![ptlens sigma 24-35 ptlens sigma 24-35](https://photographylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Sigma-24-35mm-f2-Sample-Image-19.jpg)
Now, one could argue that a zoom such as the 24-70 can also do this, and one would be correct. A 24mm lens will make lines converge and increase the perceived distance between foreground and background a lot more than a 35mm lens. If you remember my article about choosing your next lens, you'll recall that the wider a lens gets, the more perspective is distorted compared to what we see with our eyes. When you have space and time, playing with this can yield great results. The difference in the way lines and distance behave at 24mm and 35mm is very different. These are the practical advantages, but the artistic one is by far more interesting. The wide f/2 aperture gives me plenty of light when shooting indoors or at night. Going just a touch wider or a little tighter when needed is easy. In my shooting, I often find myself in very small rooms with families, or moving through crowds needing to change focal lengths quickly. I bought it a few months later, and haven't looked back. It was around about that time that the rumors of this f/2 zoom from Sigma were coming to a close and the lens was to be released. I started looking into a 24mm for my Nikon system (I already had Sigma's 35mm f/1.4), and the memory of that juggle sent a shiver down my spine. It came to the point where you'd see me with one body slung over each shoulder, one with each of these lenses. I was constantly switching between the 16mm f/1.4 (24mm) and 23mm f/1.4 (35mm). So where does it fit? Well, it's basically a bag of wide primes.įor me, the answer came when using my Fuji kit. It doesn't have the convenience of a 24-70mm f/2.8, and it's not as fast as a 24mm f/1.4 or 35mm f/1.4. This is perhaps the one area that might keep folks away from this lens. Let's start with just how it fits in my camera bag. Having a 24-35mm may seem like an odd focal-length range that wouldn't be too useful, but I have found it to be an excellent range for a lot of the work I do in editorial and family portraiture. Sigma has been making hit after hit for a few years now, leaving their "budget" lens brand stigma in the dust behind them.
PTLENS SIGMA 24 35 FULL
As for vignetting, at maximum aperture the Sigma has more to contend with than its rivals, and it has slightly higher pincushion distortion at 28-35mm, but it has lower barrel distortion than either at 24mm.The world's fastest zoom lens for 35mm full frame cameras is the Sigma 24-35mm f/2, and it's one way to follow up from making the world's fastest zoom for APS-C. The Tamron comes close to the Sigma from f/4 through f/8, but similarly suffers from some astigmatism, which can be troublesome (although it depends on the subject and its position in the frame).Īll three models have better control of uniformity and fringing at 35mm, but the Sigma leads until f/8, where the Tamron matches it more or less across the whole image field. Stopping down further, the Nikon doesn’t fare that well in the outer field due to a combination of strong chromatic aberration, curvature of field, and astigmatism. With the Sigma stopped down to f/2.8, though, it is superior to both, and particularly so in the outer field at 24mm. Sigma’s higher peak sharpness and low levels of chromatic aberration are impressive, but at f/2 the Sigma isn’t as sharp as either the Nikon or Tamron at f/2.8 over the same focal range. Still, it does show just how good both the Tamron and Sigma models are, and the latter’s wider aperture is at least as challenging optically as the extra reach. All three models perform well, with Nikon’s own Nikkor brand 24-70mm f2.8 coming in third with a DxO Mark score of 28 points, and the Tamron in second place with 31-points, but that’s not such a surprise, given the extra level of difficulty in making wider-range zooms.