Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next PZ lens test report: Sigma AF 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM | A ("Art")
Markus, I was not hateful, I was angry - to me that's a difference.


The difference of the "street price"? Here in Switzerland I can get the Sigma at 719.- and the Nikon at 887.- francs. 719/887 × 100 = 81.05%. So I checked at Foto Koch in Germany: 687 € to 857 €: again 80%! I don't know where you get your street prices, but the ones I did my research tell me not your 10%. And on the other hand, the difference in focal length is more like 14% (for the Sigma). So it would be more or less equal - if the 120 mm were as useful as the 105 mm in terms of resolution and optical performance.


As for VR vs OS: Not only I tried - I compared and the 70-200/4, which has the newer VR than the elder 24-120, was not on first place. While you just write: "The Nikkor's VR is equal to 4 stops" and "the Sigma's OS is equal to 3 stops" - if somebody tells me that, I like to see evidence. Until that, I consider it a false information. You say, you didn't wrote that? You even made it a "high end VR lens" Wink




The lens features optical stabilization (VR II) which Nikon claims allows for up to 4 stops slower shutter speeds. Actual results will vary depending on the photographer, of course. In our field tests up to three stops longer shutter times were easily possible (given a reasonably steady subject). Typical for most high end VR lenses, the 24-120/4 VR offers a switch to chose between "Normal" and "Active" VR operation.

Nikon can claim whatever they want and for some Tai-Chi masters this might be true, maybe they can handhold a ¼" at 24 mm or 1/15" at 105 or 120 mm. In reality, they haven't found the silver bullet themselves. If you say 3 stops are easily possible, it reads like with luck the fourth as well. Not my findings.


But I understand you're taking this 70-200/4 as a reference. Until I did my tests, it was the best VR I've seen. Now it appears like Sigma didn't only copy it from Nikon but improved as well.




Sigma released some great products recently, but have they really found the silver bullet in all categories ? No, they aren't there yet. Traditionally standard zoom lenses have been a weak spot in the Sigma range and the Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG HSM OS | A is not capable of being substantially better than other lenses in this class.

Your test shows no weaker performance of the Sigma - if you found weaker points, I just didn't see them (besides of weight and size). How "substantially" the improvements might be, is hard to say, If I see the weak performance of the Nikkor at 120 mm, I'd say, this IQ I can crop anytime out of a 105 mm picture. So, by numbers the Nikkor has a bigger range - effectively it doesn't matter much.


What you're saying about the sealings I consider as the blurry talk a lot of reviewers come up with. Nobody actually did a comparison, how long which lens withstands which kind of weather. Hmmm, maybe I suggest Kai Wong to destroy a couple of lenses? Huh  Talking about such a feature needs a basis to discuss. My point is, Nikon doesn't use the "weather sealing" term in any of their lens descriptions. Why not? For sure not because the seals are useless, but because their warranty would have to deal with it. Would you use the 24-120 in the rain without additional cover and zooming in and out? Also, there's in each manual of a Nikon lens the safety instruction "keep dry, otherwise electrical hazard can occur". That immediately gives me the picture of Klaus, illuminated like a Christmas tree while he use a lens outside  Big Grin Of course, "safety instructions", real men don't read or need them. 


I agree with the results in terms of optical performance and value. The biggest non-agreement I have with you in terms of weather resistance. My impression is, that you testers at PZ trust Nikon more than Nikon itself. Have you seen Roger Cicalas teardown of the Sigma 35/1.4? Tiny rubber ring in front was also a kind of seal. Although Sigma clearly only stated their "Sports" series as weather- and dust- resistant. So, it's not "nothing" they do. They just don't pretend to have weather protection. As Nikon doesn't, either. It's only the testers totally convinced about that feature. Oh, and about 5 million forum readers  Rolleyes .


Can we come to the conclusion: "No really need to sell a 24-120 for it, just don't zoom until it's tele-end. But if you're about to buy a lens in  this class, the Sigma is very well worth the price and delivery slightly better IQ throughout it's range. And saves some money for an umbrella  Big Grin "?


Yes, it's not a lens of the "usual Art-series" level and features which are fast glass sharp wide open. I guess, Sigma put it into the Art series due to the constant aperture, but not as a competitor to their 18-35/1.8 or 24-35/2 monsters. The other line would have been "Contemporary" - for that it's not cheap enough.


Messages In This Thread
Next PZ lens test report: Sigma AF 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM | A ("Art") - by JJ_SO - 12-30-2015, 01:34 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)