Looking at Sigma Art lenses, quality level?

[miatadan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I been looking at options for second lense...

But one thing that confuses me is that my iPhone 15 Pro shows 24mm as normal lense and wide angle is now 13mm.

In the film days, 50mm was normal and 24mm was wide angle.

So how good is the Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN/ Art ? I like the aperture ring that the Leica version does not have.

In the 1980's and 1990's Sigma was considered low quality. Have they changed that much. Considering they are part of L alliance, they must have improved over the years?

Dan

Edited September 12, 2024 by miatadan
more info

[GFW2-SCUSA]

I have a few Sigma lenses for my SL2 and find the quality to be excellent, both build and image.  It is assumed that a couple of Leica lenes are bult by Sigma with the Leica name a a few differences. I would not hesitate to buy a Sigma lens.  I agree the aperture ring is a plus also.  As well as the price! 

 

[thatkatmat]

14 minutes ago, miatadan said:

I been looking at options for second lense...

But one thing that confuses me is that my iPhone 15 Pro shows 24mm as normal lense and wide angle is now 13mm.

In the film days, 50mm was normal and 24mm was wide angle.

So how good is the Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN/ Art ? I like the aperture ring that the Leica version does not have.

In the 1980's and 1990's Sigma was considered low quality. Have they changed that much. Considering they are part of L alliance, they must have improved over the years?

Dan

50mm is still normal, 24mm is still considered wide, the 14-24 is an excellent lens, brilliant actually. The images pop, but know it's an ultra-wide lens. If you want a normal lens you might prefer one of the 24-70's. Sigma did used to be considered "low-quality", that has changed in the last 5 years or so, even their AF has become very respectable and they all have an aperture ring and other custom function buttons that some people can't live without. 

The new 50/1.2 is one of the best primes I've ever used and priced right so you'll never have buyers remorse. 

[miatadan]

I purchased the Leica SL-2S bundle with the Summicron SL 50mm f/2 ASPH non APO.

Learning to use existing lens for now, going camping ( holiday's ) and relearning photography again. In the old days, developed black & white negatives and printed prints in darkroom.

The other option instead of the zoom could be the Sigma 20mm F1.4 DG DN L mount.

Guess this is the year of going back to old school, actual playing cd's again and records instead of streaming music and back to digital camera instead of my iPhone.

Dan

Edited September 12, 2024 by miatadan

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, thatkatmat said:

50mm is still normal, 24mm is still considered wide, the 14-24 is an excellent lens, brilliant actually. The images pop, but know it's an ultra-wide lens. If you want a normal lens you might prefer one of the 24-70's. Sigma did used to be considered "low-quality", that has changed in the last 5 years or so, even their AF has become very respectable and they all have an aperture ring and other custom function buttons that some people can't live without. 

The new 50/1.2 is one of the best primes I've ever used and priced right so you'll never have buyers remorse. 

This is only true on a 24x36 mm ("full frame") sensor.  Focal length does not determine what we call "normal". Angle of view does.

An iPhone for instance has a much smaller sensor, so shorter focal lengths will show the same angle of view as a full-frame camera does with longer ones.

https://havecamerawilltravel.com/lens-angle-of-view-calculator-charts/

[Almizilero]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb miatadan:

In the 1980's and 1990's Sigma was considered low quality. Have they changed that much. Considering they are part of L alliance, they must have improved over the years?

Those days are long gone. Current Sigma lenses are exellent and rival the first party options. Luckily, most people still seem to remember the old days when Sigma was the cheap option in every sense of the word. This might help keep the prices down

The Leica 14-24 is supposed to be a rebatched Sigma anyways.

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 hours ago, miatadan said:

In the 1980's and 1990's Sigma was considered low quality. Have they changed that much. Considering they are part of L alliance, they must have improved over the years?

They've always been able to build high quality lenses. Indeed, they built at least one R zoom for Leica. What has changed is that they've used the digital transition to move their products upmarket.

One thing that really propelled their image among photographers is the initial "Art" line for SLRs, which were significantly better than most legacy prime lenses from Canon, Nikon, Konica/Minolta (now Sony). Those lenses were as good as Zeiss' premium Otus line of SLR lenses, and many photographers preferred them over OEM lenses that sold for the same price.