Sigma 24-35mm F2

NSXTypeR

Anyone interested in this lens?

Seems like the big brother of the DX 18-35mm.

Ironheart

Seems like they are trying to compete with their own prime lens offerings. Would love to see some images and reviews

donaldejose

Yes, if it can truly replace their wonderful 35mm f1.4.

PB_PM

F2 cannot replace F1.4. Just cannot, particularly at wider focal lengths where depth of field is deeper to start with. I think this is just a lens made to prove a point, Sigma is saying, "nobodies done this before, and we did." The zoom range is kind of odd. I'd rather have 20-35mm F2.8 than a 24-35mm F2, but that just seems like a more useful range in my mind.

WestEndFoto

Is this an FX or DX lens?

Ironheart

FX, my point of competing with the primes was if someone didn't want to carry 3 1.4 primes, 24, 28, and 35, they could grab this lens instead. Prolly half the weight, and get 80-90% of the IQ and DoF.

sevencrossing

they could grab this lens instead.

As @PB_PM says

f 2 is not f 1.4
If you are one those rare people who really need f 1.4 ( most people, including me, don't) then this is not going to cut the mustard

Ironheart

You are making my exact point, most people don't need the extra stop, and if they were considering one of the WA primes, they could get this instead. For the prime fetishist and those that desire their DoF in wafer thin slices, this will indeed not cut the mustard, but for 80-90% of the folks this will compete with sigmas own prime offerings, which was my (only) point :-)

sevencrossing

I wonder who is this aimed at ?
24 -35 is a very limited range
I prefer my 16 -35 f 4 vr

PB_PM

If the lens is sharp across the range wide open, it would a nice all in one normal wide angle lens for anyone who cannot decide if they like 24, 28 or 35mm focal length the most.

spraynpray

Agreed.

pictureted

I just can't see it - the limited zoom range, large size/weight, 82mm filter - would rule it out. It's about the same size as the Nikon 16-35/4. But it weighs a lot more, doesn't have VR and has a fraction of the zoom range. For fast - I'd rather use a 28/1.8G for a fraction of the size and weight.
If I planned to put it on a tripod for landscapes or "art", I'd probably get a Zeiss 25/2 and a 35mm (many to choose from).

WestEndFoto

I think that there is a limited application for a fast wide angle. Astrophotography and low light are all that come to mind.

I tend to shoot "scapes" at the wide end at f5.6 or above and try to use a tripod at ISO 100, so a fast lens is not important to me.

However, on the long end, where I tend to shoot portraits, I will pay big bucks for the extra half stop.

snakebunk

I agree with PB_PM.

I understand this is not for everyone, but I think it is a very interesting lense. For me it will be a good alternative to having to choose between the 24 or the 35 mm Art prime lenses. I don't need more than 35 mm because I can use my 50/1.4, and I don't think I need less than 24 mm very often.

I hope Sigma comes out with a 85/1.4 Art lense and then makes a 50-85/2. It would be a consequent strategy. And they have the 24-105/4 for those that wants a long zoom range.

Lets hope it really has prime lense image quality and is given a good retail price.

heartyfisher

Its a faster wide 24-70 :-)

just the 24-35 and 70-200 add to that a 50 1.4 which everyone gets anyway ... and it would be an excellent fast kit!

Vipmediastar_JZ

@heartyfisher thats what I was thinking.
This "would" replace my 24-70 since im not happy with it from 24-49mm. 50-70mm is fine for me

Lets see 14-24 2.8, 24-35 f2, 50mm 1.4 art 70-200mm 2.8/f4 in the event bag.

Sometimes I can't decide if I want to take the 14-24 or 35 1.4 art to the car show so this would be the lens for it. I always take the 50mm and 70-200 everywhere.

Am I going to replace it? NO. Im actually looking at 300mm+ but I would be nice if I didn't have the 24-70 already which I been trying to sell ever since I bought it if IQ is better it might make it on the wishlist but for a second shooter (my wife) or backup camera it would have that lens anyways.

WestEndFoto

I have to wonder what the point of this lens is. Just buy the 28mm 1.8 and move back and forth 20%. I know that is not always possible, but this seems like a pretty narrow lens.

snakebunk

I have to wonder what the point of this lens is. Just buy the 28mm 1.8 and move back and forth 20%. I know that is not always possible, but this seems like a pretty narrow lens.

Well, if you add moving back and forth 20%, it is actually a 19.2-42 lense .

starralazn

I have to wonder what the point of this lens is. Just buy the 28mm 1.8 and move back and forth 20%. I know that is not always possible, but this seems like a pretty narrow lens.

I said this in a flickr group discussion, and got scolded :P
Apparently people need the (critical) difference in perspective... although iguess moving back and forth on a zoom gives you more options... (although iwould think a person who uses a zoom would be less inclined to move...)

Ironheart

If the horizon is 10 miles away, and you want the extra 20%, you would have to move 2 miles back. Perhaps not?

WestEndFoto

If the horizon is 10 miles away, and you want the extra 20%, you would have to move 2 miles back. Perhaps not?

Get a really sharp prime, perhaps an AIS - nice and small, and crop.

Vipmediastar_JZ

LIke noted you can't always move back and forth. For the cruise nights it is either going to street traffic or finding a weird angle because the car next to the car you are shooting is too close that you need something wider.

heartyfisher

I have been shooting with my 24-70 VC tamron which is sharper on the wide end, so for me I use it a lot like a 24-35. With the added VC on the tamron of 2-3 stops, it performs "better" (1-2 stops) in low light situations, of course unless its low light and the subjects move, then the sigma would be 1 stop better :-). I wont be switching but I can see that it would be attractive to many who are considering the 24-70 from canon or nikon, because there are many who do not shoot at 50mm. Cropping a little at 35mm gets you to 50mm and using the 70-200 gets you 70mm and you can "zoom" with your feet if you want wider ;-)

And talking about wider .. 24mm is really quite different from 28mm. For me there seems to be a real big difference in the "wide angle" feel. I have had many different lenses with 18-xxx (28mm equivalent) and over the years I had come to the conclusion that I am not a wide angle shooter.. I also have a 12-24 dx and that solidified my impression that I dont find wideangle shooting appealing. Until now .. the 24mm end of my 24-70 has been a revelation to me! I really like it.. the more I use it the more I like it !! it doesn't distort so much that its "funny" but yet gets you the "wide angle" feel when you want it. It allows you to remove distracting subjects from the background by making them small and insignificant where the 28mm would still capture enough detail that they would be distracting from the main subject. So yes for me 24mm is a special FOV.

WestEndFoto

Yeah, 24 is different from 28. The 24 2.8 AIS is on my list.

spraynpray

LIke noted you can't always move back and forth. For the cruise nights it is either going to street traffic or finding a weird angle because the car next to the car you are shooting is too close that you need something wider.

Absolutely. These meetings are no good for a lot of shots, but there are detail shots to be had. I once spent 3 hours removing reflections from the side of a Buick 226.

EDIT: Buick Electra 225

Parke1953

spraynpray not sure about the Buick 225 could you mean the Buick Electra 225. I maybe wrong.