Share with your friends


Sigma has published performance data for its 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art (pre-order). Check it out below.

I also included an MTF comparison between the f/2 zoom lens and the 24mm and 35mm f/1.4 Art.

Diffraction MTF Charts

Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art: Diffraction MTF Chart

Geometrical MTF Charts

Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art: Geometrical MTF Chart


Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art: Distortion


Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art: Vignetting

MTF versus 24mm f/1.4 Art and 35mm f/1.4 Art

Be aware that this is wide open performance, so the 24-35mm Art is at f/2 and the two prime lenses are at f/1.4. Regrettably, Sigma doesn’t provide MTF charts for stopped down apertures.

Moreover, the diffraction MTF chart for the 35mm f/1.4 Art is not available, so what you see below is the “geometrical” one, that shows very slightly higher (better) values.

Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art at 24mm (left) and 35mm (right) — f/2 Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art at 24mm (left) and 35mm (right) — f/2
Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art (left) and 35mm f/1.4 Art (right) — f/1.4 Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art (left) and 35mm f/1.4 Art (right) — f/1.4
  • Wally in Austin

    i have to say that Sigma is doing a great job and as an owner of a 17-50 on a DX Nikon i couldnt be happier with my photography results and the Company. Sigma has the best reputation in the industry and is also showing great innovation!

  • Russell Ferris

    “1010100101010101010010101!”. I was really hoping someone would have made sense of these numbers, are these charts good?

    • Anton Tal

      what he said…

    • Rolleiflex

      The higher the MTF curves, the better (i.e. higher apparent sharpness/contrast). The closer the dotted line to the solid line, the better (i.e. less aberration, most notably astigmatism). The less waviness in the curves, the better (i.e. less field of curvature). The red lines are most likely the 10lp/mm, which represents the overall contrast/macro-contrast of the scene. The green lines are most likely the 30lp/mm (not sure on this one since Sigma didn’t say), which represents the contrast-detail/micro-contrast (i.e. make the image pop). Most lens makers use 30lp/mm, except Zeiss and Leica (40 lp/mm). By comparing across the brands, any lens can make it above 0.8 at 40 lp/mm or 0.9 at 30lp/mm is extremely extremely sharp. Above 0.2 is quite usable (i.e. not mushy). Most of these MTF curves are calculated so real life result would be a bit lower. Only Zeiss uses real measurement of their lenses.

      • Russell Ferris

        Thanks! It makes a bit of sense now, the lens looks especially strong in the 35mm end.

      • Tom

        Actually Sigma use a Foveon rig to test for and produce MTF curves! It’s an APS-C Merrill, for FF 35mm they shift the sensor for coverage. Definitely worthwhile pointing out which are theoretical vs real-life.

        • Rolleiflex

          Tom, thank you for bringing that up. I just check a couple of articles on this subject from Sigma. It’s interesting to know that the Sigma A1 MTF system is not much different than the regular Imatest one would get from Photozone and DxO. That is, the lens is tested using a test target/MTF chart at close distance (as opposed to infinity for most MTF measurements). The result is a system MTF, not lens MTF, which you would see from other makers. I also wonder why they don’t publish the result at other apertures or that they don’t show 40lp/mm instead of 30lp/mm. It has been determined as while back by lens makers that 40lp/mm is the most relevant measurement for micro-contrast.

          This would not take away from the phenomenal performance of the recent Sigma Art lenses. This new zoom looks to be very sharp. I just hope they would make lenses for mirrorless system soon so we can have smaller lens than these.

Sigma Gear: Prices & Stock Price/Stock Info as of 03/27/2017 00:34:26 GMT Access Here
Sigma Rumors' Price Guide