Distortion at 24mm Sony FE 12-24/2.8 GM vs Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art
Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art (TOP) vs Sony FE 12-24/2.8 GM (BOTTOM). Notice ghosting flare for the Sigma and slight less vignetting for the Sony at 24mm f/5.6
Great review like always Fred. after looking at your test, May I suggest you also provide a link to sigma 14-24 on B&H and Adorama? your test is a very compelling argument for the sigma.
I will add that after a few days of shooting outdoors with the sun in/out of the frame i think it's safe to say that I've never seen such impressive flare resistance performance especially for a zoom. It made shooting that much more enjoyable without having to change the angle to avoid it. Corner to mid sharpness is simply amazing. I am having a hell of a time with this new beast!
Axial CA and Lateral CA are very low to non-detectable for both Sony and Sigma ultra wide zooms lenses. In comparison, the Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 III shows moderate Lateral CA.
PS: CA correction was turned off in-camera and in-post for all lenses. However, both Sigma and Sony have a built-in correction in the RAW files which can't be turned off.
Sony FE 12-24/2.8 GM vs Sigma 14-24/2.8: Lateral CA correction
Sony FE 12-24/2.8 GM vs Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 III: Lateral CA correction
Ive had one to try for the last few days that sadly Ive sent back now. I concur that it is a very very good lens. Wether Id swap out my Sigma though Im not sure..... Both are great choices :-)
The Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM brings landscape and nightscape photography to a whole new level. I consider it to be the best ultra-wide lens available - capable of extreme high resolution and contrast even when compared to our top zooms and primes.
At f/2.8, it outperforms the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN lens from center to corners at most focal lengths. This outstanding performance with the Sony A7R IV's 61MP sensor, is a dream come true for anyone shooting Milky Way nightscapes.
Before trying this Sony 12-24mm f/2.8 GM, my Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN was the ultimate go-to lens in terms of resolution, contrast and aberration correction. But, Sony's new ultra-wide GM pushes the limit even further, adding 12-13mm of extra range and even higher resolution. Who knows how Sony makes this possible without increasing the lens' size or weight significantly. But it doesn't end there. The Sony 12-24mm f/2.8 GM delivers defined Sunstar rays starting at f/11 and offers impeccable flare resistance - possibly the best I have ever seen.
Landscape shooters who already own the Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN might hesitate to upgrade to the new Sony FE 12-24/2.8 GM, especially when mostly shooting at f/5.6 and smaller apertures. However, the extra 12-13mm f/2.8 range, better performance wide open, improved flare resistance and more appealing sunstar rendering may justify the upgrade. Currently we don't have a set of prime lenses that outperform the Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM.
PROS:
Outstanding resolution/contrast throughout the entire zoom range
Outstanding flare resistance
Well controlled distortion
Low color aberration (lateral and axial)
Low coma at f/2.8 throughout the range
Fast 12-24mm range
Weather sealed sturdy construction
Attractive sunstars starting at f/11
Smooth rendering
Great minimal focus distance (MFD) performance
CONS:
Price: $3,000 (Most expensive GM zoom)
Moderate field curvature from 12-14mm
Longer MFD compared to the Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN (despite both lenses sharing similar MFD specs)
Excellent well balanced review Fred. Good the see CA is pretty much absent in the Sony, just as it is in the Sigma. We now have two UWA zooms that outclass any prime at the wide end, and match them or better them at the long end. IQ wise both are so good, especially at around F5.6 - 7.1, that I doubt further lens improvements would even be visible on any reasonable size print. Great times to be a WA/UWA photographer
The main surprise for me with the Sony is how good its flare suppression seems to be. Currently I usually pull out my Loxia rather than the Sigma to shoot against the light, but that might be required less often if I switched to the Sony. However, I don't think I could eliminate the Loxia (or a CV) from my kit altogether because of its sun-star shape, which I find much more appealing than that of the Sony (or Sigma).
Does anyone know whether the Nisi 150mm. filter system will be tweaked to accommodate the 12-24GM? I have it for the 12-24 G, and suspect that with the greater circumference, it will have to be completely redesigned. I also would like to know if Aurora Aperture or any other filter company out there will be making behind the lens filter for the 12-24 GM.
dallvr wrote:
Does anyone know whether the Nisi 150mm. filter system will be tweaked to accommodate the 12-24GM? I have it for the 12-24 G, and suspect that with the greater circumference, it will have to be completely redesigned. I also would like to know if Aurora Aperture or any other filter company out there will be making behind the lens filter for the 12-24 GM.
dallvr wrote:
Does anyone know whether the Nisi 150mm. filter system will be tweaked to accommodate the 12-24GM? I have it for the 12-24 G, and suspect that with the greater circumference, it will have to be completely redesigned. I also would like to know if Aurora Aperture or any other filter company out there will be making behind the lens filter for the 12-24 GM.
A new S6 adapter/holder has been released, but it uses the same filters as the S5 system. Nisi are fulfilling complete S6+filter kit orders first, but will make adapters-only available after that.
Hope they release a compatible rear filter system soon, it would be great to have it for the fall foliage season. I went for a short trek a couple of days ago and shot some of the local streams and could have used some grads. Ontario Rivers by Jose Raposo, on Flickr
rvh23 wrote:
A new S6 adapter/holder has been released, but it uses the same filters as the S5 system. Nisi are fulfilling complete S6+filter kit orders first, but will make adapters-only available after that.
Thank you for the information on the S6 adapter and holder. That would definitely be the way to go if I switch to the new GM. I will keep an eye out for further information about the availability of the adapter only.
rvh23 wrote:
Excellent well balanced review Fred. Good the see CA is pretty much absent in the Sony, just as it is in the Sigma. We now have two UWA zooms that outclass any prime at the wide end, and match them or better them at the long end. IQ wise both are so good, especially at around F5.6 - 7.1, that I doubt further lens improvements would even be visible on any reasonable size print. Great times to be a WA/UWA photographer
The main surprise for me with the Sony is how good its flare suppression seems to be. Currently I usually pull out my Loxia rather than the Sigma to shoot against the light, but that might be required less often if I switched to the Sony. However, I don't think I could eliminate the Loxia (or a CV) from my kit altogether because of its sun-star shape, which I find much more appealing than that of the Sony (or Sigma). ...Show more →
"However, I don't think I could eliminate the Loxia (or a CV) from my kit altogether because of its sun-star shape, which I find much more appealing than that of the Sony (or Sigma)."
Precisely. I am therefore thinking of adding the Voigtlander 15mm iii to my kit. I don't need very wides often, I like the sunstars and rendering, the easy filter integration and one can get them for a good price, here. For a serious landscape guy the Sigma or Sony are the lenses to go, depending on budget..
This is the part I dislike most about evaluating these complex zooms. I received my GM 12-24 today and it clearly failed its centering test at all focal lengths with a soft lower left corner across the whole range
These are 100% crops on A7r4, using manual corner focus for one of the corners and then no adjustmeent for the other corners.
Being in Australia, I've been told the provider of the lens may refer to Sony support to decide whether this is reasonable 'within spec' performance for a US$3000 lens...
Ouch, that's the thing, I'd expect higher QC for a GM, not to mention a 3000$ GM, but it's only wishful thinking . It's the luck of the draw again (fingers crossed you find a good copy sooner rather than later).
That sucks. I had similar experience with my first copy and exchanged it immediately for a much better one. I could notice even without having to do de centering test that the right corners were softer and it had a bad af pulsing issue. It really made me almost give up. I realize it's harder to exchange your lens in Australia? Sony QC with this lens is on the disappointing side sadly. This whole luck of good copies should not have to apply for a lens of this price.
So far only weakness is at 24mm wide open resulting on soft corners. I already spoke to the store i got my 2nd copy from that i will thoroughly test the lens on my vacation and they are extremely supportive and will let me exchange or do whatever as long as i am happy since I've spent a crap load with them and their customer service is awesome. No fuss about exchanges.
Now my new lens i havent exactly done a proper decentering test for all FL but from shooting against a wall and the same scene i did with first copy i could tell this 2nd copy is much better. I think the most i will tolerate for a $3k lens is having to exchange twice but I am just glad i got the lens locally and not online because i dont feel too confident mailing a 3k lens and waiting weeks for an exchange. Main reason why I always buy my more expensive lenses from same store i used for years. Hopefully you get yours exchanged.
I will actually do a proper decentering test outside in the field to make sure I am happy with this 2nd copy. So far I don't see a need to exchange
This is the part I dislike most about evaluating these complex zooms. I received my GM 12-24 today and it clearly failed its centering test at all focal lengths with a soft lower left corner across the whole range
These are 100% crops on A7r4, using manual corner focus for one of the corners and then no adjustmeent for the other corners.
Being in Australia, I've been told the provider of the lens may refer to Sony support to decide whether this is reasonable 'within spec' performance for a US$3000 lens...
I realise that this is disappointing, genuine question - how much would this affect real life use at say f5.6-f8
Hmm good question. Mainly for me i would shoot wide open when I am in a low light situation where I need to freeze motion easier or taking close ups or astro which would show the softer corners. For your average landscape shots between 5.6-8 it would barely be noticeable i would think. Wide open most lenses don't have the best corners always. Nothins perfect.
johnahill wrote:
I realise that this is disappointing, genuine question - how much would this affect real life use at say f5.6-f8
I'm pretty sure that level of asymmetry will be noticeable even at f/5.6 when checking at 1:1.
I'd say it may be less apparent at f/11 when DOF and diffraction even things out.
