Share with your friends


Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art on Canon EOS 5Ds R (simulated)

As of mid-2015, there’s no better lens testing platform than the EOS 5DS R. Just published, both on the 50MP Canon camera:

  • Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art sample photos at DPReview here. 45 full-size shots, most wide open.
  • Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art review at Photozone here. Excellent sharpness in central areas, but the lens struggles elsewhere at wide apertures, which is not terribly surprising. At least the performance is assessed in the proper context.

While the Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM | A is certainly not a bad lens, it is still the weakest prime of the Art series that we have tested so far. To be fair – an ultra-large aperture 24mm lens is simply more difficult to design than a 35mm or 50mm lens. This also applies to the Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 USM L II. While we have tested the Canon on 20mp only so far, it already struggled with the image corners at large apertures here so it’s very unlikely to be better on the EOS 5Ds R. Thus if you struggle to decide between the two, we’d actually recommend to have a closer look at the Sigma.

  • William Dyer

    A recent Lensrental lab analysis of the Sigma 24-35 shows extremely good center specs and respectable middle and edge resolution.
    However as the owner of a Tamron 15-30 2.8, I have no interest in this lens. I have the Tamron and the Sigma 35 1.4 Art, and the 50mm 1.4 Art. For people that don’t already have a fast fixed focal length or a high quality wide angle zoom, this lens would be great. However for me, I’ve got those bases covered. Bring on the 135 f2 Art!

  • true

    I still don’t see how this is better choice than Tamron 15-30 f2.8 vc

    • You realize they have different max apertures, correct? Different needs for different people.

      • true

        Sigma most likely will have 1 stop more bokeh, 1 stop more moving object latitude, but for stills in low light the tamron has 3 stops of advantage.

    • Jeffry De Meyer

      This one should have lower distortion and be sharper. It is also lighter.
      For some people those thing matter, others well, most people think their 18-200 are the best things ever as they Ohh and ah over contrast less blobs of color

      • true

        Distortion I think should be the same in the range that Sigma covers. It’s wiping the floor with 14-24 which is considered best nikon’s made wide zoom atm. Both are much better distortion wise than 16-35sters. Yes the distortion is higher in 15-23 range, but it shouldn’t matter because sigma doesn’t even go there.

        Tamron 15-30 cannot be compared to a 10x zoom range quality tho. The lens is heavy, doesn’t allow front filter because of the shape, and has VC that no other wide zoom of this category has (not even the best wide zoom canon 11-24 f4 has one). Handholding low-light will have very good advantages of the VC.

        However, I’m questioning whether there’s benefit of having a range of 24-35 when there’s lenses that do almost the same thing + more for that extra 15- . The advantage is big, you have one lenses that does it all. Sigma has 1 stop “moving object” advantage, but for stills the Tamron has 3.

  • Surprised by how much shadow noise is in some of those 5Dr shots at ISO 100. Yikes. In regards to the Sigma 24-35, looks great! That performance for me is more than “good enough,” and I’m looking forward to the convenience of combining my 24 and 35mm primes into one.

    • Jon McGuffin

      Yea, sigh… Poor Canon..

  • Jeffry De Meyer

    Damn it, I saw a dslr and thought Ooooh! finally quatro slr but no it is a canon.

Sigma Gear: Prices & Stock Price/Stock Info as of 12/12/2017 21:05:01 GMT Access Here
Sigma Rumors' Price Guide