Pricing for Sigma 14mm f/1.8 and 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses announced, available for pre-order

Sigma officially announced the pricing and availability of their latest two Art lenses:


Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art lens:

  • Price: $1,299
  • Pre-order: B&H | Adorama
  • Shipping is expected to start on June 23rd
  • Additional information available here


Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art lens:

  • Price: $1,599
  • Pre-order: B&H | Adorama
  • Shipping is expected to start on June 23rd
  • Additional information available here

The full press release can be found here.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Jürgen Pfeiffer

    Does anyone know about an upcomming shootout between the Tamron and the Sigma 24-70mm?

    • sickheadache

      I hope Marshal Dillon Wins..so he can ride off with Ms. Titty.

    • fanboy fagz

      none were released yet. why would there be a shootout?

    • EarlFargis

      Actually, now I CAN WAIT for the Sigma versus Tamron 24-70 comparison reviews.

      I’m interested in both lenses but Amazon notified me my Nikon fisheye zoom shipped early this morning and will arrive Friday.

      Cooling of the ol’ credit card.

    • sandy
  • Aldo

    was hoping the 24-70 was 1k oh well

    • sickheadache

      Rent it and then report back.

      • fanboy fagz

        we were all waiting for your report first

        • sickheadache

          I just test drove the new Sigma 85mm …It is excellent. I was amazed by the sharpness and snappy focus and bokeh…and it is a hefty lens..i don’t mind..i am a big gurl..with big burly man hands.

          • fanboy fagz

            Yea that sigma 85 is an amazing lens. Better af system as well With those big sausage fingers you sound super sexy

    • Spy Black

      $1300 sounds about right nowadays. It may drop $100 in some time. I imagine the new Tamron will go for the same price. I agree renting one is not a bad idea to evaluate.

    • Dylan Wood

      Given the quality of lens and the price point all the others have been releasing at, it wasn’t hard to figure it would be more expensive. It’s still beats the Nikon price. 🙂

  • Andrew

    That means… shipment start tomorrow? That’s fast

    • My guess would be next week.

      • Andrew

        Brilliant! I hope the lens is worth the long wait

    • sickheadache

      You mean Six Months ago..Sigma yapped about these lenses. But I am going to test drive this 24-70mm OC, DG,DL,Br, 549, VR, DC, MS NBC, UFO, Lens from Sigma…

      • Andrew

        Or 10 years, if you insist on putting your perspective on others :0

  • Eric Calabros

    Tamron will beat this

    • JerryC

      I hope so, then I don’t have to buy another tap-in/dock for a different brand.

      • See I’m hoping for the Sigma to be better…because I already have the Sigma dock. So I feel you.

    • sickheadache

      Now Eric please play nice. You have tested both lenses? The answer is …No. Please show the links?

      • Just Me

        The word “will” indicates a prediction and not a statement of fact. Understandable since you have a headache.

        • sickheadache

          Sick!

  • JOHN TANG

    Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art site photos : belowhttps://www.juzaphoto.com/recensione.php?l=en&t=sigma_24-70os_art

  • Saad

    wonder how the sigma would stack up against the nikon 14-24 2.8…
    would it be a good idea to sell the 14-24 and get this? I have a samyang 12/2.8 and sigma 35 1.4…

    • Jeffry De Meyer

      No it is never a good idea to sell a lens before you know the replacement is any good.

    • ill keep my 14-24 NIKKOR not Nikon

      • Just Me

        You say “Tomato,” I say “Fuck you!”

  • Jim Huang

    I own the Tamron 24-70 VC and my boss has the Nikon 24-70. He is then getting the VR version of the Nikon lens, whereas I’m updating mine to either the G2 or the Sigma version (I damaged my Tamron). It’ll be interesting to see how they stack up against each other~ 🙂

    • Nikkor 24-70

      • ToastyFlake

        Tammror 24-70

    • JerryC

      Even money is not an issue, I still wouldn’t buy Nikkor 24-70 VR, the old version 24-70 is better. But we will see if either of these two new lenses can beat it.

      • Bob Thane

        *In the center at some focusing distances

        The 24-70 VR is more consistent across the frame and across all focusing distances and focal lengths. The G is a better headshot lens, the VR is better for most other subjects.

        • Just Me

          And following up on your comment, I would never use a 24-70 for headshots unless it was the only lens I had.

        • JerryC

          That’s true, VR version is more consistent across the frame, but it’s more like consistent mediocre. (70mm end is good though, but still not even close to 70mm end from 70-200)
          other than portrait, If I do other type of shooting, I’ll step down the aperture more often, at those f numbers, all of these lenses will be pretty much indistinguishable edge to edge.

  • John Viscovich

    Any reports on the 24-70m yet, i damaged a 24-70 g. and i was saving for the 24-70 VR. But the Sigma is over half price.

    • Neopulse

      Rent both when the Sigma comes out and try them out for a week or two.

  • NikMan

    one 2 tests matter to me when it comes to a 24-70, 1) the drop test from 5ft, landing on concrete, 2) how fast does it focus, …. the top two, and only 2 if they survive the drop test, and come in a tie on focusing speed, can then be evaluated for image quality, because in the end, my go to lens, (purchased my Nikon 24-70 copy roughly 10yrs ago – on its last legs), better be able to get quality shots, fast as F*&K after it gets dropped on the ground, …. cause if it doesnt survive a drop on the ground, then it doesnt matter if it has a USB dock

    • Luboš

      Focus, yes. but they are not design and meant to by drop from 5′ onto concrete. it is meant to be a lens on a DSLR.

      • NikMan

        well then, it is not a professional level lens, as my Nikon 24-70 had survived that fall several times, ……. like i have said in the past, the Nikon f/2.8 zooms are (14-24, 24-70, 70-200) professional quality TANKS that can take the beating the pro-photog needs, and price means nothing unless they can hold up. $600 would be great, if it didnt shatter, or just not even focus after a fall, but $2700, I dont care, as long as it holds up, that money will be made OVER and OVER and OVER again, … like I said in my previous post, 10years on my current 24-70 and i has made me so much money that the extra $2000 was well spent, … anyway

        • bobgrant

          Utterly silly stuff. I’ve seen cheap lenses survive drops and expensive ones self destruct on seemingly easy drops. The wrong drop can kill any lens. In 30 years I’ve never personally dropped a camera or lens on a shoot, so I’m always amazed when someone does it. It’s like watching someone who can’t park!

          • NikMan

            I am sure a cheap lens can survive a fall, but I have literally never lost any of those Nikon zooms when it has happened, … 24-70, multiple times, 14-24, I think maybe once, …. 70-200 VRII, dropped once, running up Home Depot stadium stairs, ….. it doesnt happen frequently, but to say it never happens, that would be ridiculous, and to make some kind of statement like “You shouldnt drop your gear” yeah well, that might be the dumbest serious statement I have ever read. You hustle sometimes 😉 , have to get from A to B quick, you dont check the mount on your black rapid enough over the period of a day in a concrete jungle on a hot summer day in LA, you might drop a body, i have seen it, and I have done it, and my gear better still work when it does, …. simple as that, . ….. every once and a while I leave the studio, … 😉

            • bobgrant

              The problem is that I’ve seen no inherent advantage in heavily built gear when it comes to drops. My friend worked at a rental house and he always told me that the cheap stuff did better because it was lighter and still very tough. Physics has to agree.

            • NikMan

              That is a different argument, one that I dont think I put forth, mine is that the Nikon f/2.8 zooms are TANKS, and they hold up well, that is all I am saying. Maybe the Sigma and Tam will be tough too, and better in the area of focus speed, and quality of image, and in that case because I am in the market for a new one, then it would win, and that will be the one I get, but toughness, that is the main priority for me, cost isnt even 2nd or third, … but anyway, …. I have no argument against 3rd party lenses either, I just happen to own all Nikon ones, but if I were to purchase a 24/35/50 right now, it would be a sigma, … anway

            • Hans J

              I don’t understand… Ive been shooting for over 12 years. Never dropped a camera or lens… what are you doing over there?

            • Maksim

              This article demonstrates what happens to the lens when it is being dropped:

              https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/02/things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-zoom-lenses/

          • accidents happen mate that is why there is insurance, I placed my D4s on a wall trackside at Silverstone, I forgot the wall was uneven it fell three feet and caused £500 damage, NO one is perfect not even you

        • Bob Thane

          Whether it breaks apart or not isn’t too important, what’s more important is how the lens elements are affected. I’ve seen a 24-70 take a tumble – looked fine on the outside. When tested though, it was decentered and the optics overall just weren’t as good.

          Maybe not noticeable if you don’t do big prints or crop much, but dropping any lens will cause internal damage.

          • NikMan

            Exactly, that is the stuff that matters, … that is why quality and toughens are most important to me, … i could care less about dings, and scratches, stuff like that, does it work, and work well, …. 🙂

        • Spy Black

          “…as my Nikon 24-70 had survived that fall several time..”

          If that really happened to your lens, your lens is way out of spec, and you just don’t see it. Either that or you’re making shit up.

          • NikMan

            I would say that I am stretching a bit on the distance on all drops, but once from shoulder height, and also drop from lower heights, but my point is that it NEEDs to survive a fall like that.
            Um, i think it safe to say that all of my lenses have been serviced, some a few times.
            Not sure why you are militant in your response, …. “Either that, or you’re making shit up.”
            come on man, no reason to get angry, … smile!

            • Spy Black

              Well, people make a lot of shit up. Just listen Andrew talk about gear that hasn’t even hit the market. 🙂 However even from shoulder distance to concrete is enough to damage a lens or at least misalign it. Even at lower heights they can be damaged or misaligned. Not every fall will guarantee damage, but I think you’re just lucky they survived your drops. If it was serviced after a drop, then it didn’t really survive the drop then, now did it? 😉

            • NikMan

              i have all 3 bodies, and 3 zooms serviced every year no matter what, sometimes a piece needs more attention than others, ….. I really dont make that much shit up, … unless of course it gets me laid.
              😉

        • Phil

          My 14-24mm tipped over whilst mounted on a medium height tripod, landed on the side of the lens hood and resulted in a £600 bill from Nikon repair + slightly more for the D800 it was attached to

    • Eric Duminil

      PROTIP: Don’t drop lenses from 5′ on concrete. 😉

      • NikMan

        #ShootHarder! 😉

      • sickheadache

        I hear that Duct Tape can fix that issue.

      • Hans J

        Eric you stole the words right out of my mouth. 🙂

  • TwoStrayCats

    The 14mm Sigma is almost as expensive as the 14-24 Nikkor. So is it going to be a little sharper in the corners being a prime – to give it some advantage over the Nikon product?

    • Citizen Kang

      More than 1 full stop of light is quite an advantage.

      • Just Me

        If the 20mm is any indication, it won’t be great for astrophotography, which would most benefit from that aperture.

        • Citizen Kang

          I’ve heard mixed reviews about the 20mm for astrophotography. Some say it’s a game changer with only minor comatic (not chromatic) aberration in the corners. Others have seen quite a bit more than minor comatic aberrations in the corners; I guess it depends on how the user views “minor”. I have the 20mm and at f/1.4 (which is where you would ideally like to use the lens for astrophotography) it’s a bit much for me and is distracting. However, I also admit that there is a possibility that I have a less than ideal copy of the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 Art lens. Maybe there are exceptional copies out there that have no, or very little, issue with comatic aberration. Personally, if the 14mm solves that one issue, I’d sell my 20mm in a heartbeat despite it’s 2/3 stop advantage.

          • Just Me

            Agreed. But I’m not going to hold my breath for them to reduce coma on a much wider lens. Physics is a bitch!

          • nwcs

            If you use a portable tracker like the iOptron SkyTracker or Vixen Polarie you could easily stop down and get better results with tracking rather than a static tripod.

            • Citizen Kang

              I have had a polarie vixen and have never had a chance to use it. Every time I plan to use it, lining it up with Polaris just seems like too much of a hassle. I do have the polar alignment tool as well, but my eyes just aren’t what they used to be. That being said, if I wanted to do a tracked shot, I have wider lenses that are just as sharp (Tamron 15-30mm VC f/2.8) and a couple Rokinon fish-eyes that go out to 12mm in full frame.

            • nwcs

              With as wide a field as you’re doing at 24mm and less you can just use the middle hole without the polar alignment scope. Just place Polaris in the center of the hole and you’ll be within 5 degrees of the celestial pole. That’s a pretty wide area and you should be able to go 60 seconds easily on tracking. Stack a few of those together and then a landscape shot for the foreground and you’re set. You really only need the polar scope if you’re going to be at 85mm or longer. Vixen also has a polar alignment bubble level which will get you in the ballpark as well without much fuss or muss.

            • Citizen Kang

              I was planning for some longer focal lengths to see how it would handle deep sky objects in Yosemite. I do also have the bubble level.

            • nwcs

              With care, 200mm is about the practical limit. Generally speaking 135mm and less works better.

        • Bob Thane

          I’d assume they’d do their best to make this a great astro lens, since it’s the only thing this lens would really be bought for. Maybe they failed, but if the price is any indication I’m guessing they did pretty well.

          • Just Me

            I hope you’re right and I agree with you assessment of the price. I’ve always had high hopes for the Art line but their typical degree of compromise (sharpness over everything else) hasn’t suited my needs. We’ll see.
            Regarding the price thing, I’m guessing the 24-70 will fall behind the Tamron and, therefore, the Nikon. 🙁

        • jstevez

          Let’s hope their ad material holds true “Well-suited to astrophotography and …” Not sure if they claimed something among those lines in their other fast primes.

    • raziel28

      It is still cheaper than Canon 14L for example
      Regards

  • doge

    Almost 2 inches shorter than the nikon. Anyone know the claimed weight?

  • Amir

    Sigma Art series’ zoom lenses are quite good,but their Art primes are magnificent.Price tags on these two also confirms the fact.

  • bobgrant

    Oh boy…if that 24-70 ART is good, it will seriously hurt the Nikon version. And I suspect it will be very good.

  • NJP

    Do Sigma zoom rings turn the opposite direction of Tamron? That alone may be enough to make me stick to one brand for the 24-70 and 70-200. Not sure which one yet, but I think Tamron has the edge in the 70-200.

    • silmasan

      You’ll lose track with the Sigmas, they are somewhat inconsistent when it comes to zoom ring direction. But I think this will be their standard for FX lenses (same direction with 12-24, 24-105, 120-300, 70-200 EX). It’s opposite Nikon’s way (and all Tamrons I guess?).

      The DX lenses 18-35 and 50-100 go the other way. The 24-35 which shares some base with the 18-35 is at odds with the above.

    • Just Me

      I don’t think their 24-105 hurt 24-120 sales but the price gap is quite a bit larger in this case. I never buy based on price though because I’ll regret a so-so lens a lot longer than paying more money.

    • Ashraf Al-hujaili

      well, tamron has decided to go the opposite direction of what they were doing before with their latest 70-200 g2 , so it became now like nikon , and 24-70 from tamron is expected to be the same
      so which side is the opposite of you are talking about ?

  • Reilly Diefenbach

    One hopes that Sigma has paid some attention to bokeh, as they did with the 85 Art. Could be a winner.

  • jstevez

    Everyone relax, Ben Stonewell already has full reviews.

    • silmasan

      Dammit.. I actually googled that… ^_^

  • NikMan

    Awesome, great addition to my point though, I am not seeing any demonstration, but just a single mention that one had been dropped, and a statement that says:

    ” I’ll also add that one of these lenses had been dropped on rental but ‘suffered no apparent damage.’ Want to guess which one?”

    and then a follow up at the end:

    “the small differences we see on the bench aren’t apparent even on the highest resolution test charts.”

    I do not have time to read the entire article, but SH*T can go bad when a lens drops, …. but doesnt always, ….. that is why quality of build, toughness, that matters!

  • bgbs

    whoa steep prices there Sigma. Think hard, really hard.

    • Spy Black

      Its halfway through 2017 dude.
      Think reality.

  • am I the only person that would love a 35-70 f2? I just think at 24-70 focal length you need the big apertures my 35mm stays at f2 or wider most of the time.

  • bonem

    This 14mm f1.8 is a beast! A good replacement for my Rokinon 14mm f2.8?
    I’m wondering why Nikon hasn’t extended their f1.8 line to 14mm. Or are they? I just got the 24mm 1.8 and it’s lovely. 85mm 1.8 too.

  • Back to top