Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art Sony E Mount 578965

Product Information

It’s close, but I think that the Lumix 24-70mm has the best overall sharpness here, with Sigma not too far behind it. We did note some field curvature for macro shooting, which leads to rather soft corners, but the 24–70mm F2.8 isn't an incredibly sharp lens when shooting close-up in the first place. Stopping down yields very good corner sharpness. So, expect that whichever of these lenses you buy you’ll get wonderfully high resolution images. I probably wouldn’t make a lens choice based on resolution, here. Autofocus Performance

Most 24-70mm shooters aren’t too concerned about distortion, but if you’re shooting architecture or straight lines, all 3 lenses are great, but Sony still out performs in this category. Is it worth it? If you’re young and healthy and don’t mind an extra half pound of weight, the Sigma will pose no problem. If you’re doing what you can to lighten your camera bag, though, the Tamron may still be your best choice. Zoom RangeThe Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN Art is a general-purpose zoom maintaining a bright and constant f2.8 focal ratio across the range. It is designed for full-frame mirrorless cameras and available in the native Sony E and Leica L mounts, the latter working on Leica, Panasonic and Sigma L-mount bodies. Announced in November 2019, it’s the third Art lens designed for full-frame mirrorless cameras, following the Sigma 35mm f1.2 DG DN Art and the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 DG DN Art.

Lens profile: The lens comes with a lens profile for vignette-, CA- and distortion-compensation which can be controlled from the camera. Adobe’s RAW converter (as of version 12.1) does not recognize the profile completely: vignette is compensated as it was set in camera (but you cannot switch between off and auto in post-processing) while CA-compensation is always ON, distortion compensation always OFF. The latter is a pity as the lens shows strong mustache-like distortions at the short end which are not easily corrected. [+]

The Sony 24-70 2.8 GM ii is a great lens for anyone who can afford it. If I had to choose between this lens and the Sony 70-20 2.8 ii, I’d choose the 70-200 in a heartbeat. I know there is a reason we did not see that that often and Olympus did not release a new f/2.0 standard zoom because the old one was already really big. Now Sony has the Mk. II out now, and there's more (listed) competion, like DPR posted exactly - but forgetting the cheapest 24-70/2.8 of them all, the new Samyang 24-70/2.8, which is being something enhanced with their latest v3 Firmware...and cheapest price is under 740 EUR new. Review (posted last year) online in german here: If that's the case DPR's stance does seem pretty arbitrary... I know with some of the mounts like M4/3 the app is supposed to force them if they're paying to participate in it, but C1 doesn't force M4/3 corrections either (are they not using the ones supplied by the lens?). Do all the other recent mirrorless mounts force them with Adobe converters or what? As for actual macro reproduction, here’s a ruler shot from as close as the lens would focus at 70mm, and at f2.8 notice how the details towards the edges have become quite soft. Closing the aperture gradually improves the edge performance but even at f8 it’s still soft at the extremes. So stop down if you’re archiving flat subjects, but if the main subject’s only in the middle you can get away with larger aperture.

It's what you often get from those who see photography as a competitive team sport, rather than an individual artistic endeavor. For one more bokeh comparison, here’s the Sigma 28-70 at 28mm f2.8, as close as it can focus at that focal length, quoted as 19cm. There’s still some texture within the blobs, but it’s still a fairly attractive result and I enjoyed the potential for shallow depth-of-field effects when shooting at close range. Note the lens does become softer in the corners the closer you focus. For studio portraits this Sigma replaced my 35mm and 50mm GMs as its just so much more versatile and the hassle of switching lenses is removed. Sigma’s service can change the mount of the lens between Sony’s E-mount and L-mount (at a cost). This is a unique feature that no other manufacturer offers. [++] Well, I am talking about distortion here, not vignetting. A full lens review should of course look at vignetting. [Vignetting correction in a sample gallery wouldn't bother me, however]

Ease of Use

Panasonic AF seems very lens sensitive - I’ve observed that the Panny 50mm AF is very good but not so confident with the Sigma 35 I also own. It is not easy to get colors right. It takes a lot of work. And Sony changes with every camera, so previous profiles need to be fixed. But, the bigger issue is, if this type of under-the-hood raw profile correction becomes more and more the norm, (since, let's be honest, almost everybody still uses Lightroom or Capture One) ...are lens manufacturers going to try and get away with more and more "hidden" corrections?