Sigma officially announces their new 14-24mm f/2.8 Art full frame DSLR lens

The previously rumored Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 Art full frame DSLR lens is now officially announced (US pricing not yet announced):

"The Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art is the ideal ultra-wide-angle zoom lens for the most demanding photographers. With a constant F2.8 aperture throughout the entire zoom range, it’s designed for 50-megapixel plus cameras for outstanding high-resolution image quality. An updated Hyper Sonic Motor (HSM) provides fast and accurate autofocus. 3 FLD and 3 SLD glass elements; 3 aspherical lens elements; and 1 large-diameter aspherical element minimize chromatic aberration resulting in extremely sharp images. Outdoor shooters will appreciate the dust- and splash-proof construction with special sealing at the mount connection, manual focus ring, zoom ring, and cover connection. With the growing popularity in multi-camera VR videography, a new Front Conversion Service is available to convert to a round hood for these specialized applications. Like each and every Global Vision Lens, the Sigma 14-24mm 2.8 DG HSM Art is handcrafted at our single factory in Aizu, Japan and undergoes individual evaluation before leaving Sigma’s facility." (source: Sigma)

Sigma is now offering a new "Front Conversion Service":

"SIGMA is offering the new Front Conversion Service for the SIGMA 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM | Art lens. With this service, SIGMA converts the petal-type hood of the lens to an exclusive round component that lacks a light-blocking function. The new front helps prevent the lens from interfering with other lenses or from casting a visible shadow during multi-camera work. This is a for-fee service performed exclusively by SIGMA. Use of the service has no impact on the validity of the product warranty."

Main lens features:

  • Rounded diaphragm
  • Fast AF with full-time manual override
  • Compatible with Mount Converter MC-11
  • Available Sigma USB dock makes customization and flexible adjustment possible
  • Available Mount Conversion Service
  • Brass bayonet mount
  • Evaluation with SIGMA’ sown MTF measuring system: A1
  • “Made in Japan” with outstanding craftsmanship

Technical specifications:

Lens Construction 17 Elements in 11 Groups
Angle of View 114.2°-84.1°
Number of Diaphragm Blades 9 (rounded diaphragm)
Minimum Aperture f22
Minimum Focusing Distance 26-28cm/10.2-11.0in
Filter Size (mm) N/A
Maximum Magnifications 1:5.4
Dimensions (Diameter x Length)

ø96.4mm x 135.1mm/3.8in. x 5.3in.

Weight 1,150g/40.6oz.
Corresponding Mounts
Sigma DG HSM
Nikon DG HSM
Canon DG HSM
HSM -Hyper-Sonic Motor DG- Compatible with full frame DSLR as well as APS-C DSLR* The appearance, specifications, and the like of the product are subject to change for improvement without notice.

Lens design, MTF and distortion charts:

Press release:

Sigma Announces Brand New 14-24mm F2.8 Art Lens

February 9, 2018 - Sigma Corporation today announced the brand new 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art wide aperture zoom lens. In addition to the new Global Vision full-frame lens model, Sigma also announced a new front conversion service for the 14-24mm F2.8.

Outstanding Art Lens Performance
Designed for 50-megapixel plus cameras, the 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art achieves the legendary Art lens sharpeness with three FLD glass elements, three SLD glass elements, and three aspherical lens elements, including one 80mm high precision molded glass aspherical element. With near zero distortion (less than 1%) and minimal transverse chromatic aberration, flare and ghosting, the new Sigma 14-24mm offers constant F2.8 brightness throughout the zoom range and delivers optimal image quality at every focal length and shooting distance. The high-speed, high-accuracy autofocus allows photographers to capture incredible, in-the-moment images.

Rugged Design
In addition to outstanding optical performance, the 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art features the Sports line level dust- and splash-proof design with special sealing at the mount connection, manual focus ring, zoom ring and cover connection, allowing for the lens to be used during varying weather conditions.

Versatile Camera System Mount Support
The new Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art lens supports Canon, Nikon and Sigma mounts and works with Sigma’s MC-11 Sony E-mount converter. The Nikon mount features brand new electromagnetic diaphragm, whereas the Canon mount is compatible with the Canon Lens Aberration Correction function.

Pricing and availability for the Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 Art lens will be announced later.

Front Mount Conversion Service for Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art
Addressing the rising popularity of multi-camera productions, especially using ultra wide-angle lenses in shooting virtual reality (VR) content, Sigma has introduced its Front Conversion Service. Converting the petal-type hood of the 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art to an exclusive round component allows for the lens to be used in various VR scenarios without the risk of interfering with other lenses in the VR rig or undesired shadows in the content.

The availability of this fee-based service for Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 Art will be announced at a later date.

Sample photos can be found here.

Like: Sigma Facebook page | Join: Sigma Facebook group

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • a5m

    Who would’ve guessed the hood conversion was intended for VR…

    • outkasted

      I still have my hood…ijs..

      • a5m

        I’m still in the hood…

    • Richard Hart

      I shoot vr and I wouldn’t choose a 14mm lens to build a rig.

  • Rich Poinvil

    Seems nice but Sigma had too many reliability issues in the late 90s / early 2000s when they lost mine and many of my friends trust. I do have their 300 because the deal was a steel and that is the only one that I’ll ever have.
    BTW, it’s for sale if anyone’s interested.

    • Marco

      Mate, the 90s early 2000s ? Seriously ? It is 2018

      • Vinnypimages

        My 30mm Art is in the shop. I have never had any other lens without VR fail unless it was damaged. Its going to be 5 weeks getting back to me. If they want to tout pro standards then they need to offer pro repairs and after service.

        • waterengineer

          If they want to tout pro standards they need to make an accurately focusing lens. Sigma still has lots of assembly QC problems.

          • dredlew

            They focus just fine. What assembly QC problems? Any data you can reference that would back this up?

            • waterengineer

              Not really, or yes, they focus fine if you get a good copy. You decide which is right. Why have I and so many others had to send lenses back due to decentered lens elements, focus racking issues, etc. Please use the Google machine to see the complaints.

            • fanboy fagz

              when I look at links at bh and adorama (verified buyers) for sigma art primes, all I read are raving reviews about the lenses. people comments are “best lens ive ever owned”

            • Captain Insane-O

              Self reporting does not equal a random sample and considered unreliable in statistics due to the bias it introduces.

            • dredlew

              Yup and that goes for complaints as well as good reviews. It’s irrelevant to determine the state of QC.

            • GMck

              I don’t tend to go by these reviews because people tend get emotionally attached to a purchase.

            • TheInfinityPoint

              Yeap. I’ve had people attack me because I wrote a long 3/5 star review on one of their lenses, breaking down everything that worked and didn’t. It was pretty obvious some of it was emotional, lol.

            • GMck

              Emotions aside, the ones that attack you probably never even used it and never even bought one. I still use my 50 and 35 pretty regularly. Just need to retest every few months and adjust if needed. My 50 needed a +12 when I bought it and after 3 years, is now a +15. I guess I can’t complain about a +1 per year.

            • Bob Thane

              On the other hand people who have something wrong with their product are far more likely to post about it. If you look at a forum like FredMiranda, how often do people create threads to say that their lens is working within specs and meeting their expectations?

            • photomanayu

              That’s what the USB dock is for. The problem is that Nikon and Canon won’t license their AF protocol to Sigma, so it is done via reverse engineering. There’s a certain allowed margin of error in all brand, even a Canon or Nikon lens have good and bad copies. Try Canon and Fuji, working in a camera store, we’ve seen de-center elements, giant dust spots from lens BNIB.

            • dredlew

              Just by common sense, most people do get a good copy. You just happened to get a bad one. So did a few others that complain on the forums. Did everyone else complain on these forums that they got a perfectly working one? No? Exactly.

              Maybe you should use that Google machine to find a link to actual news or an official statement from Sigma that confirms that they have QC issues. A couple of forum posts are irrelevant when compared to the number of lenses Sigma produces. Also use your Google machine to understand how mass production and its associated QA works. Then you will understand why a few of you don’t have a perfectly working lens and that this is to be expected (from a QA perspective).

            • CERO

              Dred: theres quite a few reports of certain lenses having autofocus problems. Like the 50-100mm f 1.8(and I think also the 135mm 1.8 F as well). Aka they keep hunting or “lock” defocused.
              Most of them of course, can be sent to sigma for correction. Still an hassle and waste of time.

              I was lucky to have both my sigmas working properly.

            • dredlew

              No one says that there aren’t ones that are not perfect and that’s also to be expected. My argument is that there is no evidence or data of QC issues. A few lenses not being perfect is normal.

              Mine work fine too, I have the 20/1.4, 24/1.4 and 135/1.8.

            • CERO

              Agree, There are quite a few folks who keep proclaiming how Sigma has severe QC problems and that a “sizeable” percentage have bad AF.
              I have yet to see proof of these claims with real factual data.
              And makes me wonder if its the same group of people posting exactly the same on different forums and sites.

          • GMck

            I wish Sigma would just slow down on the new releases and focus (pardon the pun) on fixing the variances. It’s not like you are paying $200 for a lens and expect the world. They are cheaper than Nikkor and Canon pro glass, sure, but really, a thousand bucks or more is still a pretty hefty purchase to end up with a book end that you have to return.

          • photomanayu

            Try Canon QC, from experience working in a camera store, top repairs in the last 5 years by percentage are Canon and Leica.

        • I have two Sigma lenses (50Art, 150-600 Sport) and 5 Nikkor lenses. The only one I have ever needed to fix was the “Pro” non-VR 24-70.

        • I agree with Vinny. I had the 50-100 Art and after a senior shoot, I noticed a lot of not sharp images and I used a tripod. I took it out to test it and I could take three shots of the same item with the same focus point, just manually unfocusing and recquiring, and have three different images. I won’t trust sigma again!

          • Wow the 50-100 is that bad?! Glad I didn’t pull the trigger on that one.

      • Aleksandar Ratkovic

        It seems REALLY unfair to judge AND DISCARD SIGMA lenses based on several complaints.
        My 24-35 f2 ART works GREAT! And I swapped my 24-70 for that one…
        ALSO! I had LOADS of trouble with several Nikon lenses, 14-24, which all of a sudden started missing focus, and I sold it as faulty, 70-200 mark1 – I am still using it, but WITHOUT EVER falling, or get knocked, it started locking up whenever I try to focus on something closer than it’s minimum distance (by accident). And I have to remove the lens and try to manualy de-lock it, it takes time, and made me miss few good ones. Nikon service says some part got “eaten” away, part costs 150euros, they wanted to charge me 600 euros for installing it (total price). Whole lens is not worth much more than that!
        So far, for me, NIKON SHOULD HAVE much WORSE reputation when it comes to QC, but I can not judge based on that! Even if lenses broke on their own (neither 14-24 or 70-200 were over-used, bumped, fallen down, got wet etc.)
        So, to tell You the truth, I am REALLY close to a decision to base my whole lens kit on Sigma ART series!

    • D-RiSe

      Right, because we judge brands by what they we’re doing 20 years ago…

      • Alexander Gray

        Canon fans do.

        • FountainHead

          I just spit coffee on my monitor.
          Thanks for nothing 🙂

        • CERO

          man, shots were fired.. I mean cannons were..

    • Allen_Wentz

      Agreed. To the folks below I say it takes me a decade of abuse to really judge the reliability of a lens.

      Sure one could say who cares, buy another one every decade, but the point is that in my head I need full confidence in my gear every minute under exposure to demanding conditions.

      Obviously YMMV but I will stick with Nikkor thank you.

      • Bob Thane

        Which is fine and dandy if 10 year old kit meets your needs, but while you’re using a 80-200 f2.8 your competition is using the 70-200 f2.8 FL. Or if you trust newer Nikon glass, a Sigma example might be you using the 200-400 f4 VR I and your competition using the Sigma 500mm f4. Sure, your kit’s lasted longer, and maybe theirs will break down 5 years from now, we don’t know. But right now they’re able to capture images that are of a higher quality than yours, unless you are more skilled and put in more effort.

        Ultimately it’s a value judgement – you appreciate tried and tested gear more than you appreciate the optical improvements of new gear, and that’s fine. But it’s most definitely a trade off that has costs.

      • “Agreed. To the folks below I say it takes me a decade of abuse to really judge the reliability of a lens.”
        I can understand this view but when one says, it was bad 20 years ago. Must be bad even now…. what would be your answer?

    • CSIROC

      “too many reliability issues…”

      Kinda like Nikon over the past few years…

      • What? My D bodies have been flawless in reliability, what have you been dealing with?

        • My D800 went to Nikon three times before they managed to fix the focus problems (left side out of focus). D600 issues are well documented as well.

        • CSIROC

          As I said to Fly Moon, the D600, D750, and D800 all had major issues out of the gate, with the D750 having issues throughout its production run. The D500 and D810 also had issues. And the 24-120 f4 has massive sample variation. I haven’t had issues either, including my D600 nor with my current D810, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist or aren’t VERY well documented on the web. A simple google search would turn up a plethora of Nikon quality control issues in recent years.

          • My D810 at 300k shutter about and D500 at probably half that have never given me grief. Ever. D810 is a refurb straight from Nikon and D500 new. My J4 bought refurbished had a CMOS that showed some banding when pushed in PS/LR, buydig subcontracted the warranty work to some outfit in the Midwest who had to special order somehow a replacement CMOS from Japan for a camera barely sold here. Kudos to them bending over backwards, that J4 is probably at 30-40 hours of footage recorded and 20-40k shots. Only bug it has is if you record a big photo burst and then switch to video and video was set to slow motion video before the switchover then it freezes until a battery pull. Only slow motion and won’t happen after buffer is cleared.

            • CSIROC

              Look up “anecdotal evidence”

              Your response has no relevance on what I posted.

          • CERO

            What problems with the D500? Havent noticed much problems myself other than it loving to crank the ISO higher than needed when on autoiso.

            • CSIROC

              Straight out of the box: battery performance, card read issues, and random lockups of the camera. Some of this has been mitigated with replacement batteries and firmware updates – but it shipped with those issues.

            • CERO

              Battery performance? but this was on V01 batteries, not on the newer V20 ones. Batteries that were technically out of production for years before the D500 came out. And they gave free battery replacements.

              The only real flaw I seen on the D500 was that in some of the produced models….the plastic seal of the battery compartment came off.

            • CSIROC

              You seem to be confused on what “quality control” means. It doesn’t matter that they replaced the problem batteries for free. It shipped with a problem that had to be remedied after customers had the products in hand. Quality control means catching those problems before customers see them…not after (that’s what customer service is for). Toyota has excellent quality control. Audi has excellent customer service.

              Further, the flaws I mentioned weren’t pulled out of a hat. They’re aggregated from people with far larger and better data sets than either you or I will ever have. They are well documented and common problems with the D500. Note that “common” does not mean “every single camera has this issue”. As I said elsewhere, I had a flawless D600…

            • CERO


              If it was a quality control issue, the reports would be more widespread and affecting the NEW AND CURRENT batteries, which it isnt.

              Having an issue with an outdated battery that hasn’t been in production for years isnt anything related to quality control.

            • CSIROC

              Thanks for confirming you have absolutely no clue what quality control is.

              In this case the battery issue isn’t about the battery at all – its the camera’s power management system, per Nikon’s statement on the issue: “When pre-modification EN-EL15 batteries are used with the D500, the maximum number of shots possible (battery life) is reduced. ***This does not occur with cameras other than the D500.***” This apparently dovetails into the lockup issue being reported as it relates to the power management tweaks.

              And this crap is widespread enough that someone who 1) doesn’t own a D500 and 2) doesn’t even care about the D500 knows about them. No, the D500 doesn’t have nearly as serious of issues as the D600, D750 or D800…which is exactly why I didn’t include it in that group. But YOU asked what the issues were – I’m simply relaying that information from far more reputable sources that you could have easily found with a simple google search or following the relevant Nikon-centric websites.

              “Here’s the thing: with only 15,000 cameras in the wild, 300 problem reports for a card would be statistically significant to the point where it is predictive. Any QC person seeing that data set would immediately be moving to try to figure out what the actual problem was.” ~ Thom Hogan

              PS. QC means “Quality Control”

            • CERO

              Thanks for going ad-hominem and cherrypicking at your convenience,. Also nice you misread the clear “When pre-modification”. Again the older batteries when mixed with the power requirements of the D500 are the problem. Not the D500 itself, which was designed with the V20 power in mind.

              If Nikon decided to use a different more capacity type batteries, I bet you would lose your marbles in fury as well.

          • Mike

            I’ve had a D750 since Sept ‘14. Not one issue ever. But it did fall under the service advisory. After 148,000 actuations I just got a new shutter, no charge. So I’m happy.

            • CSIROC

              And I never had an issue with my D600 and have yet to have an issue with my D810. As I said to CrashingOut, anecdotal evidence is not relevant. There were quality control issues at Nikon, regardless of your personal experience. They are well documented.

        • Most probably non Dx bodies.

      • BlackRipleyDog

        It dovetails with my buying strategy. If buying used Nikkors – legacy AF-d’s. If new – will take a chance on AF-S / VR.

      • Fly Moon

        In the last 2 years I bought D500, D850, 28mm 1.8, 20mm 1.8 and 300mm PF with no issues at all!

        Are you referring to D600? Man, that’s like 5-6 years ago. I had the camera and I am over it already.

        • CSIROC

          1) the OP is talking about sigma 20 years ago.
          2) D600, D750, and D800 all had major issues out of the gate, with the D750 having issues throughout its production run. The D500 and D810 had issues as well. And the 24-120 f4 has massive sample variation. I haven’t had issues either, including my D600, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist or aren’t VERY well documented.

    • jojo

      I first came across Sigma lenses in the 1970s – they had a glaringly bad 39-80mm zoom I think it was, but also a few good manual focus primes over the years. They struggled with autofocus lenses initially, and seemed to get bogged down in a sort of “firmware war” with Canon, but have grown through these and other difficulties to become one of the leading players in today’s market. There still seem to be some consistency issues though. They do seem to have shown more creative thinking over the years than many bigger names in the industry, and have made great progress over the years.

      • PhilK

        Ooh, I remember that lens. LOL. A real fuzztar…

        The Sigma of old was kind of like the third tier under Tokina, Tamron, Kiron, etc.

        But they have definitely improved in recent years, apparently after the son of the founder took over and started trying all sorts of new things.

        I haven’t tried recent Sigmas personally, I always hear reports all over the map about them and the sample images I’ve seen never really grabbed me that much.

        But they have definitely pushed the camera makers out of their complacency over the last few years. Now all the Japanese makers are looking over their shoulder at the fast-rising Korean and Chinese competitors..

    • Spy Black

      Too bad everyone’s gonna force you to buy one, ay?…

    • Fly Moon

      I am not fan of Sigma lenses myself but it’s not fair to judge them based on what they did 20 years ago. In technology, that’s a long time.

      On the other hand, I bought 2 Tamron lenses in the last month and I am very happy with their lenses. I used to make fun of them 2-5 years ago but I am impressed now.

      • Mike

        Ya, I bought the Tamron 45 1.8. It’s pretty stellar. And the VC is astonishingly good.

      • Rich Poinvil

        I have almost all Nikon glass now but I love every Tamron I’ve ever had, save one.

      • jvossphoto

        I have the Tammy 24-70 2.8 and I must say it performs as well as all my Nikon lenses.

    • Shutterbug

      Honda was crappy and unreliable, too, 30+ years ago… were many things that are now excellent.

      • decentrist

        that’s total bullshit

  • Joe Russo

    I’ve owned Sigma glass before. Never again.
    I’m sure it’ll be a good lens, and most people won’t notice when their photos aren’t completely in focus, but for me, focus consistency was a deal breaker. Some of my friends have also sold their Sigma lenses, and i’ll always recommend Nikkor (or L for those Canon people) over Sigma.

    • GMck

      Agree. Rather than make more and more models, fix the damn focus problems. When I returned sigma 85 and sprang for nikkkor 105 and looked at the first batch of portraits, I wondered what the hell was I thinking. 105 on my 850 is stunningly good .

      • fanboy fagz

        weird though, all links to bh or adorama sigma art prime has raving reviews.

        • outkasted

          Raving review on my Sigma 35mm/1.4 Art! On my D3 and D700 this thing is sharp and seldom misses focus. I’ve replaced it using my 50mm/1.4 Nikon which sucks regarding sharpness

          • outkasted

            oh yeah I have the highest rating on BnH regarding feedback. of the 35mm/1.4

            • GMck

              You are one of the lucky ones that got a good one. They do exist.

            • Joe Russo

              My old Sigma 35mm 1.4 worked great on my D3S too. On my D810 however, it would miss 70% of the shots, even after multiple calibrations. Same with the 50mm Art.

        • GMck

          Many reviews are quite subjective. There are a lot of negative reviews on both B&H and Adorama that specifically call out the focusing problems.

          • CERO


    • Mehdi R

      Same problem with my Tokina lens, not with any other Nikon lenses I own..

    • Sadly, I must agree. Everyone goes crazy for the Sigma glass, but every single ART lens I’ve tried either didn’t focus or wasn’t as good as its Nikon counterpart. I’m sure there are excellent copies out there (I see the results) but QC seems inconsistent to me.

      • AnotherView

        I certainly like the price of third-party brands but the thing that turns me off them is the (reported) inconsistency in terms of optics and electronic performance i.e. AF/VR. Personally I’d rather pay the bucks (yes sometimes BIG bucks) for OEM equipment and know I’ll have fewer problems than with third-party brands no matter how much they’re recommended. I have a full-time job so photography is just a hobby for me, and I just don’t have time to mess around trying to save a few bucks when my shooting time is so precious.

      • fanboy fagz

        “Everyone goes crazy for the Sigma glass”

        if it wasnt so great people wouldnt be going crazy for it.

        • Last time I was on the freeway and stopped for lunch, people were going crazy for McDonalds – doesn’t mean it’s great or that there aren’t better options.

          The thing that really frustarts me is that I lightimately would like to use some of the lenses they have, but every time I try it, I’m dissappointed.

          • fanboy fagz

            perry, youre comparing mcdonalds to lenses? whats wrong with you?

            were talking about high end lenses, and you bring junk food into the conversation…

            “The thing that really frustarts me is that I lightimately would like to
            use some of the lenses they have, but every time I try it, I’m

            maybe watch someones videos of how to’s

            • Sorry that comparison went over your head. My point is just because a large number of people think something is great doesn’t always make it so. I’m glad you like Sigma, I’m sticking with Nikon. We won’t change each other’s minds on this.

            • fanboy fagz

              actually more people like nikon then sigma. so is nikon not that great? because the last few years, their QC isnt something great.

              im not a fanboy to any company. I like products that offer me great products that give me great value. sigma and tamron have gotten excellent reviews all around. every product reviewer, even those who dont like 3rd party lenses.

              how many sigma art primes have you tried that were no good?

            • I’ve had three Sigmas – the 35 and 50mm ART lenses and the 12-24 ART. The first two suffered from massive front focus issues (and the 35mm coupled that with wild AF inconsistency). The 12-24 seemed OK for AF, but when I carefully tested it against my 14-24, it just wasn’t as sharp. I really wanted that extra range, but not at the expense of sharpness. That was my biggest Sigma disappointment.

              I’m not a fanboy either, and I’ll readily admit Nikon isn’t always perfect, but roughly 80~85% of the Nikon glass I get works properly right out of the box – compared to 0% so far for Sigma.

              I use this gear to make my living, so I have to trust that it’s going to be consistent from shot to shot. I just can’t do that with Sigma. Again, you and I aren’t going to agree, so do what works for you…

            • fanboy fagz

              yes, I read the 35 was problematic. all the rest, I never heard a bad word. my experience was nothing short of amazement. I would not buy or use the 12-24. meh lens.

              posted a question to a photographers group on fb for sigma art primes to rate from 1-10 how happy they are. about 40000 members. so far half hour (and its saturday) 14 people rated 10/10 and nothing else. ill bump it and see what I get and post a screen shot. I highly doubt it will be anywhere near the negative feedback here.

              after all though, this is “nikon” rumors.

              I also use my gear to make a living shooting weddings. my friend who shoots with D4s/d5 and continuous focus all the time and says his sigma 24-35 f/2 doesnt work as well on the outer points. but single center point is fine. I used his lens. always spot on, as I shoot center spot/recompose.

            • Vinnypimages

              So how does that work with moving subjects?

            • Allan

              You are way out of line.

              Steve simply stated that he has not had good experience with Sigma lenses.

              And yes, a lot of people can’t tell the difference between good/excellent food and McDonald’s. And yes, a lot of people cannot properly evaluate how good a lens is. I’ll take the opinion of one Steve Perry over the opinions of many unsophisticated photographers.

              “whats wrong with you?”
              “maybe watch someones videos of how to’s”

              These disgusting comments are completely inappropriate.

              You owe Steve an apology.

            • fanboy fagz

              oh the noble fighter has come to fight for steve perrys honor.

              really? what DISGUSTING comments exactly? nothing less then your aggressive message above getting all flustered for comment that god forbid says anything doubting mr perrys credibility.

              so dont be a hypocrite and protect perry hes doing fine allen. he doesnt need a momma watching him.

    • RC Jenkins

      One of the often missed issues in third party glass is due to the camera’s lens recognition & corrections.

      One such example is focus shift. Focus shift is a natural optical phenomenon where lenses must be re-focused if they’re stopped down vs. wide open.

      DSLRs focus wide open (though they sample phases from less than wide-open), and then stop down before capturing the image. Focus shift means there will be a differential that should be corrected for (the lens should be focused for the used aperture, not the wide-open aperture). Nikon cameras correct for Nikkor lenses, but they won’t correct 3rd party lenses.

      This is just one example. So even if the third party optics are better, they can perform worse on the DSLR body.

      • Joe Russo

        That’s good to know.

        For me however, it wasn’t that simple. I tested all kinds of subjects, and every time I hit the AF-ON button, the sigma lenses would be focused somewhere different. I tried to do it on objects that would exhibit easy to see chromatic aberration like tree trunks, buildings in the distance and focus calibration prints. With my camera on a tripod, I would start wide open, press AF-ON, take a photo, and AF-ON again then another, then after 3-4 shots, stop down one stop. I swear the photos were only in focus 30% of the time.

        This type of inconsistency CAN NOT be fixed by in camera calibration or Sigma’s USB dock. Those will fix the starting point, sure, but every time you press the focus button it’s like those lenses were guessing. Any and every Nikkor lens i’ve bought, rented or used has never exhibited this behaviour, period.

        I mentioned before that the 35mm and 50mm Sigma lenses I had seemed ok on my D3S, and I think that’s because the lower resolution helped mask the exact focus point.

        Anyway, I implore all Sigma lens owners to try focus consistency tests, especially with high resolution cameras, Canon or Nikon, and share your results online. We shouldn’t just be disappointed in real life, sell the stuff and never talk about why.

  • Is there a legend somewhere showing which spatial frequencies are shown in the MTF graphs?

  • %(numUsers)

    And this will compete with the Tamron 15-30… how exactly?

    • Spy Black

      I dunno. It will certainly compete with the 14-24 Nikkor…

      • PhilK

        Which was renowed lens when it was introduced over 10 years ago.

        But I have a feeling it will get replaced itself before long anyway, and the pendulum will swing back…

        • Spy Black

          …at twice the price, I would suspect as well…

    • Vinnypimages

      If its actually a 14-24 then it’s already on the table for me if it offers improvement over the Nikon 14-24. The Tamron is 16mm + at the wide end so doesn’t compete at all

  • bushkov

    I don’s many improvements over my sigma 12-24 art, the presented images show soft enough corners. But I’m still eager to read a few reviews and tests of the new lens.

  • harvey


    • Matti6950 .

      1799-1999 euro. It uses more elements then the other two UWA (art) from Sigma. So price will be higher (unless they surprise me).

      • fanboy fagz

        me, the tamron seems like a better deal all around. but lets wait and see the price

      • harvey

        everybody seems to be going after the premium pricing these days.

    • Not released yet.

  • fanboy fagz

    Why did they purposely include images that hard to see small Details. Show images of trees in the sun to show fine detail and ca.

  • Nikuza

    Sigma Art… and the art of no-focus.

  • longzoom

    With its MTF chart the lens looks much promising. Possibility of rounded hood, OK. But what was the technical or economical ($O.50, not more!) problem to supply it with extra tulip hood extension? Dirty cheapo piece of plastic? It is way above and beyond my mind…

  • outkasted

    …for free service or fweeee service ..ijs

  • Dino Brusco

    Looks impressive on a mere spec standpoint. I wonder how much priced it will be

    • decentrist

      Yes, and Sony cameras are great on specs. Sigma’s whole strategy is to sell heavy, over corrected glass, to a slice of the market that equates sharpness as the only true benchmark for lens performance.. They have yet to achieve reliable AF.

  • Amir

    Sigma karma will start soon with predictable outcomes:Major YouTube photography channels/websites will receive the best sample,will give too much credit.People will start to invest,but soon enough forums will be full of out of focus issues brought by this lens.Sigma will recommend using dock to re-adjust,massive dock sale will start,yet problems will remain still.I have a question for Sigma:What is your ratio formula for producing bad sample compared to good one?5:1,2:1,or 1:1?

    • fanboy fagz

      weak humor

  • Julian

    Looks like a similar problem as with the Nikkor with regards to filters, due to the extended front glass element, and that means you will need to wait for a 3rd part like Lee to develop a solution for this lens design. Important if you want the maximum dynamic range for landscapes to be able to use an ND grad.

  • Iceman

    May I ask , why not the 12-24mm lens, the 2:1 focal is achievable without the quality compromise right?

  • Mike A

    I never realized the amount of contempt that forum members had for Sigma Art Lenses. It’s a bit sad to read through the all negativity churned out by members at the announcement of an interesting Sigma Art wide angle fast zoom lens.

    • Rick

      I hear you. I guess I’ve been lucky because I’ve had a Sigma 24-105 F/4 Art lens for a couple of years and it’s been great. Very sharp, and focuses quickly even in low light situations like inside old dark churches. It’s one of my favorite lenses.

      • CERO

        I still use that one, love it. Its my worker for my trips and general photography.

      • Ed Hassell

        I do not own the Sigma Art 24-105 f/4; however I have used it on my D810. It is easily a better lens than Nikon’s 24-120 f/4.

        • Vinnypimages

          Heavier, bigger, shorter focal length and not weather sealed may mean for many it is not “better”. Its almost certainly sharper though..

          • Vinnypimages

            Strangely Lensrentals just did the head to head test (Testing 10 lenses of each) and the 24-105 did very well beating the Canon but actually the Nikon 24-120 was optically very close to the Sigma. Their conclusion
            “There are always other things that are more important when deciding if this is the lens for you, of course, but you can be very comfortable about the resolution being excellent and the sample variation is small. I’d call it clearly better, from a resolution standpoint, than the Canon 24-105 f/4 IS II. The Nikon 24-120 f/4 VR, though, is aging very gracefully and certainly holds it’s own at f/4.”

    • fanboy fagz

      dont believe hype in forums. look at amazon bh and adorama (verified buyer) reviews of the linked lenses and all youll read are people wowed with their lenses.

      a lot of oem fanboys who dont want sigma to succeed as much as they are now. tamron as well.

      never believe “my friend returned theirs and I returned mine” ” I sold mine and they sold theirs” crap. see reviews of those who bought them on amazon or bh or adorama

      look at the verified buyer reviewers. some who are not and negging on the lens.

      the days of nikon being the superior lens choice is gone. it used to be that if you wanted the best, youd have to cough up a lot of money, and when you saw a sigma lens owner it was because they didnt want to buy the nikon for the high price and they would compromise on the superior lens.

      today sigma and tamron lenses outperform the nikon. sad to say.

      • sandy

        Generalization at best. At worst BS.
        Nikon makes some very good glass, so does Sigma. Nikon beats the Siggy 24-70. And the 70-200. It lose to others like the 35. maybe the 85. But they are fairly close. Nikon’s keep resale value much better then siggy.

        • CERO

          yes, but at what cost? on average is 1000 USD.

          • sandy

            I will bet the farm Nikon’s 14-24 won’t be anywhere near a grand more. And from what I read the 70-200 is worth every penny more of that grand. Choices are good.

      • decentrist

        Not on wide primes, and certainly not on long fast glass.

        • fanboy fagz

          which specific WA prime lenses are you talking about?

      • Vinnypimages

        I own and still have the Sigma 35mm 1.4 art and 24mm 1.4 art. They are optically better than the Nikon equivalents that I owned and for my use are the better choice. However I am realistic about their faults as well. They are much heavier, not weather sealed and have unreliable AF. I have the dock and can calibrate with the camera so the centre point is spot on. When I move to the outer focus points on the latest Nikon bodies it is hit and miss.
        I have posted a lot of links in this thread, including objective testing on a test bed that shows this is the case. My 35mm is with Sigma as I can no longer get it to focus on the centre point. I live with that for the performance wide open. I had the 85mm it had exactly the same issues. That wasn’t a good trade off for me for my use. Like most of their longer primes it is not really an 85mm anyway it gets its optical advantage by being effectively a 105mm F 2 with a speed booster. So they will always be much longer and heavier than a “true” 85mm.
        I also have the Sigma 18-35 and 50-100 F1.8 zooms. I have never tried to use PD AF with them as I use them with M43 and a speedbooster and nearly always manual focus. They are great lenses.
        I have the old Sigma 15mm Fisheye, it’s fine for the odd times I need a fisheye but it is compromise.
        I have the Tamron 35mm 1.8 and their 15-600 G2. Also both great for my use.
        I have a Tokina 17mm 3.5 that I will get rid of soon but it was useful occasionally as a just in case UWA.
        So I don’t think I am an OEM fanboy, I will get this lens if it is better for my use than the Nikon. That said I know Sigma makes compromises and would factor that in.
        I think in very few cases, if any, by every metric do Sigma and Tamron outperform Nikon. They make design choices which mean that for some lenses, in some ways they are better.

        • Mike A

          Vinnypimages – Do you have Zeiss Milvus 85MM f/1.4 to compare with your Nikon & Sigma 85’s?
          Any lens brand head and shoulders better optically? I was wondering if manual focusing is worth the hassle – if images are worth the additional effort which is easier for me as I shoot A7RIII.

          • Vinnypimages

            No but I understand they are amazing. If I was using an 85mm in a studio/landscape a lot I would think about one. For my use I really need AF, sensible size, weight and preferably weather sealing in an 85mm.

            • Mike A


    • Ric of The LBC

      it is the internet after all.

    • AnotherView

      I don’t have any contempt for third-party brands. It’s just that when I buy an OEM lens, I can be assured that it’s been (or should have been) fine-tuned to their bodies. Cameras and lenses are becoming more and more dependent upon very sophisticated electronics, which third party brands will NEVER be able to compete with except for optics. MF glass? No problem; Leica and Zeiss or me.

      • decentrist

        Most here worship sharpness at the altar of DXBlows, and know little about rendering. Thom Hogan told me to the effect if you can’t measure it it doesn’t exist.

    • Ed Hassell

      Back in the days of pre-D Nikon AF film and MF film cameras, Sigma offered a large variety of lenses, most of which could be interchanged with coke bottles for equal results. It is really only in the last dozen or so years that Sigma have gotten their act together with reasonably high quality for the money spent. Their “Art” lenses, while not flawless (no lens is), are generally exceptional. There have been a few AF problems; and, certainly, their AF calibration out of the box appears to have greater variation than some of Nikon’s pro-level lenses; however, with their 4-point calibration using the USB dock, and then optimization using the camera body AF fine-tuning, they are dealing Canon & Nikon a serious threat.

    • 120_300 OS for nikon

      I hear you to a lot of the people complain about everything i own now 2 Sigma s the 120-300 OS and briefly 29th of december the 20 mm art lens i love my Nikon camera s and will not change to other brand but for lenses is an other cookie come on all of you yes it can go wrong but that happens also to canon and Nikon lenses i have that experience too my 70-300 VR stopt won’t work on 70 mm soft at 300 etc rubber got loose and softened sold for the 120-300 Os had the 170-500 Sigma but was slow but got great shots with it and now with AF fine tuning in cameras problems solved . Please give a company a break !

    • Gosh1

      Nikon have lost their lead – if not the plot – with Ultrawides. Their 14-24, 16-35 and 18-35 are jaded. Only their 14 f2.8 is any competition among primes, and several impressive prime UWs Nikon-Fit have been released in the past 2-3 years.
      It interesting to consider where Sigma will be by 2020, looking at how far and fast they have advanced in just a few years.

  • TwoStrayCats

    It would have to be considerably cheaper than the Nikon version to get my attention. And I got my Nikkor for $1695, brand new. I doubt Sigma’s version will be much cheaper than that plus the fact that the Nikon lens will hold value a bit better than the Sigma in the long run.

  • Shutterbug

    Too bad it doesn’t have OS 🙁 Would have probably bought this.

  • Mike

    Peter, could you source the Nikon 14-24 & Tamron 15-35 MTF charts to compare to the new Sigma?
    I kinda like the design of the Sigma mirrorless cameras. Mirrorless, but allows DSLR lenses. It wouldn’t be horrible if Nikon designed something like this… I mean the grip is going to stick out that far, so what’s the big deal about the mount extending out too?

    • Comparing MTF charts between different manufacturers is not really a good idea because they all have different ways of measuring.

      • Exactly. Plus: almost all MTF’s are about performance wide open. Nobody expects a super wide angle to be very good at f/2.8 in the corners. But by approx. f/6.3 you do. But lenses don’t get get sharper equally when stopping down. Some keep their astigmatism, CA can even get worse when stopping down e.g., so wide open MTF’s actually don’t say much – except for lenses that have very bad or very good MTF’s.

  • ninpou_kobanashi

    Woah, I thought it’d be lighter than the Nikkor (14-24mm).
    Now I wanna see it attached to a body so I can see how big it is.

    Sigma 1,150g vs Nikkor 1,000g

    • CERO

      Sigmas usually are always heavier.. the ART ones I mean.. (lots of glass).
      My 24-105mm weights almost as much as my 150-600 contemporary.

      • But rarely are they never heavier.

        • CERO

          Pardon my english.. didn’t take my sacred nap yesterday.

          • It’s all good, CERO, just having some fun at your expense. 🙂

            • CERO

              You meanie 🙁
              I want the divorce, you get the kids.. ill get the house!

            • Well, I might as well tell you now…they were never YOUR kids anyway! So fine, as long as I get the flatscreen TV.

            • CERO

              GAAASP! YOU CHEATER! XD

      • Hans98Ko

        Heavier does not means bad at all, on the contrary it is almost always better because most expensive dedicated industrial grown, high transmission elements are heavier. Just take a look at Zeiss or Leica, both do not have AF or electronics and both uses alloys for their barrels, but the alloy barrels does not occupied majority of the weight, it is the premium optical elements that do. I know because I do come in contact or work with numerous manufacturers including those that supplied to CZ and Leica, industrial and space programs.

        • Vinnypimages

          Heavier usually comes from bigger, this makes it easier to give better optical performance. It does not automatically mean better as that extra weight and bulk is an issue for anyone who has to carry or hold them which is a lot of users. So heavier is bad for many, but sometimes it’s a worthy trade.

          • Hans98Ko

            In a way it is also true, but what I am trying to say is that for a similar size and shape element using plastic, glass or industrial grown crystal, their weight will be very different.

            • Hans98Ko

              In the last 2 decades many users complained about their lenses having tiny little bubbles as well as turning yellowish, that is where the problems came from. The glue being used is breaking apart having tiny air bubbles trapped in them, as well as turning yellowish due to aging.

  • Rich Poinvil

    Looks like I unintentionally started a war here. I almost missed your post.
    The latter would be the correct one as I did not say 100.
    I tried to post my craigslist add with photos of the gear but looks like my last reply to you was rejected.

    • Dino Brusco

      Don’t worry I saw your post.
      So would you recommend that lens?

      • Rich Poinvil

        I would recommended it. It’s a solid performer. I wouldn’t call it stellar but very, very, very good. For comparison, stellar would be the Nikon 105 1.4. The Sigma performs like a pretty damn good prime…as expected. I’ve had no issues with mine. Comes with a nice green cushioned case.

        • Rich Poinvil

          Additionally, it’s built like a brick outhouse.

  • Stephen Gatley

    The problem with Sigma is they have muppets buying their gear that don’t calibrate their equipment, this includes camera body servicing!. If you would spend the time bitching about something at least spend the time setting it up!. My Sigma 20, 35, 85 & 135mm lenses focus great even on older bodies D7100 & D610 I lens aligned them impeccable IQ!

    • Joe Russo

      You are correct, only muppets buy Sigma lenses.

  • Macro Cosmos

    Wow, the very first page is just people going at war with each another.
    You’re all just wallets to these companies, chill out.

    • Teko

      But my wallet can focus faster and better even in low light of dingy dive bars.

  • fanboy fagz

    unless the reviewer is a “verified buyer” I never read it. anyone person who isnt a verified buyer can make a review, whether they bought one or not. its quite easy really.

    the vast majority of those negative reviews are no verified buyers.

  • mikerofoto

    we can tell reading this that there is a lot of ART haters, while many other likes the Sigma lenses. I got the 500mm f4 sport and love it, super fast and work like a charm, while I have to say yes my 50mm 1.4 ART isn’t a super fast focus beast like other prime lens I have, it still does the work and better images than the Nikon 50mm 1.4 that I sold.

  • DieMusik

    My Sigma 50.4 and 20.4 Art focus perfectly on the D700/D800E that I own. On the other hand I had persistent problems with Nikkor 50.4G even after having been supposedly fine-tuned by a Nikon technician more than twice. So, I would assume focusing problem isn’t exclusive to a certain lens brand but depends on the camera body and lens combo one uses. The 50.4G focuses well on my D700 but always, always back-focuses on my D800E. At least in my case Sigma 50.4 Art is much better on focusing.

  • Kim

    Sigma never would’ve released this lens if it wasn’t significantly better then the Nikkor! Significantly! This one will be a game changer.

  • Teko

    Though I’ve never owned any… I really like the recent improvement in aesthetics of Sigma lenses. As for the reliability I’ll wait until the dust settles.

  • dredlew

    You are referencing forums? You hopefully understand that this is not evidence for any kind of QC issue. Do you generally see people in the forums post that their product is working? No, because they expect it to work. Only the ones that have issues will complain. And that’s a small number because otherwise, there would be news or an official statement by Sigma to acknowledge an issue. There isn’t anything of the sort.

    You also hopefully understand how QA works in mass production, yes?

    • Vinnypimages

      I wasn’t I was saying it is the case with all my Sigma lenses. The first reference was a bench test by a respected tester. It is not a QA problem. It is unfortunately a repeatable feature of their lenses.

  • Back to top