Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS HSM Art (help required please)

Coho-Blue

Coho-Blue

Messages
422
Name
Harry
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys

Anyone using the Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS HSM Art lens ? If so I would appreciate your thoughts , good, bad, or Indifferent... I’ve read various stuff about it on the internet and to be honest it’s a mixed bag so I thought I’d ask the forum members for their views as I was planning to purchase this lens to be used on a Nikon D500 , partially for the odd family snap but mainly for Landscape...

Thanks in advance
 
It's my go to lens, the one that's stuck on the front of the D850 when it goes back in the bag as the most likely lens required for a shot when it comes out. Seascapes are my main thing. I have a D500 but never put this lens on it, I use the D500 more for sports/ wildlife, 35-150ish on the D500 is probably a bit tight at the wide end for my type of landscape range but you'll be even further into the sweet spot for sharpness on this lens.

I don't know what reviews you've been reading, I have only really seen praise for it. For me it's a no brainer, the lens is great.
 
I use it on a Canon EOS 90D and I love it. It’s definitely my go-to lens for portrait and general walkabout. I can’t complain about the image quality at all, and I would definitely buy another Art lens, not only for the image quality, but for the great design and build quality too. I’m not well up on the Nikon lenses and whilst I’ve never used the Canon L equivalent, many people say that the Sigma is as good if not better.
 
If you have a reason for choosing that range of focal lengths then fine, but I'd see it as the wrong lens for landscape, as Jim points out. I'd look at the 16-85 that Nikon make.
 
As said, the 24-105 on a crop sensor leaves you lacking on the wide end because you only get around 35mm equivalent on a crop sensor, which is ok for walkabout lenses, it's not really wide enough for landscapes. On full frame 24-105mm is a great range, 24mm on ff is equivalent to about 15-16mm on crop, so you can see quite a difference if you tried the 24-105 on your D500 vs the 16-85mm.
I used to use my 24-105 (Canon) on crop sensor and did find that it wasn't wide enough, but I had a 10-20mm to fill the gap, but once on full frame, the 24-105 was great.
You could look at either the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 or the Sigma Art 18-35mm f1.8 which would give you the wide and a wider aperture for low light and shallow depth of field (if you wanted it).
 
I had and insurance payout on my Canon 24-105mm L f4 lens (dropped into the sea) ... read many reports on whether to replace it with the canon one again or the sigma Art .....
I went for the Sigma and I find it sharper than the Canon was.
Like above it's my walk about and goto lens.
 
ShropshireLad said:
I had and insurance payout on my Canon 24-105mm L f4 lens (dropped into the sea) ... read many reports on whether to replace it with the canon one again or the sigma Art .....
I went for the Sigma and I find it sharper than the Canon was.
Like above it's my walk about and goto lens.
Click to expand...
Did you have the Mk1 Canon or the Mk2 ?
The Sigma is meant to be sharper than the Mk1, but I don't know whether it's sharper than the Mk2.
Are you on ff or crop?
I found the 24-105 better as a walk around lens on ff than on crop. Hence recommending the OP looks at other options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top