Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art lens for Nikon F-mount now in stock (+ reviews & comparisons)

The new Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art lens for Nikon F-mount is now shipping worldwide and is currently in stock at:

B&H | Adorama | eBay (refurbished) | Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon DE

A good and very detailed comparison between the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Art and Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 lenses can be found on and on

Lensrentals published their sharpness test for the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art lens (see also this post).

New on Facebook: Sigma Lens Page | Sigma Lens Group | Tamron Lens Page | Tamron Lens Group

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


    • Ed Hassell

      #2 – and to make this on-topic, I’m going with the Sigma 24-35 f/2 Art in combo with the Nikkor 70-200 “E” and skipping 35-70.

  • as a 135 art owner, i cannot wait til my 850 comes in to show the magic! my 810 & 70-200 were stolen from a sporting event. .. . looking to make a write up on the 135 as well as the 850 when it finally arrives!

    • Robert Isha

      make sure you shoot at really really high shutter speed. i returned mine today. its a tripod camera really. going back to d810

      • I was wondering how long it would take for people to start complaining about camera shake from the D850. I mentioned it on one of the threads here a couple weeks ago and a lot of people just blew off my suggestion that the D850 is a camera that will need to be on a tripod to take advantage of everything it has to offer.

        • Alexander Gray

          I’m perfectly fine with it handheld. Just printed a file that’s a 60th of a second at ISO 12800. Looks good to me.

          • Aldo

            Lol is this a joke? At 12800 iso who cares about motion blurr you dont even have half the effective resolution

            • Daniel Shortt

              He forgot to mention it was a 4×6 print.

            • karayuschij


            • Alexander Gray

              Actually, it was 8.5×11 cropped from a 1×1 shot in camera. You wouldn’t know it was 12800. The camera is that good and it’s not hard to hand hold. If a beginner can get sharp shots with a d3400 you should be able to do the same with a camera that has less pixel density.

            • “You wouldn’t know it was 12800”

              …meaning, it looks more like 6400? Yay!

            • Alexander Gray

              it’s a print you haven’t seen. Why run your mouth?

            • In my career I’ve *seen* enough prints, enough 100% crops, and enough bad noise-reduction jobs, to know what the D850 will be capable of in print.

              I’m sure your print looks great. I’m sure the un-trained eye would not be able to guess that it was ISO 12800. Some folks might guess 1600, some might guess 3200 or 6400. That’s great! But unless you also shot the exact same image on a D810 and a D750, and did the same cropping and the same size printing for comparison, …your claim remains more ambiguous than I can place value on.

              So, let’s not pretend that the D850 has made a *massive* leap forward at *any* ISO.

              I bet if you dropped just one stop to 6400, an 8.5×11 from both a D850 and a D750 would be almost impossible to tell apart. And I bet that if you dropped the test images all the way to 3200, an 8.5×11 from both a D850 and a D500 would be pretty tough to tell apart as well, especially with minor noise reduction.

            • Alexander Gray

              I do this for a living. I’m not disputing anything you said. At all. I never compared it to the 810 print. In fact, the comparison I WILL do with the 810 will show close the difference in color noise. That’s it.

              My only point was that I could hand hold the camera and get an acceptable print without having to use fast shutter speeds in low light situations. That’s it.

            • Aldo

              Two things. What you ‘see’ can differ greatly from what others see. The other thing is that when you don’t use all the pixels you capture when you print, you will not miss or ‘need’ those pixels to make the photo ‘look’ sharp. This is however independent from the fact that your photo has lower resolution or sharpness than what it appears to have on your print.The best illustration of this is your own example at 12800 ISO where you unintentionally admitted you had butchered file to begin with.

            • Alexander Gray

              I didn’t butcher the file. It was shot in a square format and I printed s rectsngle that I didn’t want a border on to show customers the quality you can get from the 850. The print actually serves as an example of how good the camera is at that setting AND how you can crop with out penalty when printing the largest size the VAST MAJORITY of people actually print.

            • Aldo

              When you are shooting at 12800 iso you are ‘butchering’ the file… even if you have no choice. At those iso’s 40 50 60 megapixels dont really matter. Tony on youtube covers similar conceps. You should check them out to get more insight. In the end it is you who will benefit from the information.

            • Alexander Gray

              I watch their videos all the time and do this for a living. I’m printing WAY smaller than capable so it’s more cutting than cropping the file. And the file is what it is. A file perfectly capable of being printed.

            • Aldo

              Ok we are just not on the same page.

          • The problem is many people look at the images at greater than 100 percent size regardless of what the use going to be. And according to them anything less than razor sharp image is trash. Hence this thinking.

            • Aldo

              100 percent will suffice… yes I agree many don’t realize a slightly blurry image will not really make a difference on smaller prints… but that is not what’s being argued here. If you are okay with less than tack sharp images… why buy a 46mp sensor?

            • For cropping maybe for some people. This argument is like using XQD for speed when not everybody used high FPS and not for all times. People use cameras for different purposes at different times. It’s always better to go for highest denominator. And it’s not like nikon has 2 cameras of same config with low/high MP count.

            • Aldo

              I hope they stick with a lower res sensor for the d760.

            • They also do need to come out with a low res version of D850

            • Captain Insane-O

              Imagine a d760 with the d5 af, 36mp d810 sensor, and being able to capture 10 fps.

              I’m quite happy with my 24mp though, but I’d trade up for the new af, fps, and those tech goodies the 850 came with like focus peaking and ff4k

        • Aldo

          Bingo!… it’s not a camera for everyone. I think 36mp is the limit for me for fast paced handheld shooting

          • I agree, 95% of all the sports shots on my site are D810 and siggy 150-600 sport, I rarely use the D4s/D5, in fact I have just given my son the D5, my go to camera is the D810 for sports

          • Julian

            I’m a bit reluctant to go over 36MP too, already I default the shooting mode on my D800 to mirror lock up. Guess I need to really think before making the jump up to 47MP.

            • Aldo

              As umeshrw mentioned, they did fix some unwanted vibrations in the d800 with the d810, so it is a little better. Still the higher pixel density as with dx cameras will force you to shoot a little faster handheld than with a camera like the d750 or that of lower pixel density.

        • i have never had an issue using my once d810 mounted to a 300mm 2.8 ii in very shoddy lighting when i want detail. my 610, 750, & d4s never had issues either in the same venue. i chose the 810 over the others due to where i had to stand & gave me awesome cropping options until now. my 850 will be mounted to my needs even if it is overkill (sorry pete, not directed at you – replied incorrectly) :

        • Reggie

          LOL, pixel density is the same as the D500, I guess all those people that take handheld photos all the time with the 24mp APS-C or 20MP m4/3 cameras are just mistaken about their photos.

          • Aldo

            And that’s why you have to use higher speeds with dx cameras…which is the original observation from the first commenter.

            7 others misinformed…smh

      • Eric Calabros

        No wonder, even your avatar image is blurred with shake.

        • Robert Isha

          my friend took this image and its called icm. intentional camera movement. i never had a problem with d810 and zeiss 100mm f2 i used to get sharp images and when i was in focus that green dot stays in focus . unlike the d810 was jumping around like super Mario

      • Vince Vinnyp

        All higher resolution does is allow more detail to be captured. So you can see more movement at 100% but at the same output it will be no more visible than with the D810.

      • JoCarpenter

        Omg, please don’t tell me this camera is like that D800 with the shutter shake. I thought they solved that quite nicely with the D810.

        • Robert Isha

          unfortunately it is. from my experience with it. but i recommend higher shutter speed. i had the d800 and it was horrible. pretty much a tripod camera. when the d810 came out.i was in heaven zero motion blur. i think nikon with higher mp need to start implementing image stabilization in body

          • Aldo

            People unable to leave their love for nikon to think objectively. Im not sure sensor stabilization would solve the issue though because you end up with a ‘moving’ sensor which is the original problem… you’ll get more ‘acceptable’ shots, but not tack sharp.

            • Reggie

              More like we have enough experience of our own to know that you’re mistaken.

            • Aldo

              Check the consensus yourself…

          • Reggie

            Well that’s comforting. The D800 was fine. I don’t shoot my higher density cameras any differently than my old D3s, so I think I’ll be fine with this one. If you’re talking shutter shock, btw, that would be a different issue, for which a tripod or ibis wouldn’t help.

          • Suhail Alam

            How is this possible? Same resolution and 810 no AA filter.. so why should it matter?

            • He is right about D810. Nikon corrected D800 mirror slap and shutter vibration to a great extent in D810.

            • Suhail Alam

              Wow, ok just looked it up. No idea! Makes sense, I have a D800 and always felt like I needed to use higher speeds, now I know why. But D850 silent shots should help I imagine. Good way to test this theory of mirror slap

            • Even without the silent shutter or quiet mode(which helps with electronic shutter) I can feel at least 1 1/2 stops equivalent of difference in shake with D850 compared to my D800e. Major confidence booster.

        • They did. Nicely too.

      • PhilK

        Funny, because the reviews I saw indicated a great improvement in that regard over the D810, which was itself a significant improvement over the D800.

        The D850 has special inertial shutter shock absorber that has never been used on a non-flagship Nikon before.

      • JasonsArgonauts

        Just shot my second wedding with my D850 and there is no problem. I get the same results as with my D810 and D750. There is no issue with shutter shock or needing a higher shutter speed for the same shot over the D750.

      • Carleton Foxx

        Internal camera vibration has been a picture killer at least since the D200.
        I may be nuts, but feel like I’m able to reduce shutter shock/mirror slap when I mash the camera against face pretty hard but keep my fingers fairly relaxed in a somewhat lighter grip.
        To me it feels like my hands and skull meat are damping the vibrations. I get similar esults by putting the camera on a granite or marble tabletop and pushing down firmly. With that setup I think I can feel the vibrations propagating into the tabletop rather than staying in the camera.
        Is there any possibility that this is true?

      • Maybe it’s your lack of skills? I heard the same BS about the D810 and have thousands of sharp handheld shots.

        Also, do you realize that all of the 24mp DX cameras have a higher pixel density than a D850? I suppose all of those people should be toting around tripods too?

        You should invest in some training rather than a new camera.

        • Robert Isha

          yes lets switch to insults shall we? i don’t need skills i already have them. that fact that i shoot with zeiss should tell you i know my shit. i had the d810 and never ever had anything but amazing sharp images. but with d850 is not the case. i cant even get the focus dot to stay for 1 second without twitching like a mother fucker

  • Jim Kiefer

    Thanks Peter! I have the last non-vr 24-70mm from nikon, and thinking about upgrading for something with more corner sharpness.

  • mikerofoto

    other than on chart, how do they compare to each other in real world?

  • IanMak

    Sharpness and Chromatic aberration aside. Tamron have a faster AF motor and their stabilization is the most aggressive from all the lenses I have used thus far.

    • Not sure “aggressive” is the word I’d use if complimenting a feature.

      • Nikkor300f4VR

        I would use the word “kick@ss” it is so good.

      • IanMak

        I dunno, some people don’t like stabilization. Sometimes you want to move the camera that little bit but the stabilization is like NOOOOO!!!! and you end up jerking it a lot.

        I personally like stabilization.

  • bushkov

    The main question is will it focus on D850? I’ve read a few reports on dpreview concerning autofocus it lost when one changed a sigma lens. The problem is said to be resolved only by removing and replacing the battery in D850.

    • Chris Phillips

      I have had many focusing issues with the Sigma lenses in the past with my D810.
      My latest puzzle was the 35 f 1.8 which was front focusing by a mile. I never could bring it to focus accurately. So got rid of it just like the rest and vowed to never buy a third party lens ever again.

      • Carleton Foxx

        I had a problem with a d5500 and one of the Sigma zooms. The weird thing is that it worked with my other Nikons. But I had just updated the firmware on the D5500.

      • bushkov

        Well, sometimes it’s not easy to substitute some really good art and sport series lenses made by Sigma for Nikkors. I hope it won’t take them long to make all the firmware updates IF problems with focusing in D850 confirmed.

  • Tamron’s been on a roll. I hope they do more VC primes too.

  • fanboy fagz

    Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM is not worthy of the art name.

  • TheAwfulTruth

    If you DON’T need vibration reduction, go for the Tokina. Mine is absolutely tack sharp, is built like a tank and it’s a steal at less than US$1000. Strange that there is so little love for this lens.

    • nicolaie

      I used to have a Tokina back in the day. Slow AF, cheap build who tried to look rugged and chromatic aberation is what comes to mind. Also, Tokina made a 16-50 2.8 which had horrible QC

    • KnightPhoto

      On the DX-side, the Tokina 14-20 f/2, delivers pro-quality images. Love it, for my needs for low light UWA-WA on my D500. Noticeably better images shot at f2.2 than my Nikon 16-80 shot at f/4 at the same event.

      This is my first Tokina and pretty happy with it.

    • Tokina’s lack of SWM / USM / HSM / USD is what holds them back in certain realms, like wedding photography or portrait photography where precise and fast autofocus is very important.

      If you’re shooting less quickly, the Tokina 24-70 is a beast and probably better than almost any other 24-70 out there…

      • PhilK

        IIRC some Tokina lenses now have USM AF.

        I agree that they have been behind on certain major lens tech like USM and VR/IS in recent years.

        Pity, because at one time Tokina seemed to be more of an innovator.

        • Tokina has always batted 1000 when it comes to wide angle lens sharpness, ever since the days of the 12-24 DX. It’s truly incredible how they seem to just pull off lens after lens that offers amazing sharpness, from the new 11-20 2.8 DX to the 14-20 2.0 DX. Both are home runs.

          This is fantastic for astro and general photography, but yeah, if they want to take on Tamron or Sigma, they need to appeal more to the portraiture etc. crowd which rely on fast, silent, and precise + reliable autofocus and stabilization. I think they only have one or two lenses with USM type autofocus, and no lenses with stabilization yet.

  • Amir

    Thanks Peter.It seems Tamron is way better in almost every aspect than Sigma in that focal range.One thing to mention is that corner sharpness is better on Sigma side,though!So,if I am about to shoot with DX body,Tamron is a clean winner lens.On FX body,that depends fairly on sensor resolution.On D850 body,I believe Nikkor second generation lens(E version)is a clear winner in terms of comparing them to the third party opponents.

    • Rick Jansen

      I agree with you when talking across the entire sensor surface, but I can’t say the E is a clear winner because the lacking center sharpness and it’s steep price. The Tamron really does a good job.

  • MB

    According to MTF charts and Lens rental Tamron is only a bit better at widest end, while Sigma is much more balanced and better across the entire zoom range …
    So if there are no issues with AF and VR it may be better lens overall…
    Unfortunately the best 24-70 f2.8 lens currently is Canon L Mk2, at least according to Lens rental…

    • IanMak

      I have not used that sigma lens in particular. However I do own a few of their other ART lenses, the newest one being the 50-100mm ART APS-C. I have to say their HSM motor is unimpressive and average at best.

      I have the old Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 and the motors on those are super fast. If the G2 versions of their lenses are just as good then I would definitely get the Tamron if they are optically similar which they appear to be.

      Unless of course Sigma drastically improved their motor…. which doesn’t appear to be the case.

    • Vince Vinnyp

      The Nikon and Canon seem to trade blows. I think in terms of compromises I like the Nikon. It has no real weaknesses. I seldom have my subject in the centre with a 24-70 so the Nikon being optimised to be better across the frame is a better fit for me. Equally being strongest at the extremes is where it gets used most. If I do have a central subject it tends to be at 70mm where the Nikon is at its best in the centre.

      • MB

        According to Olaf optical test bench LR is using in center Sigma is a bit better than Nikon at 70mm and much better at 50mm, and Nikon is better than Sigma at 24mm, and Canon is better than both at any focal length…
        On the other hand Nikon is best in corners at 70mm …
        The thing is if Sigma can deliver a good and reliable AF it will be great buy … especially if you also have a good wide lens that covers widest end …

        • Vince Vinnyp

          To be fair not just corners and not just 70mm.. These are the quotes from lensrentals.
          It tells you that if you want the absolute best center resolution at the mid and wider ends of the lens, then you probably don’t want the new Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 VR. And it also tells you that this lens has been designed to be about things other than absolute resolution. It’s about having a flat field with very equal sharpness from side-to-side, and fairly equal sharpness throughout the zoom range.”
          Away from center, the Nikon really is awesome, and better than either the Canon or Tamron in the corners and edges.
          At 50mm, as mentioned in the Nikon comparison, we see Nikon’s design difference. It’s not quite the center resolution of the other two lenses but is the best out on the edges
          Center resolution isn’t as good as the others two lenses; it’s been traded for a very flat field that gives the Nikon the best edges of the group.

  • William Ling

    Just remember Nikon folks, Sigma focus and zoom rings move “backwards” and Tamron turns the Nikon way.

    I love Sigma lenses, but I’ve missed shots due to their Canon zooming direction. You’d think since they make a version for Nikon, Canon, and their own mount, that they could make a few “mirror image” parts that control focus and zoom, and make the operation match the mount.

    • It’s only a problem if you shoot equally with two different zooms all the time, and have to re-train your brain on a scene-to-scene basis.

      Otherwise, it only takes a few hours of using a Sigma or Tamron lens, and your brain remembers which way to zoom.

      • William Ling

        Well, it is a problem for me. The question I actually am wondering about is how difficult would it be to mirror-image some parts, since they have to make a run with Nikon mounts anyway.

        • Ed Hassell

          It’s not a matter of difficulty; it’s a matter of inventory costs. The mechanism for multiple camera mounts across multiple lens designs is mitigated by the costs of the mounts being spread across many different lens designs. Maintaining multiple focusing/zooming mechanisms for each lens design would be like nearly doubling inventory.

          • PhilK


            When Nikon re-takes the ILC crown from Canon some day and has a bigger marketshare, we can look forward to the default zoom direction on 3rd-party lenses being in the “Nikon direction”. 😀

          • 24×36

            Yes, unfortunately cost will always cause third party lens makers to make one “camp” unhappy. If only Nikon and Canon would have been consistent in the first place!

    • 24×36

      I have all older Sigma models before they reversed their zoom ring direction. Won’t buy their newer stuff because of it. Some lenses have alternatives, others do not. For my collection, the 300-800 f5.6 is the one that dictates the ergonomics, because nobody else including Nikon makes an alternative. And that one zooms the “Nikon way.” I’m not as concerned about the focusing ring direction since I’m generally using AF, but the zoom ring direction (and location, for that matter) consistency is important to me.

  • Never had a need for Nikkors 24-70 don’t see a need for this one either. If I did I would rather have the Sigma, I use mainly Nikkor but Sigma have come a long way

  • Ed Hassell

    I owned the 28-70 D AF-S and hardly ever used it, using the 17-35 D AF-S almost exclusively for wide to normalish work on film. I just don’t use the over 35mm to under 70mm range that often. I settled on the Sigma 24-35 f/2 Art. It covers people groups and most of my “normal” wide-angle needs admirably, in addition, giving me an extra stop in speed. I have 20mm and 15mm primes when I need something wider and the 70-200 “E” covers my tele-zoom needs.

  • ethan

    The main question is will it focus on D850? I’ve read a few reports on dpreview concerning autofocus it lost when one changed a sigma lens. The problem is said to be resolved only by removing and replacing the battery in D850.

  • Wolf33d

    Seriously? Not recognizing that FF is the trend is hilarious. He spoke the truth and did not seem arrogant. You seem offended by his interview because you own an APSC Fuji system.
    Does not mean your Fuji camera is bad. It is actually very good in some areas but let’s face it. A Fuji XT-2 with a D850 sensor and associated line of lens would be a better camera IQ wise. And don’t give me the lens weight argument, if you can’t carry a bigger lens just go M43.
    IQ aside, FF is the trend due to cheaper FF body coming in the market and people wanting to get the best IQ.

  • NikMan

    I tried to run my car on urine once, didn’t work

    • Cynog

      You should have used tea, don’t’cha know. Everything runs on tea in Britain.

  • David

    The graph marking the format cutoffs are wrong; as it is from center, then it’s approximately 12mm in either direction for APS-C and 18mm for FF.

    • Sean Miles

      It’s to the corners – approx 21.6mm for FF

  • Rick Jansen

    Im in the market for a new 24-70mm. That Tamron really looks promising. Center sharpness better than the E version from nikon and a lot cheaper. The G version is optically superior in the center, but lacks VR. The corner sharpness for me isn’t that extremely important and well enough on the Tamron. It seems to me the G2 is the perfect allrounder.

  • Michael Moats

    Great. Another Sigma lens where the zoom has to be turned the opposite direction of most Nikon-type lenses.

    • 24×36

      No matter how good it was, that would stop me from buying it. Opposite every other lens I own – plus the zoom and focusing rings are transposed as well, compared to all my other lenses. Ugh!

  • true

    This sigma lens has super sexy look, but boy does it look like it would weight a ton

  • Ps

    This lens has been out of stock everywhere for over a month. Not going to be in stock for another month as per B&H. Wonder whats going on. Many initial reviews were criticizing this lens’s the image quality disappointment compared to other Sigma ART lenses. I am wondering if Sigma is pulling a Nikon tactic and quietly pulled these lenses off the market to “fix” the issues.

  • Back to top