SIGMA 14-24mm f2.8 ART vs NIKON 14-24mm f2.8 Lens Review | CLEAR WINNER?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ต.ค. 2024
- This is a head to head vs's video between the SIGMA 14-24mm f2.8 ART Lens and the much older NIKON 14-24mm F2.8 . I think we have a clear winner based on a few different factors. One is 10 years newer, cheaper and possibly sharper / cleaner through and through.
►Download RAW Files froknowsphoto.c...
Order from Adorama
►SIGMA 14-24mm 2.8 bit.ly/2O9NKdM
►NIKON 14-24mm 2.8 bit.ly/2LK1NtU
Order from
►Allen's Camera allenscamera.com/
Download MyGearVault mygearvault.co...
Get a FREE Guide To Capturing Motion In Low Light Situations froknowsphoto.... (look for the orange box)
___
Gear I USE
I SHOOT RAW Camera Bag bit.ly/2scQRt7
I SHOOT RAW T-Shirts bit.ly/2vG2igB
Nikon D5 bit.ly/2OBrXNa
Nikon D850 bit.ly/2n54Xto
The Microphone I use for Vlogging bit.ly/2LWGRPq
Nikon 70-200 2.8 bit.ly/2OBsjmY
Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR bit.ly/2LLHdsQ
Nikon 14-24 2.8 bit.ly/2LK1NtU
Nikon 105 F1.4 bit.ly/2vttwUq
Sony a7 III bit.ly/2n3HaK8
My Rolling Bag Of Choice For Flying bit.ly/2LNsHRK
Follow me
►TH-cam: bit.ly/frotube
►Facebook: / froknowsphoto
►Instagram: / jaredpolin
►Twitter: / froknowsphoto
USE CODE FRO at squarespace.com... to get your 14 day FREE Trial.
Please help us continue to make FREE content
by purchasing one or all of the FroKnowsPhoto
Educational guides. To check out previews of
each guide click here.
►froknowsphoto.c...
Hey everyone, let's go over a few things. I've owned the Nikon since the day it came out. I'm actually on my second copy because I felt like the first copy may have been slipping after seven years of use. Was it slipping, probably not, it was probably me expecting too much out of a wide angle shot when zooming in. I love the Nikon and have captured amazing things with the Nikon and will continue to use it.
What the tests showed me is that the sigma was straighter right out of the camera without correction being needed. That's partly because the thing is a decade newer and that's to be expected. I am not a big fan as I said of how tight the zoom and focus rings are compared to the much looser ones from Nikon. As someone mentioned below they love the tighter rings for astro photography.
The SIGMA is $600 less. I bring up that point because many people watching this channel are not full time pro's or aspire to be full time pros. They also may not have a large bag of gear and saving the extra money will help them get other better glass.
I personally do not own any third party glass. Back when I started shooting in the mid 1990's third party lenses were pretty much garbage. They were cheap and produced sub par results. Over the past 6 or so years both Sigma and Tamron have changed how they manufacture their lenses and have put out much better products.
Like I said in the video, the Nikon has been around for 10 years and could use an update even though it puts up a really solid fight against a lens that's much newer. I am not replacing my Nikon with the Sigma. I do however recommend as I said above that photographers who are starting out or looking to save money but still get quality results consider it.
We don't know how the Sigma will hold up over a decade, we just don't. We know that in the past, there were lens quality issues but Sigma has worked hard to change that and a ton of people are loving their ART line of lenses.
I bet Tokina 16-28 2.8 get the same result for half the price of the sigma
Jared Polin Why not shoot this this with a D850? If you’re pixel peeping at 2:1 the D850 would definitely show the difference in resolution between the two lenses.
Jared Polin Both Nikon and Canon must be a bit worried about how good some of the (much) cheaper opposition is getting, especially Sigma's ART range.
I wish you would have included Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 in this, despite being ever so slightly different focal length. Would have been interesting to see, since that too is comparable, if not better, than Nikon.
The Sigma is now on sale for 899 at BH photo!!!!
Don't forget you can download the RAW files right here to check out for yourself. froknowsphoto.com/14vs24/
Nice comparison. I did a similar one, though more condensed, when I bought mine. I am a bit surprised that no one considered shooting against light. With such a wide-angle lens, the sun or other light sources easily fall into your picture. Long story short, both lenses cope well against light. In both cases you have flares, but no ghosts or desaturation. In my opinion, Sigma wins also this contest, as the flares are lighter and you get rid of them if you change your camera's stance a bit.
Anyway, I bought Sigma. The very first non-Nikon lens that i ever owned.
Thanks for the comparison Jared! I’m deciding which lens to get. With price not being a factor, which lens produces better images?
I don't own any third party lenses but I've heard that some have trouble focusing. Did you experience any differences?
PS, I own the Nikon 14-24 and have been shooting real Estate with it since 2012. I think I have 250,000 clicks/5,000 shoots with it and still going strong. I figure Nikon is going to be around if I need something serviced.
My camera strap actually came undone and my camera/lens fell. It knocked my lens out of alignment. I paid $400 to fix it but it's been working fine since then.
Nikon 14-24 is such a legend. Despite being 10 years old, it's still wider, lighter, and brighter. It has lured so many Canon users to the dark side for so long.
I like it a lot
Sorry to bother brother, but no. It's not wider or brighter than the Sigma and i'l tell you why. Right off the bat, i'm not saying that the 14-24mm Nikon is bad or anything like that.
If you pay close attention to the test when comparing both images at the first image that the horse paws show in the picture and Jared point it out, when the lenses correction is used, both images became equal, it's for a really quick period, but it's there. It just seen like wider in angle, but it's because the angle in the nikon have that little distortion that Jared mentioned right in the beginning of the comparison.
I have mentioned the brightness too, yep... at least for me... the Sigma is a little bit brighter than the Nikon (Again, in the test when both pictures are paired together side by side).
@@vinnyvanoni5321 maybe rent it buddy and test for yourself lol. I owned the nikon for 6 years now and I'll borrow the sigma from my buddy all the time to use it as my secondary. The sigma is great for the price but the nikon looks a little better once you start editing your raw.
admittedly i bought the nikon . the sigma had serious focus problems .. nikon glass every time for me now
@@vinnyvanoni5321 this guy would sell sand to the arabs
Jared I just finished pixel peeping the two lenses. Firstly the Sigma file of 14mm @ F2.8 is NOT in the download, you have mistakenly included the f20 twice. Other than that the Sigma is sharper than the Nikon and more contrasty too. Geometric distortion is more or less the same SOOC BUT when the lens corrections are applied the Nikon has less distortion than the Sigma(the flag poles give a clear indication on that).. The Nikon is much better in Vignette also especially as you step down, and after the lens corrections are applied. The color rendering of the Nikon is much better in my eyes , I find the Sigma colors somewhat washed out but thats quite subjective . It is also very evident that the Sigma is less wide, at 14mm I would estimate around 15mm compared to the Nikon's 14mm. I think Sigma has provided a great piece of glass at an unbeatable price. The only thing that would tip the balance in Nikon's favor is reliability. The Nikkor is a tried and tested lens and needs no introductions whereas with Sigma could sometimes be a hit and miss both in reliability and precise autofocus . Will the Sigma age well and will it hold the value as Nikon does in the years to come? Would potential buyers be prepared to take the risk and go with the Sigma given it is on Par optically with the Nilkon and a lot cheaper, or would they opt to go down the safer route with Nikon? In my case I would prefer to buy a mint used Nikon for around 1200 $ and sleep well at night but then again there are people that don't buy used.
The vignetting on the sigma will be an issue if you want to correct it while also shooting at high ISO or you will get a very noticeable increase in noise in the corners of the photo.
Thanks Jared for a great and fun review.
I used to own the Nikon 14-24 was frustrated with its field curvature.
Than sold it and switched to the Tamron 15-30 that didn’t do great on the edges.
Couple of months ago I bought the sigma and took it to few trips and it is really great.
I feel on my D850 it is as close to perfect I could wish for. Great lens!
Interesting. Five years later, looking at used EX+ versions of both at essentially the same price. What to do?
Thank you so much for your time to make very detail comparison
I don't have a nikon camera and I don't want to buy this sigma lens, but your videos are so good and so funny that I always watch it hahaha
The settings are not the same. Right off the bat I noticed the Nikon is 1/5000 and the Sigma is 1/4000. Will that make a difference?
nice tuto. not a problem for you not having the 12-14mm range ? i have a d750 and sigma 24mm F/1.4 and am interested to shoot wider for artistic effects. i don't have budget for these two primes. what do you think about sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 hsm II in same conditions ? no idea what it would look like and if lightroom/dxo can fix distorsions,....
Did you try the sigma with the z6? :)
Because my tamron 15-30 does not work in lowlight :(
Nice review. But, I'll stick with my Nikon 14-24! Every time I use it, I am amazed at how sharp it is, and how easy it is get good shots, even in darker scenarios!! In short, it works, for me, and I love it!! I think it will still be working, when the Sigma is past it's prime. That's my 'tuppence, and thanks for reading! Take care, and God Bless! - Doc
I literally just got my 14-24mm 2.8 Nikon and coupling it with a D810. Looking forward to some great night shots and astrophotography. The lens is a beast.
The "vignetting" on the Sigma doesn't look like the usual smooth gradation in light fall-off one typically sees on a lens, which should anyways go away as it is stopped down to f/8. Rather, it looks like the edge of the lens' image circle is crowding into the corners slightly, which could actually become worse as you stop down because the edge of the image circle will become sharper. This is an unfortunate oversight by Sigma engineers.
I've been using the Sigma 12-24mm F4 ART for over a year now and love the results from it. I can only imagine the 14-24mm F2.8 is just as robust a performer.
Hi, can you tell me what camera you think is best between the Pentax k1 ll, Nikon D810 and Sony a7 lll, and on what basis do you choose, thank you.
just as a piece of fun trivia, the rocky scene running up those steps is the first time a steadycam was used. It was at that time experimental and that scene made the product a must-have for future cinema.
Do you have any quick thoughts on the sigma 14-24mm 2.8 va the canon RF 15-35mm 2.8?
I like the Nikon but I agree, it's close. I dont have 1 yet. just the 20-35 2.8D Love it but I'd like to see images of the 14-24 indoors close quarters, up close sharpness and perspective. Links?
I prefer the NIKON over the Sigma because there is a better integration with NIKON camera bodies in terms of automatic compensation of distortions and vignetting. And I like your hair style!
Respect to both Nikon and Sigma, it's a win win for us all that third party lens makers have upped their game so much and Nikon still doing so well in this test with an old lens reminds us they know what they're doing . Both are available new in the UK at around £1150 through ebay, very tough call but the fact the Nikon has a known track record might just swing it for me.
I own a Nikon D500. I had been planning to get the Nikon DX 12-24 wide angle zoom lens for the D500. The new Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 VC HLD lens has been getting good reviews. Have you done a review of either lens? What is your opinion about each of the lenses? The Nikon lens is priced at $1149.95; the Tamron is priced at 499.00. Thanks in advance.
Can I use the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 ART on a Nikon D850?
This kind of video is awesome! I've looked seriously at some of the Sigma Art lenses and I know before dropping the $ on one I should research and do something like this. But that would involve having to rent the lens and testing it out and mailing back and forth! It's awesome that you are doing the legwork for us!! :) Keep it up Fro!
It's now four years later, and the Nikon 14-24mm is 15 years old. I picked one up for $1500, and I absolutely love it. I'm sure the Sigma is a fantastic lens, but I just had to complete my Nikon Trinity. It's taken a while...!!!
Great review! Thanks for all the work you put into these.
What do you suggest for filters? Is it possible to use a CP?
That is really nice of you to stop and take your time and extend courtesy, so rare unfortunately no matter where you are
you dont do very important test for me - autofocus speed especialy in low light situation. i do sports shooting and i m goona buy nikon lense because im pretty sure it will work faster and better in low light situation when people move, for some landscapes i think sigma will be as good as nikon. Please test autofocus in diferent situation for your next lenses
Picked up a used Nikon 14-24 for $800 used... I think bang for buck can't complain. With so many newer wide angles coming out, its worth checking out the used market on some of these previously premium Nikons
If you zoom in all the way in the raw files it looks like the Nikon is much sharper. Also, the first raw file in the Sigma 14mm is not the 2.8, it's F22. Either way, thanks for the great review.
I had the Nikon 14-24 for years which landed me many epic pictures and switched to the Sigma 14-24 as soon as it came out. I was waiting for Sigma to release a glass of equivalent focal length so when it came out I was excited. Extremely happy with the Sigma! It handles the sun also bit better during sunsets which is what I use it for mainly and is just a tad sharper especially for being a much newer glass. I also used the extra money I got and got a Tamron 35 1.8 which I am super happy with as its my main event glass I take with me. The VC on it is so useful.
A big thumbs up - offering people to take photos for them.
Thanks for doing the comparison Jared! I just bought a Nikon D-500 and looking to buy a 24 - 70 2.8. Really enjoy your channel. All the best!
Will they make it in a Nikon Z mount? I'm on the fence about buying any lenses until after Photokina.
Not surprising considering the Nikon lens is 11 years old. Actually, it underscores how good Nikon's lenses are, that an 11 year old lens could go toe to toe with a new lens. And if I were in the market, I'd wait. The update for the Nikon is imminent. It's part of the "trinity" and they've already update the 24-70 and 70-200. The 14-24 is coming very soon I'd say.
You could be right regarding those lenses. I didn't think of that. Still, I think some kind of 14-24 update is close.
Very true. It'll be over $2000 for sure. but if money is no object then go for it
There is that. Nikon is crazy with their prices.
uh huh but it's not as good as newer lenses...just as the 14-24 is still one of the sharpest out there but still not as good as newer lenses...
The Sigma is now on sale for 899 at BH photo!!!!
Check the shutter speeds. It appears that in the same conditions, the photos taken with the Nikon have faster shutter speeds, so that means that the Nikon is a bit brighter. It has better T-stops.
I mentioned that
There's the money difference.
Looks like maybe 1/3rd of a stop.
In the video he stated he was shooting aperture priority so he could maintain same f-stop and ISO for each image. The camera is simply compensating for changes in the suns irradiance. I teach solar and on a clear, cloudless day such as the conditions in this video, a pyronometer (meter used to measure suns irradiance) will constantly change in value. It will never sit still as the light is constantly changing ever so slightly. So it probably isn't a lens or camera issue, but simply mother nature doing her thing. I see an experiment coming this semester!
Interesting, but can it really be a coincidence that in all shots the Nikon is the brightest?...
I noticed when you corrected the shot of the Nikon the effective angle of view was the same as the Sigma.
Thank you for your review. I’ve spent the last few years replacing all of my 3rd party glass with Nikon glass for sharpness and quality control. Now you have me really tempted to buy the Sigma 14-24. My problem is that I shoot with a D850 that has more than twice the resolution of the D5. Have you tested it on a D850? Would you expect the same results? Thank you.
Hi I shoot on the D850 and Z7 professionally with the Nikon 14-24mm and its superb, in LR I obviously use the lens corrections and shoot on keeping the camera level. I never shoot at f22 because of diffraction. My max aperture is f16 and choose where I focus for greatest DOF. Hope that helps?
Just came across your channel. Really liking it. Super informative. I even just bought that Sigma lens earlier today. Cheers man
As far as the filter systems go, does Sigma take NiSi 150 Q system?
I think it's the way to go for canon shooters as it's the only 14-24 f 2.8 available for Canon
This was a cool video Jared, I enjoy your channel
Don't get me wrong, I love my 14-24mm f/2.8 on my D850, BUT I am really hoping at Photokina this year or next year there will be a new version coming out.
What is that square thing on the hot shoe mount of your camera facing the museum?
Which is better for Nikon D800 Nikon 14-24 mm or Nikon 16-35 mm?
I like the way you start your videos, I just bought the sigma 10-20mm wide angle EX. brand new. I also bought Jintu manual lens for my D3200, but don t know how to make it work on amazon it's listed as compatible with D3200, would you help me out with this issue how to make it work or should I sent this back, thank you for your help.
Thanks Jared, I was about to buy the Sony 12-24 F4 G Lens, but I guess I'll wait for the Sigma version for E Mount!
I own the Sigma for Canon and am very pleased.
I had a really bad experience with Sigma 17-50mm. It worked great the first month. After that the AF motor was garbage after. It wouldn't focus except maybe 10-20% of the time. I returned it immediately.
Richard Arocho The Art series lenses are much better than the old Sigmas. I’ve personally used the 50, 85 and 35 Art lenses for a couple of years now with zero issues.
@@kennethwilliamsinc I rented a Sigma 35mm Art and had to take it right back. AF was crap! Got the Tamron, since they didn't have a Nikkor, and all was good.
Hi Jared
Could you please do a comparison or a real life review of Nikon 24-70 VR and Tamron 24-70 G2?
When you applied the profile correction on Nikon it looked similar to Sigma without the profile correction.. That's maybe why the Sigma has that small crop to my opinion.
Thank you. I needed this info. Now to make a decision
is there any way to put a filter on the front of the nikon?
What shoes are you wearing? I like them
Wouln't it have been better to use the D850 for this review because of the higher resolution of the sensor?
Doesn't matter, I used the D5 for both, so it's even.
Like your comparison of these two lenses Jared. Yes, I agree that the Sigma is the way to go here but I would expect the new Nikon to have significant improvements over the older version but it does come down to $.
If Nikon update the 14-24, how much bigger will the price difference be then?!
A LOT.
Do you think this lens would be good for portraits?
No I don't. An 85mm prime would be my go to lens for portraits.
Hey Jared I have a request :-) Can you compare Sigma 85 and 135mm ART with Nikon lenses?
I noticed that despite the Nikon being slightly wider, after lens correction it looks almost identical.
yea
Yeah I spotted that too! I think sigma slightly cropped out the heavily distorted edges to give priority to an overall less distorted image.
If you are a professional. Go for the nikon. The rainbow banding in the centre of the Sigma lens is very difficult to correct in post. The rest of the flaws on the nikon are easy to correct in lightroom.
Thank you for what you do.
Definitely buying the sigma!! The extra dollars make sense! Thank you for this
nikon lens holds water drops on the surface.. but sigma has some kind of coating and because of that the water drops can be removed easily with some gentle shake...
Thanks Jared. Great review.
Thanks for the review Fro. Quick question? If you didn't have this lens and were going to buy one, which would you go with? This review makes me lean towards the Sigma.
Great vid! Would love to see how the TAMRON 15-30mm f/2.8 VC stacks up against these two!
Tamron is way better than both
Tamron n1
Nikon is much brighter, but softer. I would go with Nikon because of better t-stop, and I will get better and sharper images in low light than with Sigma.
being either is not a lens in the sports/action genre of photography, I think it's not a huge issue. Was it like 2/3 of a stop @ f/2.8? Something like 1/4000 sec vs 1/3200 sec. It "might" present itself a slight concern for wedding photogs, indoors, low light doing candids and dance floor shots etc. Pretty easy to compensate for 1 stop of light with virtually any modern Nikon body with an ISO boost. Z7, D810, D850, D500 etc. On a tripod, shooting landscapes the Sigma is crushing the Nikkor lens
@@ThomasSchoellerFineArtPhotos It makes a difference for astrophotography.
Jared, now that its a year plus down the road, can you comment on how the sigma has held up vs the nikon? Assuming you still have the lens, that is. ;)
I'm going to really consider the Sigma 14-24mm for my Sony A7RIII
Very good honest review
Great review, I grew up in the Bronx and now I live in the Sedona Flagstaff Area. Like you I love taking pictures of the tourist and I will give them a business card.
I am a canon shooter and really thing about this instead of getting the canon
Great job
Omg you really a change in your style
Neat comparison. But I bought the Nikon 16-35mm F4 instead. And I love it.
Few years back I bought Tamron sp 15-30mm f/2.8 , I don't feel the need to buy Sigma 12-24
just in time jared!!! I was looking to buy one of those 2 lenses! Now I've got the right choice :-)
Congratulations on your video. That’s very open approach to compare overpriced Nikon vs lower price contender sigma.
It may seem that in some videos where you use sigma lenses, they are sharper and lot cheaper. My only question would be in regards to Ken Rockwell comments that the shutter of Nikon is very aggressive and will eventually cause third party lenses to crack or cause small fissures.
Did you ever experience that with sigma? It’s very tempting to use them. At the se time it feels like a sin to use sigma since you already own a Nikon d5. I own a D3 and hesitate a lot to buy cheap priced lenses
6:10 to 6:22 Love it!
Thanks, now i know all that things but srsly I just want the Nikon one because it looks really nice!
Would love to see some Tamron vs. Sigma comparisons
Great comparison. Thanks for the review.
Thanks for another great video Jared. Can anyone reading this recommend a good Photography magazine?
There is so many to choose from and I am clueless on what would be a good one to subscribe to?
No, they are all dead.
Which country? Try amateurphotographer.co.uk from the UK. Been a subscriber for a few years myself
Tl Cheeto The french magazine called PHOTO.
Does the Sigma work on Z cameras?
I got the Sigma because it was the best at photographing the Milky Way. There is no place to install a polarizing filter on either, so I will not be able to use the lens for photographing mountain brooks or wet foliage in the way that I prefer.
I just got sigma 14-24, very happy
what about the Nikon AF NIKKOR 14mm f/2.8D ED Lens ? its prime and will be much sharper right ? thinking of getting it for my nikon d750 ! let me know what u think :)
Sharper ....no chromatic abbaration....600 bucks less..... a jab..... a hook.....finished off with a uppercut.....the sigma knocks the nikon out.....
Yeah, but the nikon is a little more wide and 1/3 stop brighter... I'm not gettin none of this sice i don't shoot full frame, but i would go for the sigma...
So Nikon is Rocky Balboa or Apollo Creed?
1time
Nikon is the one who goes down for the count....;-)
The Nikon is a tad wider than the Sigma but when you do the lens correction, it's the same or a tad less wide. Where as the Sigma is almost no distortion so the lens correction maintains that wideness. In the end, it's sharper, and cheaper and newer, the nod definitely goes to the Sigma in this case. But 11 years newer, you should expect that.
@@ee01233 But take notice. after you correct the lens issues in Lightroom you get the exact same focal length perspective. Notice the leg on the horse statue before and after. The Nikon still presents CA issues and it noticeably not as sharp.
why not through the Tamaron 15-30 in there also? you save over 700$ and imo get better lens
@Jared Polin you have mic, but why not you just talk calmly? *wondering*
Amazing review. All the needed details covered.
Note that when you turned on lens correction, the field of view advantage on the Nikon at 14mm pretty much went away - there was very little difference in the hoof of the horse statue. By unbowing the strong pincushion distortion, it lost that advantage.
True, but I don't always use lens correction, especially on landscapes.
I saw Dustin Abbotts review of this lens compared to the Tamron 15-30 2.8. The Sigma came out on top. So if it beats that lens, it's gonna beat the Nikon. If I was gonna get one of those it would defo be the Sigma. Only thing for these bulbous lenses is they are a little bit of a pain for filters, but that shouldn't stop you getting one imo.
big pain for filters.
Fantastic review. I’ve been looking to buy a wide angle lens for three years and just seen amazon drop the sigma price to £949 inc vat I’m going for it despite being a nikon fanboy !!
Hell yeah FRO! More videos like this!
Hey Jared, I noticed the shutter speed was different in the F/2.8 24 mm example. Anyway what is your take on the Tamron sp 15-30mm f/2.8 ? Keep up the good work !!
I mentioned that.
Indeed you did Jared @ 11:30 my apologies. You always put out great informative videos. So whats your take with on The Tamron sp 15-30 f2.8 lens I mentioned as a third alternative?
No response yet?
Hi from Greece!
If you have the Nikkor 14-24mm then you've no reason to change your lens for the Sigma 14-24, but if you don't own one the you could buy the Sigma and spend the extra money for another lens..
Ps. Also it would be great to make a review for the new Sigma 14mm f/1.8 Art for anyone who doesn't use more than 14mm :)