also be very beneficial to have a standard/normal focal length around 50-70mm. The problem is that the 28-70, 24-70, 24-90, do not have a 21mm focal length coverage. While the 16-28, and 16-35 do not cover the standard focal length.

Currently, my most used lens is the 16-35 SL because it covers the key focal lengths I need, while providing decent enough quality (stopped down) at 24MP. But I wouldn’t say I enjoy using this lens. I tolerate the size and bulk as a trade off for the image quality it can produce. If Sigma can sell me a lens at half the weight with the similar focal length coverage, I would take that lens instead for sure. Even if it wasn’t 100% weather sealed, it would be 1/5th the cost and I can buy multiple copies should any get damaged over time.

I’m not looking for a super zoom like those 18-200 or 24-240 because they compromise optical quality too much. If I’m shooting with a zoom, I’m already making a compromise for specific reason such as saving weight and/or avoiding having to swap lenses in specific shooting scenarios. But I’m also trying to maximize the image quality by picking a zoom lens that covers the focal length I need while not hugely compromising the image quality. Otherwise, I’d be using a prime lens. So if I had to pick a high quality zoom with a limited range (i.e. <3x) I would choose something around 21-50 with a slight trade off in range on the tele end for a larger aperture of f/2.8.

Edited by beewee
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...