Sigma 24 1.4 Art

funtagraph

The AF system to control the AF-drive is in camera. Always. How fast a lens focuses, is depending on how powerful the focus drive is. HSM or silentwave drive work the same way and are part of the lens, therefore the lens plays a part in speed and the camera in accuracy, simplified very roughly.

heartyfisher

..... simplified very roughly.

yup.. ;-)

Golf007sd

...and to be fair: themore wide-angle you go, the more light is collected and probability increases that in the wide AF frames is something the camera can focus on. On the contrary, I have a lot of hunting on 300/4E PF when night falls.

Would be interesting how the Nikon lenses of that FL would focus. But I keep in mind, the 24/1.4 from Sigma saves half the bucks I spent on 24/1.4 G, and the same for the 35 and 50 - I think, even if focussing in very dark areas becomes an issue on comparatively old systems like D4 (without s) and D7000 - they blow those counterparts away in each (!) other aspect.

I can honestly say, I never experienced Sigma lenses hunting where Nikkors would just bite the spot.

Have you ever been in a salt mine 170 meters below the ground? How about a silver mine 60 meter below the ground where it is so dark that without a single point of light you will NOT be able to see your own hand 1 inch from your eye? Ever walk in to a dark church build over 1000 years ago? These are the setting I'm talking about where finding a point of contrast is hard to find. Not outdoor shooting the vast venue that you can see the stars and the street lights. So, YES the Sigma hunts...period, in venus I was in. Hence, I don't "think" I KNOW first hand. Moreover, try to get close to a subject in such setting and shoot wide open, see how you fair.

Why even bring up the new Nikon 300mm lens into this conversation. If you understand light and how it works in trying to meeter a subject 300 meter away or farther, you would not even make the comparison or correlation. Moreover, if you are trying to shoot in such setting, then you should have gotten the 2.8. That is why they are made.

@msmoto: So you are telling me you took this shot blow...a 5 second...again, a 5 second shot at F8, ISO 100 handheld? Really? As I said, in my comments, no tripod and on a time constraint.



In the end, I look forward in seeing what Sigma has done. But I will not be selling my Nikon 24 1.4G or having it replaced anytime soon.

snakebunk

.................otherwise I would say it is the maximum aperture of the lense and the focus system of the camera that matters......................

No. the lens plays a big part
Compare
The new Nikon 80-400mm AF-S VR G ED N R
with
The old Nikon 80-400mm VR
the new one focuses much faster

Yes, the speed comes from the motor in the lense, but we were talking about possibility to focus in low light (at least I was...).

funtagraph

@Golf007sd since I live in Europe I know what you're talking about. One reason I never leave home with a camera bag but without a torch: even in broad daylight I occasionally come to places where it's quite handy to have one and can save the picture. And no matter what happened to you underground, you still don't have the slightest proof, the 35 and 50 Nikon would have done a better job - as well as I have no proof they wouldn't. No offense, but gathering light IS easier for wider angles. I was not doubting that lenses can hunt, no matter who made them. I was just doubting, in the same situation the same FL from Nikon would NOT hunt. And if you're not happy with the Sigmas, you don't have to keep 'em, do you?

Maybe that makes a difference: I very gladly take the surprises coming from them, but am never tempted to demand perfection at that price. I am aware they are not very close to the sources of the secrets of Nikon tech - at least not the one impossible to copy because of the know-how. But then, Sigma (to me) is currently one of the most interesting manufacturers.

Msmoto

OK, are we talking about lens focus speed or impressions of the new Sigma. Maybe a new thread, "What determines focus speed?" is in order.

Like here:
http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/3942/what-factors-determine-focus-speed-lens-camera-body-or-both

funtagraph

I feel, we were talking about a difference in reliability of AF, Nikon vs. Sigma. And @Golf007sd rightfully came up with some disappointing experiences with his Sigmas on his high-end cam. It's a pity not each of us has some mines at hand to compare different lenses, but I guess everybody can talk about nightshots, dimlight situations. I admit, I can't compare - I don't have doublettes in FL from both brands, I once had a 50/1.4G which I found a bit disappointing in terms of wide open performance. But I truly can't say anything about reliability differences.

Golf007sd

@funtagraph: Glad you get what I was trying to say. And you are right, I did not have the Nikon 35 or 50 with me...they stayed at home. I know the Sigmas are far better and that is why I own them. What I do know is that when I mounted the Sigma 50 1.4, in the setting I was shooting at...and again this is the key shooting venues I'm emphasizing on...my beloved Sigma 50 1.5 Art, kept hunting. Once I switched it out to the Nikon 24 1.4....the problem went away. This is all I'm saying.
And trust me when I say, it has nothing to do with the lenses being wide and one that is not. As you have tried to express. I'm far from the average photographer....I have a very sound foundation in how to shoot given a venue regardless of the gear. And for the record, I'm not in anyway disappointed with the shot I took with the Sigma 50 1.4 Art. The image are awesome. I was frustrated, not disappointed. I wanted the longer focal length reach the 50 offers...just wish I was given more time in the areas I was shooting.

I LOVE wide-angle lenses, and when I travel to place like I did, the wider the better. So I'm just giving you and those here my own feedback. I just hope that Sigma has addressed this in this new lens....specially for those that will be shooting in setting like I did.

donaldejose

Testing can be done without going down into a mine. The mine only provides an absence of light. This can be simulated by using a basement at night; or any room in the house with the windows covered. Then a set up can be created and various lenses tested in the same environment using various levels of light to compare hunting in low light. Nikon 50 1.4 v Sigma 50 1.4 etc. However, I doubt the utility of such testing because how often will anyone be shooting in such conditions? I am not going to take the time to do such work because I am not going to be photographing in such conditions.

funtagraph

@Golf007sd The firmware of your lenses is updated, I guess? Currently there's not much firmware out, I think once I had an update and whenever I frequently checked, it was still nothing new.

"And trust me when I say, it has nothing to do with the lenses being wide and one that is not." Well, I disagree on that. My own experience tells me something else. Why? If you have the half FL, you have four times more area within the AF mark. Increases the possibility that something within that area just has enough contrast or borders to detect focus. Also, the wider your lens, the less your body movement changes the place you try to focus. Handheld 200 without VR and AF-C: One could also say the focus is hunting, but it has to because from AF-module perspective seen, AF point keeps moving.

That's only my explantion to what I notice. Most of the time I use AF-C when shooting handheld. I don't want to go into competition with your experience, I just have my own which I know. Yours I can't evaluate and I'm not saying anything about "less value" herewith

Golf007sd

@funtagraph Yes, all the firmware have been applied to both of my Art lenses.

I was only exposed to this while adventuring the dark world, underground, in Poland, its church's...as well as, those in Hungary and Austria.

Let me be clear, I have not had any issue regarding AF with either of my Sigma's in the past. I have taken thousands of image with them. Moreover, I took some stunning image with my 50mm while on my trip. I look forward in sharing them on PAD in the days, week, months to come.

Did I hear you say 200mm? Well, again, I look forward in sharing the stunning image I took with my Nikon 200 F2...VR on & off with the new TC-14E III & TC-20E III. In addition, you will not only see mine, but many taken Adamz, as well. The word "hunting" can in no way be used with this lens....period! And I used all the modes possible: in AF-S/AF-C, single AF mode all the way to 51 points.

funtagraph

No, @Golf007sd you can't have heard me saying something about your 200/2. I was talking about my 300/4E PF. And since I'm the guy behind the finder, I saw it happen, period
I don't want to slow you down in editing all the fantastic photos you brought home. Could I speed you up somehow?

henrik1963

If the 24 1.4 Art is anything like the 35 1.4 Art it will be a fantastic lens. And it should give Nikon something to think about.

Looking forward to all the pics on the PAD taken with the 24 1.4 Art :-)

Msmoto

I have had the 24mm f/1.4 Nikkor for about two years, and while at present I would of course purchase the Sigma, the Nikkor has been an exceptional lens.

funtagraph

The only thing I don't like about the Sigma is the big question mark "when can I get it?" I must say, I'm very tempted to sell the "exceptional lens" as you very precisely described it @Msmoto. But after three years exchanging it for a much less expensive one which might be optically a little bit better?

kenadams

MsMoto, I don't think anyone doubts the Nikon is exceptional - but is it more than twice as exceptional as the Sigma, and noticeably so? Really makes you wonder about Nikon's pricing strategies...

funtagraph

@kenadams I don't think, @Msmoto was defending the Nikon price. Maybe she was, and for sure I am saying, I had lots of fun with that lens. We're not saying we won't have lots of fun with the new Sigma

funtagraph

...Competition is good for us. Rejoice.

Exactly!

My sentence with the "Question mark" only refers to Sigma's luxury problem: They can't make enough of their great glass. I ordered the new 150-600/5-6.3 Sport last October. First it was November, then December and actually it's "not before March". So I cancelled it, got the 300/4E PF instead, am not too happy with because of the fiddling with converter and will renew the order for the Sigma which is four times heavier, 1/3 cheaper, fully customizable, got a nice score a lensscore.org and comes with a serious tripod collar.

It's not equalling your 200-400, of course not, but it's a long row of bucks until I'd get to 200-400 and am not using it professionally.

Edit: And by the way, I'm based in Europe and therefore not shopping at Adorama or B&H, shipping costs are quite unattractive

snakebunk

Here is an mtf comparison between the Sigma, Nikon and the Canon: http://sigma-rumors.com/2015/02/sigma-24mm-art-lens-vs-canon-nikon-mtf-charts/

I am not sure if you can compare charts between brands, but the Sigma chart certainly looks good.

funtagraph

It's the only logical thing to do these days, if you need a fast 24mm. The Sigma will be almost as low-proced as a Samyang but with AF

Msmoto

The MTF charts suggest for a wide lens this new Sigma is a stunner. Not only does it expand the iner cicle of sharpest image out about 40% more than the Nikkor, it has better contrst at the finer level as well.

My prediction is this may even have the "Leica" like quality of better contrst, plus excellent sharpness. I will bet the resale value of my Nikkor 24 mm f/1.4 will be slipping somewhat. But I did not buy it to resell, so.....

Looking forward to your results, PitchBlack

funtagraph

Me too.

As for the Nikon prices: Which way should they go? Would we believe in their good quality if they'd become cheap beyond their "special lens rebates"? If I'd could get a Leica for 1000$, wouldn't I suspect some drawbacks? Could Nikon lower their prices without upsetting some customers?

kenadams

What drawbacks?? It's from the original seller and producer. If Leica sells a brand new 50 Lux for 1000$ - I'd buy three. Two for use, one for backup.

The IQ is for anyone to see and judge by themselves, should be easy enough.

JonMcGuffin

My thoughts..

I completely second the comment in regards to competition is a good thing. Competition and commerce is indeed, a very good thing and I'm so pleased to hear somebody acknowledge as such.

What must else Sigma do to give the market confidence their Art line of lenses are top notch? They've not released a dud yet. 35mm, 50mm, 24-105mm, 18-35 1.8, 150-600 plus a handful of others. If the performance doesn't exceed Nikon's it'll match or be so close that it won't make any tangible difference. At $850 it will really be a steal.

Nikon always has the option to do something very similar they did with the 35mm 1.8G and that is come out with a good lightweight prime and price it under the Sigma. I'm a fan of the 1.8G primes and Nikon has done well with both the 20mm 1.8G and the 28mm 1.8G so maybe a 24mm 1.8G at $699 is in the future. If it can perform essentially on par to the Sigma, it'll slow Sigma sales I would think.

snakebunk

Another thing Nikon can do is to make sure they are the best camera choice for use with third party lenses. I think they should let Sigma and others license the use of their mount. In that way we (the customers) can be sure that there is no compatibility problem and Nikon can earn a few percent on Sigma sales as well. It would make the Nikon cameras more attractive and could get Canon users to convert.