I think these comparison videos are going too far. I wish photographers would just find what works for them, figure out their budget and keep moving. Comparing 3 categories of lenses that are very different but only share some focal distances isn’t helpful to new photographers nor does this principle apply in the professional photography world.
Thank you for continuing to show sharpness results on APS-C cameras. Too often we get reviews that don't take this possibility into consideration, despite the large number of owners of Sony's a6X00 series cameras.
I am also happy to see this as I mainly shoot on an A7RIV. This test shows me the center and mid frame sharpness that I can expect, which is pretty important
@@muzlee7479 At 42-157.5 it's not entirely dissimilar to the Tamron 35-150mm on full frame. Weird to be sure, but someone would probably find it useful. I'm hoping Tamron sent Chris the 28-300 to review. The reviews I've seen show it to be fairly abysmal on the edges/corners, but much better towards the center. On an APS-C body the edges should be better since it crops out the worst of it, but so far no reviews have shown this yet.
If you find yourself thinking "wish we had this on APSC", remember that Tamron offers 17-70mm f/2.8. 25.5-105mm equivalent. Obviously not the exact same thing, but there is a great option for non FF shooters too!
I have that Tamron but the sharpness of Sinus 16-55 2.8 makes me want to sell the 17-70. Yes we're talking about different zoom ranges now but lately I've been preferring quality over range. That's kind of how I feel about this review. I preordered this lens but I may just be happier with my 24-70.
35-85 F2 would be Awesome but quite bulky, 1.8 might be extremely large! I think for 1.8x zoom lens they are all gonna be sub 2x zoom range. For F1.8 it's so tricky that 2.5 time might be possible at the expense of having a big boi haha, or very expensive due to extensive use of composites materials. But engineers always surprise me, let's cross fingers!
@@smallrtech I have no knowledge on lens design. But, Sigma recently released a 28-45mm f/1.8 zoom lens. Tamron has a 35-150mm f2-2.8 I feel like it is possible to find a similar sweet spot, at the expense of requiring some lens profile corrections maybe.
I agree, a 35-85 f2 would be perfekt for professional event photography, since many shoot on two bodies with a 35/85 combo. For that scenario size is less of an issue. Personally i would even prefer a 35-85 f2.8 but very small. Such a lense should be possible in smaller than sigmas 28-70 or tamrons 28-75.
I'd definitely like to see what they'd come up with, but I don't know if they'd produce something better than the 70-350G. A 50-300, or even just 50-267 (to match FF 400mm FOV) would be very cool if they can make it smaller/lighter than the 70-350 (or the Tamron 50-300 FF).
@@KevinZJR Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, nobody makes a 70-200mm F2.8 equivalent for APS-C. Even micro 4/3 has this equivalent - Panasonic has a 35-100mm F2.8, and OM has a 40-150mm F2.8.
Gorgeous lens but hard to justify this when the Samyang 35-150 comes on sale here in the US for about a grand. 24 or 28 isn’t exactly wide, wider than 35 but I think I’d just switch lenses for an event like a wedding - only a few shots will be wider than 35mm like the establishing shot or group shot in which case I’d probably want a 16-35mm on the body.
To be honest we Sony shooters are too spoiled. This new sigma is phenomenal especially the Price it’s perfect for what this “F2.8” “Full Frame” can do. Not that many camera manufacturers say this about their lenses. Overall big win for sigma and Sony shooters :)
This lens is goated but id still take either the tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 if i want the best of the best or the nikon z 24-120 f/4 s if i need something a bit lighter. Well done sigma!
Dear Christofer! You made 24/45/70mm review for rf 24-70. But 24/50/105 for rf 24-105 f2.8. I think more useful for 24-105 will be 24/45/70/105 to compare same focus distances with 24-70 you did. Thank you 🙏
I would advise that if you have a 24-70mm keep it on a full frame and get the 35-150 for a crop then get a viltrox 16mm and you will be covered for almost every situation.
Another impressive lens. I already have the 35-150 so I will be skipping it, but I hope Sigma could continue making such impressive optics. I hope Sigma could make a 85-135mm f/1.8 or a 35-50mm f/1.4.
@@FilmFlab I don't know if you were shooting with a Sony or a Panasonic/Leica. If you were shooting with the former, a 28-70mm f/2.0 is going to be released by Sony.
The comparison we need now is 24-70mm lens at 2.8 70mm compared to 105mm 2.8 on actual detaol captured. I'm sure 105mm will beat due to zoom factor but I expect best 70mm instruments to not lag behind too much
Knowing that (by previous 24-105 constructions) the image quality at 105 will be worst it's a pitty that you didn't include test shots at 85/2.8 for example to visualize portrait lens capability.
IMO missed the mark by not making it internally focusing, which is more of a video shooter thing, but L mount could really do with a good broadcast capable multipurpose lens.
@christopherfrost Hi Christopher, I hope you are doing well. Is it possible to know the dimensions of your test chart/photo mosaic? I have the tamron 28-75 RXD V1, I saw your video about it, but my copy is soft in the corners. I have a test chart, but it is not that big and I test my lenses fairly close to it. However, when the subject is 1.5-2 mt or so from the lens, the corners are a lot better. For landscapes, the lens is really sharp overall. So, I guess it is an issue when the lens is close to the subject due to distortion or something like that.
Awww thats so sweet Sigma made a 28-105 for full frame. Over in apsc land we been enjoying this lens thanks to Tamron with its excellent 17-70mm F/2.8 (24-105 FF) As always this was a awesome video for such a must have tool for stills and video work!
on corner tests, do you focus on the corner? or expect it to have the same focus as the center? as the corners are technically at different distance than the center, so shouldnt be in focus if you focus in the middle.
This, thats why shooting flat surfaces like walls or charts can't be objective testing. All lenses experience lens field curvature especially on wide f stops and on ultra wide lenses. When i first bought my Laowa 10-18 i thought it's corners where soft but after applying a focus stack technique which i always do on vertical close to the subject(15cm) ultra wide angle compositions the corners came out almost as tac sharp as the center portion of the image at f8
If this was an f2 at 28-35mm it would be awesome. It is still a great lens though. If I was choosing between this and Tamron 35-150mm it wouldn't be an easy choice.
@muzlee7479 Well it's actually the same. The Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 is actually 24-105 in full-frame. Sigma 28-105 F/2.8 is the same range (a tiny bit on the wide end different) but in full frame. Thats like saying a 50mm on crop is 75mm but a 75mm on Full frame is not the same?
@@HagaishiSama If you buy an apsc 50mm lens for you full frame camera then all you have is a 75mm eqv. If you buy a 75mm full frame lens then you have a 75mm lens plus in apsc mode a ~112mm lens.
@@mbismbismb Their subjective opinion doesn't matter if they show the objective results of their tests. As far as I know they don't do that so it doesn't matter to me.
Watching the blog makes me think that the wise money should be spent on the glass .The Nikon 50 mm f1.2 is going to see a long life span . Along with the other great lenses out there . Camera bodies are going through great changes change . For the Megapixels are going up Global shutters will get to be the norm for higher end . My point is the lenses we purchase the latest and greatest coming out may well be where the wise money is spent. Till we get to see the way the new camera bodies perform …. I would say hang on the z 8 price has dropped and the camera is a great choice. But u think my z50 f1.2 is a wiser investment than a 100 mega pixel body. May be an explanation on what is happening with new technology may help a few people out .
Ah I have to say it’s a little disappointing. I was hoping this may replace a couple of my 1.4 primes because as I’m getting older I don’t want to pack as many lenses…
Well, afte this, it's just irrational to stick to Canon and their "xenophobic" strategy. Which is too bad, R6 is such a comfortable camera, very ergonomical. Alas, half the price for this lens makes them good concurency
Sigma 28-105/2.8: 1500 USD, 89x160mm, 990g Canon 24-105/2.8: 3000 USD, 88.5x199mm, 1300g I am a Canon shooter for 25 years but overaly current Canon offerings in RF are soooo disappointing. I only have one Canon RF lens, rest are Sigma EF Arts because they have MUCH better price/performance ratio.
@@GungKrisna12 Most of the bodies have IBIS today so lens IS is not that important as it used to be in times with no IBIS: Not saying that the combination of stabilization in lens AND in body is not better but IBIS itself is good enough not to represent any major issue with usable exposure times. I am using my 105mm non stabilized prime comfortably at 1/30th of a second with the IBIS body.
But you can't use this lens on RF, so what's the point? Also the sharpness is on a different level. If you want this lens you need to switch to Sony first.
@@Tegneaufreak Of course, I know it is not made with the RF mount. I compare ML lens vs ML lens. Fact that Canon blocks 3rd party FF AF lenses from RF mount is just another sad story. Canon knows well why he does this - he would sell fraction of lenses. And if you look on TDP, sharpness is on par between the two. Sigma has better controlled fringing than the RF. So for the RF it is even more sad considering its ridiculous price. And I write this as an owner of the RF 28-70/2.
Same here, in Canon since 1999 in film days, two R6's, but all Sigma Art EF lenses. But after seeing this, and considered also the Tamron 35-150, I feel ready to switch in the next months, I'm closing this year wedding season and it probably would be my last season with Canon. Such a shame on them.
Another reason for Canon shooters to switch to Sony. Like sure there is the RF version of this lens but as someone who switched a few ago for more lens options but have kept up with Canon. I can not see them allowing Sigma full frame lenses anytime soon as it would kill their lens sales for a year or two as RF owners would buy 3rd party lenses like crazy. Just switch to Sony. Takes about 1 month to get used to it.
I see no reason to take this over the Tamron 35 150. Also I wish we wouldnt be showered with one behemoth lens after the next. Where are the small lightweight high quality lenses for modern cameras?
Don't forget Sigma released a 28-105mm f2.8-4 Full Frame in 2005 that was hailed for its sharpness and was almost half the length and weight of this new one. It took Sigma almost 20 years! to get that extra 2.8 at the long end. So to say that they're lens "Designers are working harder than Air traffic controllers" is a gross, overly hyperbolic statement. It would be more apt to say that they were asleep for almost 20 years and then finally decided to update a 19 year old design.
thanks for nice review . Sadly contrary to what used to be Sigma compact design trend ,now it has move to opposite direction for their newer lens larger , bigger & heavier & shorter in zoom range.I will not consider it .It should has at least 18-120 or 28 -150
US price: $1,499
very cheap!
Here in europe the price is 1649€
Im not sure if i should get the Tamron 35-150 over the Sigma.
How about making a comparison between F/2.8 Canon 24-105, Sigma 28-105 and Samyang & Tamron 35-150 lenses? 😊
Waiting for this!
The ultimate wedding lenses !
The canon is on a different category
@@v_stands_for_value124this is true. But most people are judging based on focal length and not overall purpose.
I think these comparison videos are going too far. I wish photographers would just find what works for them, figure out their budget and keep moving. Comparing 3 categories of lenses that are very different but only share some focal distances isn’t helpful to new photographers nor does this principle apply in the professional photography world.
Thank you for continuing to show sharpness results on APS-C cameras. Too often we get reviews that don't take this possibility into consideration, despite the large number of owners of Sony's a6X00 series cameras.
Well said 💯
Kind of a niche tho. Like it’s such a weird focal length on apsc and there is the tamron 17-70 to cover the same range
I am also happy to see this as I mainly shoot on an A7RIV. This test shows me the center and mid frame sharpness that I can expect, which is pretty important
I mean, there is the full frame 35-150mm, same sorta deal as this on crop.@@muzlee7479
@@muzlee7479 At 42-157.5 it's not entirely dissimilar to the Tamron 35-150mm on full frame. Weird to be sure, but someone would probably find it useful. I'm hoping Tamron sent Chris the 28-300 to review. The reviews I've seen show it to be fairly abysmal on the edges/corners, but much better towards the center. On an APS-C body the edges should be better since it crops out the worst of it, but so far no reviews have shown this yet.
I’ve been watching your channel for more than 5 years now. The fact that you only have 300k+ subs is criminal. You deserve millions’
If you find yourself thinking "wish we had this on APSC", remember that Tamron offers 17-70mm f/2.8. 25.5-105mm equivalent. Obviously not the exact same thing, but there is a great option for non FF shooters too!
I have that Tamron but the sharpness of Sinus 16-55 2.8 makes me want to sell the 17-70. Yes we're talking about different zoom ranges now but lately I've been preferring quality over range. That's kind of how I feel about this review. I preordered this lens but I may just be happier with my 24-70.
Это конкурент 24-105mm f/4 на полном кадре.
For the best lens reviews this Christopher Frost is the best!
Sony will then probably release FE 24-105 II at some point. Perhaps f2.8-4 wouldn't be a bad thing
Looking at the designs coming out lately, I still hope for a 35-85mm f/1.8-2.0 or similar.
35-85 F2 would be Awesome but quite bulky, 1.8 might be extremely large! I think for 1.8x zoom lens they are all gonna be sub 2x zoom range.
For F1.8 it's so tricky that 2.5 time might be possible at the expense of having a big boi haha, or very expensive due to extensive use of composites materials.
But engineers always surprise me, let's cross fingers!
And pair it with a 20-35mm f/2.
@@smallrtech I have no knowledge on lens design. But, Sigma recently released a 28-45mm f/1.8 zoom lens. Tamron has a 35-150mm f2-2.8
I feel like it is possible to find a similar sweet spot, at the expense of requiring some lens profile corrections maybe.
I agree, a 35-85 f2 would be perfekt for professional event photography, since many shoot on two bodies with a 35/85 combo. For that scenario size is less of an issue.
Personally i would even prefer a 35-85 f2.8 but very small. Such a lense should be possible in smaller than sigmas 28-70 or tamrons 28-75.
When will Sigma release the last one of the APS-C zoom trio? Now we have 10-18mm and 18-50mm. We really need a ultra-lightweight telephoto!
I'd definitely like to see what they'd come up with, but I don't know if they'd produce something better than the 70-350G. A 50-300, or even just 50-267 (to match FF 400mm FOV) would be very cool if they can make it smaller/lighter than the 70-350 (or the Tamron 50-300 FF).
@@planterz42 Usually, the telephoto of the zoom trio is around 70-200 full-frame equivalent, which is around 50-130mm in APS-C.
@@KevinZJR Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, nobody makes a 70-200mm F2.8 equivalent for APS-C. Even micro 4/3 has this equivalent - Panasonic has a 35-100mm F2.8, and OM has a 40-150mm F2.8.
@@planterz42Well, Fuji has a 50-140/2.8 for APS-C. But I would expect from Sigma to go much smaller. 🤞
Does the oldie enormous Sigma EF apsc 50-100 f/1.8 count? With Canon x1.6 its become 80-160 f/2.88 FF equivalent.
Gorgeous lens but hard to justify this when the Samyang 35-150 comes on sale here in the US for about a grand. 24 or 28 isn’t exactly wide, wider than 35 but I think I’d just switch lenses for an event like a wedding - only a few shots will be wider than 35mm like the establishing shot or group shot in which case I’d probably want a 16-35mm on the body.
Good point
for me 24 is way wider and it would benefit my work, but this 28 is not that insane. Ill stay with my Samyang 35-150 which i really love
I own the Tamron 35-150 and I believe this Sigma will be optically superior
@@alyousufI think you’d have to make a rather large print to see any difference.
To be honest we Sony shooters are too spoiled. This new sigma is phenomenal especially the Price it’s perfect for what this “F2.8” “Full Frame” can do. Not that many camera manufacturers say this about their lenses. Overall big win for sigma and Sony shooters :)
Oh dang I didn't think the review would already be done! And I'm here just 10 minutes in!
The only seemingly objective review of this lens I've seen. Much appreciated Chris!
This lens is goated but id still take either the tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 if i want the best of the best or the nikon z 24-120 f/4 s if i need something a bit lighter. Well done sigma!
Dear Christofer! You made 24/45/70mm review for rf 24-70. But 24/50/105 for rf 24-105 f2.8. I think more useful for 24-105 will be 24/45/70/105 to compare same focus distances with 24-70 you did. Thank you 🙏
I would advise that if you have a 24-70mm keep it on a full frame and get the 35-150 for a crop then get a viltrox 16mm and you will be covered for almost every situation.
Another impressive lens. I already have the 35-150 so I will be skipping it, but I hope Sigma could continue making such impressive optics.
I hope Sigma could make a 85-135mm f/1.8 or a 35-50mm f/1.4.
35-50mm 1.4 would be a dream lens! Even a 35-50mm 1.8 🙏
@@FilmFlab if you think that 35-50mm 1.8 is a dream lens you can buy 28-45mm 1.8 right now
@ Need the 50mm, 45mm doesn’t cut it.
@@FilmFlab I don't know if you were shooting with a Sony or a Panasonic/Leica. If you were shooting with the former, a 28-70mm f/2.0 is going to be released by Sony.
@@shang-hsienyang1284 I’m greedy, I want a 1.8 or 1.4 haha
The comparison we need now is 24-70mm lens at 2.8 70mm compared to 105mm 2.8 on actual detaol captured. I'm sure 105mm will beat due to zoom factor but I expect best 70mm instruments to not lag behind too much
5:57 That corner blurriness is more like a small amount of an optical phenomenon called "Double Vision".
Thanks Christopher. I own the Tamron 28-200 which is only f/2.8 at the wider angles, otherwise I'd considered buying this lens
As always, excellent review! 😊
It sadly lacks an internal zoom, meaning dust & moisture quickly enter lens.
Knowing that (by previous 24-105 constructions) the image quality at 105 will be worst it's a pitty that you didn't include test shots at 85/2.8 for example to visualize portrait lens capability.
I LOL'd on "bumper to bumper disaster".
I wanted this but noticed background is busy like f4 and tamron 35-150 has creamier backgroubd
I think this lens is enough for me. This is awesome lens.❤
For all in one landscape lens on sony R5 vs Sony 24-105 OSS lens? I’ll be hiking with it and would like some reach.
Wondering if there will be a Tamron 28-105mm f1.8-2.8
It'd be great to get a comparison between this and the Leica 24-90 2.8-4 on L mount, esp. IQ at the extreme ends
IMO missed the mark by not making it internally focusing, which is more of a video shooter thing, but L mount could really do with a good broadcast capable multipurpose lens.
Hope Sigma and Tamron bring back optical image stabilization to their lenses
@christopherfrost Hi Christopher, I hope you are doing well. Is it possible to know the dimensions of your test chart/photo mosaic? I have the tamron 28-75 RXD V1, I saw your video about it, but my copy is soft in the corners. I have a test chart, but it is not that big and I test my lenses fairly close to it. However, when the subject is 1.5-2 mt or so from the lens, the corners are a lot better. For landscapes, the lens is really sharp overall. So, I guess it is an issue when the lens is close to the subject due to distortion or something like that.
Awww thats so sweet Sigma made a 28-105 for full frame. Over in apsc land we been enjoying this lens thanks to Tamron with its excellent 17-70mm F/2.8 (24-105 FF)
As always this was a awesome video for such a must have tool for stills and video work!
APS-C land 🗑🚮
With the DOF and total light gathering of an F/4 lens on FF which is of course an option that has been around for many years
@JesusChristSaves. Not at all but you don't sound like a professional ether so I'm not surprised. But to each it's own
Christopher Frost the goat
It would be great if the lens doesn't extend outside the barrel. Internal zoom and internal focus.
That would make it much larger and heavier tho
@@muzlee7479 like the Canon,24-105 2.8
Unbelievable performance… Sigma is unbeatable this year O.O
Chris, don’t you miss IS on this lens? Or is modern in body IS good enough?
IBIS was good enough for me with this lens, even on my slightly older a7R III
I'm not rushing out to grab this as I guess I'm not the target market. But it does bode well for the future of not-exorbitantly-expensive zoom lenses.
Are there any obvious reasons to get the Sigma 28-70 f2.8 ii when this exists?
on corner tests, do you focus on the corner? or expect it to have the same focus as the center? as the corners are technically at different distance than the center, so shouldnt be in focus if you focus in the middle.
This, thats why shooting flat surfaces like walls or charts can't be objective testing. All lenses experience lens field curvature especially on wide f stops and on ultra wide lenses. When i first bought my Laowa 10-18 i thought it's corners where soft but after applying a focus stack technique which i always do on vertical close to the subject(15cm) ultra wide angle compositions the corners came out almost as tac sharp as the center portion of the image at f8
If this was an f2 at 28-35mm it would be awesome. It is still a great lens though. If I was choosing between this and Tamron 35-150mm it wouldn't be an easy choice.
got the 28-45 f1.8. One thing i cant get over, its the fact that zooms the wrong way around compared to nikon/sony/tamron lenses
That is the Canon way.
Is it fit for Canon ?
When’s sigma going to create a telephoto lens for z mount!
When will Nikon allow Sigma to make some lens for Z system???
Why did you shoot 3:2 and upload the video without desqueeze?
I really want a lens with this range and F 2.8...But good I first look at this video :) Like always an awesome review.
If you have a high MP FF camera you could get the Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 and put your camera in crop mode.
@@HagaishiSamaor get this and then you can get an even larger range
@muzlee7479 Well it's actually the same.
The Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 is actually 24-105 in full-frame.
Sigma 28-105 F/2.8 is the same range (a tiny bit on the wide end different) but in full frame.
Thats like saying a 50mm on crop is 75mm but a 75mm on Full frame is not the same?
@@HagaishiSama If you buy an apsc 50mm lens for you full frame camera then all you have is a 75mm eqv. If you buy a 75mm full frame lens then you have a 75mm lens plus in apsc mode a ~112mm lens.
Compare with RF 24-105 f/4? About the same price. The 2.8 Z of Canon is not competition.
How can this lens so small ? Perfekt perfekt perfekt 👌🏻
hi is available for Nikon Z mount ?
I wonder if at this point it is just better to have 2 cameras, one with a 1.8 135 and another one with a zoom 24 70mm
Or one with a 135 and the other with a a 28-105. Or even better, a 16-35 and a 35-150
not going to beat the Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8 for sony and Z mount
Odd. Peta Pixel's review shows 105 F2.8 to be extremely sharp. Chris Frost received a slightly faulty lens copy?
Will u be trusting peta pixels? Me ? No hahaha they talk shit about canon and praise sony and lumix hahahahaha
@@mbismbismb Their subjective opinion doesn't matter if they show the objective results of their tests. As far as I know they don't do that so it doesn't matter to me.
This is basically the equivalent of the tamron 17-70 f2.8 on aps-c
No Nikon z mount 😢
If only any lens maker could produce a 20-150mm f5.6 for us landcsape shooters that would be a godsend. Or even a 20-200mm f4.5-f6.3
how long until RF version? lolz.
Maybe in another life 😂
Which is better the newer 24-70 or 28-105?
The 24-70 has better image quality, this has a better range. Decided which is more important to you
i need this for z mount!
Damn price kinda steep but i also already have the 18-50mm f2.8 which is great
It’s much better in close shot wide open and fringing than rf 24-105 f2.8. Also has less distortion. Shame for canon.
Watching the blog makes me think that the wise money should be spent on the glass .The Nikon 50 mm f1.2 is going to see a long life span . Along with the other great lenses out there . Camera bodies are going through great changes change . For the Megapixels are going up Global shutters will get to be the norm for higher end . My point is the lenses we purchase the latest and greatest coming out may well be where the wise money is spent. Till we get to see the way the new camera bodies perform …. I would say hang on the z 8 price has dropped and the camera is a great choice. But u think my z50 f1.2 is a wiser investment than a 100 mega pixel body. May be an explanation on what is happening with new technology may help a few people out .
Need 24-180 F2-2.8.
Ah I have to say it’s a little disappointing. I was hoping this may replace a couple of my 1.4 primes because as I’m getting older I don’t want to pack as many lenses…
Canon: better optics
Sigma: better sales.
Not a bad lens but the corners are soft and too much distortion
Wow 😮
now F4 please thats super compact :)
Came right here this morning for this review. Still think the Tamron 35-150 may be the better buy.
yeah, the Sigma is cheaper and lighter, but tamron got more sharpness and less aberations.
@@julianB93 And a - for me - more useful focal range and better bokeh.
Ohhh still less wider than Canon's 😌 Sigma should really keep it up
Well for an extra £2000 you have to expect something extra 😀
Fuck this lens is insane! I want it right now 😅😅
Well, afte this, it's just irrational to stick to Canon and their "xenophobic" strategy. Which is too bad, R6 is such a comfortable camera, very ergonomical. Alas, half the price for this lens makes them good concurency
You go watch cats, I get an urge to go see recipe videos from chef john (foodwishes) after each of your videos 😹
Sigma 28-105/2.8: 1500 USD, 89x160mm, 990g
Canon 24-105/2.8: 3000 USD, 88.5x199mm, 1300g
I am a Canon shooter for 25 years but overaly current Canon offerings in RF are soooo disappointing. I only have one Canon RF lens, rest are Sigma EF Arts because they have MUCH better price/performance ratio.
Even if we factor the IS on the Canon's lens
@@GungKrisna12 Most of the bodies have IBIS today so lens IS is not that important as it used to be in times with no IBIS: Not saying that the combination of stabilization in lens AND in body is not better but IBIS itself is good enough not to represent any major issue with usable exposure times.
I am using my 105mm non stabilized prime comfortably at 1/30th of a second with the IBIS body.
But you can't use this lens on RF, so what's the point? Also the sharpness is on a different level. If you want this lens you need to switch to Sony first.
@@Tegneaufreak Of course, I know it is not made with the RF mount. I compare ML lens vs ML lens. Fact that Canon blocks 3rd party FF AF lenses from RF mount is just another sad story. Canon knows well why he does this - he would sell fraction of lenses.
And if you look on TDP, sharpness is on par between the two. Sigma has better controlled fringing than the RF. So for the RF it is even more sad considering its ridiculous price.
And I write this as an owner of the RF 28-70/2.
Same here, in Canon since 1999 in film days, two R6's, but all Sigma Art EF lenses. But after seeing this, and considered also the Tamron 35-150, I feel ready to switch in the next months, I'm closing this year wedding season and it probably would be my last season with Canon. Such a shame on them.
At that weight would it be better to have a tripod collar….
Another reason for Canon shooters to switch to Sony. Like sure there is the RF version of this lens but as someone who switched a few ago for more lens options but have kept up with Canon. I can not see them allowing Sigma full frame lenses anytime soon as it would kill their lens sales for a year or two as RF owners would buy 3rd party lenses like crazy. Just switch to Sony. Takes about 1 month to get used to it.
Can I use DG DN Art lens to my Canon R6 with adapter ?
I use Sigma DG HSM Art type work perfectly with adapter to my R6
Thank you !
@@BillyKumoro-ct7gt nope.
Working harder than ...... what?
I see no reason to take this over the Tamron 35 150. Also I wish we wouldnt be showered with one behemoth lens after the next. Where are the small lightweight high quality lenses for modern cameras?
It’s too heavy for normal day out
USD price? 🤑
1500
Don't forget Sigma released a 28-105mm f2.8-4 Full Frame in 2005 that was hailed for its sharpness and was almost half the length and weight of this new one. It took Sigma almost 20 years! to get that extra 2.8 at the long end. So to say that they're lens "Designers are working harder than Air traffic controllers" is a gross, overly hyperbolic statement. It would be more apt to say that they were asleep for almost 20 years and then finally decided to update a 19 year old design.
wow
RIP bank account
Zoom lens only tamron
thanks for nice review . Sadly contrary to what used to be Sigma compact design trend ,now it has move to opposite direction for their newer lens larger , bigger & heavier & shorter in zoom range.I will not consider it .It should has at least 18-120 or 28 -150
I hate that the word sigma has become cringe lol, I love Sigma lenses.
Give me the lens Chris
28mm?? why sigma, why??
Canon users 😭
first!