Sigma 24 1.4 Art has been shipped

[Busted Knuckles]

At least according to B&H :)

Says it will get here Friday so I know what I will be doing this weekend :)

Mike

[conropl]

Congrats.

I would really like to know how the coma is on that lens wide open.

[Kayaker72]

+1. Congrats on the lens.

[DavidEccleston]

Someone posted a link to lenstip's coma results in the news item. In short, as that comment in the news item says, it's the worst Art lens yet... but it's better than Canon and Nikon offerings (aside from focus speed), for much less.

[Busted Knuckles]

So the days testing is that the lens is really sharp all the way to the corners, vignetting is a bit more than I would like but certainly workable for this fast and this wide. Very minor by 2.8 and gone at 4.0

Tonight will be the star shots that will test the coma and CA.

[Busted Knuckles]

Coma Test

https://www.flickr.com/photos/77760916@N05/16734426200/

Not sure how this stacks up against the competition. The distortion seems tangential to radius.

This is the far upper left corner.

[conropl]

Coma Test

https://www.flickr.com/photos/77760916@N05/16734426200/

Not sure how this stacks up against the competition. The distortion seems tangential to radius.

This is the far upper left corner.

I would say I get worse (maybe as good, but I think worse) when stopped down to f/2 on my Canon 24 mm f/1.4L II. I always stop down to f/2 because it only gets much worse from there. So if that is an example of yours wide open at f/1.4... then that is pretty good and better than the Canon version.

I might have to re-think my gear choice. The extra stop of light would be nice. The trade off would be the weather sealing (which is a big consideration for me).:confused:

Congratulations on your new acquisition. I hope to see some night time shots now.:)

Pat

[Kayaker72]

+1. Of course I would prefer none, but that looks pretty good to me. I've watched a video and read a bit, looks pretty sharp.

Is that what you are seeing?

[Busted Knuckles]

Yep it is at 1.4. I will do a series tonight through 5.6 and then post.

[Busted Knuckles]

From f 1.4 to f 5.6 posted at https://www.flickr.com/photos/77760916@N05

probably should have done a close crop, but this are the full frame and I think you can get a better idea of scale. The moon was off to the right it was a little humid tonight (every night in FL)

[Jonathan Huyer]

Interesting information... thanks for posting. I definitely see more coma than that with my Canon 24 f/1.4 II, but when I'm taking night shots I am typically using a higher ISO and a longer shutter speed so that will automatically make the coma a lot brighter by comparison. My most common setting for aurora photography is ISO 1600, 8 seconds at f/2.0. It would be interesting if you could try that with your lens (and also try 4 seconds at f/1.4).

[Busted Knuckles]

I am at the St. Pete Indy Car race this weekend. Will give a try Sunday night and post.

[Busted Knuckles]

Other than monster light pollution... and 2 meteors :) in the upper left corner
I did the 1600 8 seconds f2. then dropped the exposure time for the 1.4 shot to 1 second.

You might be able to interpolate to the other shots.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/77760916@N05/

[Jonathan Huyer]

I have to say that it looks really good, and to my eye it is better than my Canon 24 f/1.4 LII. There is less coma, and everything is wildly sharp. Even your coma is sharper than my coma. I'd say you definitely have a keeper with that lens! Thanks for posting these results.

[Busted Knuckles]

I am happy with it, haven't had enough time with it alone in the woods.... :)