tomcat

Do any of you have any first hand experience with this lens? I need something that will be really really sharp in low light, high ISO (approx 12,000). I currently have a Nikon 85mm f/1.8 and it performs great in the low light. This Sigma lens is only ⅓ stop above the f/1.8 lenses that I have in my bag, so I am thinking it should be perfect at holding down noise. I do not want a f/2.8 lens because it generates noise when it drives the high ISO values even higher. Nikon has an f/1.4, 24mm lens, but it is a fixed lens and I prefer the reach with the 35mm. So just wondering if this lens lives up to the standards of the other Art lenses? The Nikon 24mm lens is about $1999 and the Sigma 24-35 is $999, $1,000 less, plus the Sigma lens is an Art lens.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

No first hand experience. All three of the Sigma ART lenses I do own are excellent. Best of luck.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

I only have one Sigma Art lens, the 18~35 f/1.8. Excellent lens.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I have that lens and its the best full frame, fast zoom on the market, and the fastest full frame zoom period. It does suffer from the lack of zoom range though. And its about the same size as most 24-70mm F2.8 zoom lenses. If the limited zoom range isn't an issue, the F2 capability is worth is for indoor wide angle shots.

DennisC. Loc: Antelope, CA

I am considering this lens also for the Nikon D850 and D500. The reviews I looked at are very positive with the only negative being AF in low light. The only Sigma Art lens I currently have is the 135 F1.8 and the auto focus and sharpness are as good or better than any Nikon lens I have ever used, that lens never disappoints.

tomcat

I want it specifically because it is faster than a 2.8 lens. I have some 2.8 lenses and the problem is that they don't let enough light in at my high ISO shoots (12,800) and I end up with noise. So I was interested in this f/2 one for two reasons: It's a Sigma Art and the f/2 is just ⅓ stop difference from my f/1.8 mm which is the perfect lens for most of my indoor basketball shots. I can use this 24-35mm for my gymnastic competitions shots when I need the high vertical range for the tumbling girls during their floor routine--which I can't get with the 85 or 135 fixed lenses.

Thanks for your vote of confidence. I'll see if I can make a trade with my local camera shop next week.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The very excellent Sigma 18-35 mm f/1.8 is a better match for your D500 but obviously you don't want both lenses.

tomcat

Yes, I use that Sigma Art 135mm a lot for my indoor basketball games from mid-court. I can get great shots on offense and defense shooting from there. It is an incredibly sharp lens. I sent it back to Sigma for a fine-tuning of the AF and it came back even sharper than it was brand new. And I am hoping that the 24-38 will be every bit as good. I plan to use it for girl's gymnastics competitions when they are tumbling and I need the vertical height that I can't get with the 135mm. Thanks for your comments.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Here are some user comments you may be interested in.
Sigma 24-35mm f/2.0 Reviews
24 Reviews 5 Stars (18)4 Stars (3)3 Stars (0)2 Stars (3)1 Stars (0)
Write a review
Most Helpful Positive Review 64 customers found this review helpful Not as sharp as the 35 prime but close I jumped in and bought this limited zoom as since I have had my 35mm Art I don't want to put another lens on my camera. I felt this could tie me over till the new 24-70mm's on the horizon get reviewed (with Nikons weeks away and Sigma Art version rumoured to be coming soon). I bought a sigma 50mm prime to go with it so I have more of the range covered. I did some test shooting today against my Tamron 24-70 VC and my sigma prime at 35mm. On the same manual setting... Most Helpful Critical Review 65 customers found this review helpful Razor sharp and absolutely useless This is going to sound harsh, but I'll begin by saying that the Sigma 24-35 f/2 for the Nikon F-mount is one of the sharpest and most intriguing lenses that I have ever used. My frustration with this lens, though, is really with Sigma's ridiculous quality control philosophy. I say it's a failed philosophy because they've designed a system that puts the burden on the end user to callibrate the focus using the USB dock. What's even worse is that they've tricked con... Reviewed by 24 customers
Search
Sort By: Filter By: Results: 3 customersStars Filter: 2 Stars 1/16/2017 Better skip this one By Jim I bought this as a low light indoor lens for events and family gatherings. After putting it on my Nikon D750, I noticed it was slow to autofocus and was front focusing. Using the Sigma dock I also bought, I adjusted the focus at 35mm. Better but still not as fast or sharp as my 24-120 f4 Nikon lens. I also added some AF adjustment in camera with little effect. I decided for such a small focal range, the lack of sharpness was not acceptable and returned both items. I was able to get a sharp focus using live picture and manual focus - but who has time for that when you're snapping photos at a party? Was this review helpful to you?3 8 8/7/2016 Razor sharp and absolutely useless By Ralph R. VERIFIED BUYER This is going to sound harsh, but I'll begin by saying that the Sigma 24-35 f/2 for the Nikon F-mount is one of the sharpest and most intriguing lenses that I have ever used. My frustration with this lens, though, is really with Sigma's ridiculous quality control philosophy. I say it's a failed philosophy because they've designed a system that puts the burden on the end user to callibrate the focus using the USB dock. What's even worse is that they've tricked consumers into believing that this is an acceptable business model by including the dock as a free included item as a way to justify the fact that they aren't putting any significant effort into focus calibration at the factory. I rejected my copy within two hours of use because the lens focused so inconsistently, that it would have taken days of testing to bring it to acceptable levels. If you have the time for this kind of effort, then I'm sure the lens will render beautiful pictures for you. I, for one, refuse to pay one-thousand dollars for a lens that does not focus correctly right out of the box. Was this review helpful to you?65 48 8/22/2015 Sigma 35-24, not the Sigma 24-35 By Matt VERIFIED BUYER There is no such thing as the Sigma 24-35 lens, in real life it's the Sigma 35-24. They built the lens backwards. And as such, I think we as photographers should call it such, the Sigma 35-24.As amazing of a lens as it may be, it's backwards. The 35mm is on the left, and the 24mm is on the right. We as photographers should start writing it out that way too.It's such a great lens. I'm so disappointed Sigma could think flipping the zoom around wouldn't be that big of a deal. Why? What is going on in the designers mind that would make them think, Oh, naw. The photographers won't care if we make left right, and right left. They won't even notice.Maybe it's a left handers lens. Maybe they built this lens for left handers like me thinking we are somehow creatives and would like it. Sigma, if you're listening, I'm a left hander, and I don't like driving on the left side of the road in America as much as I don't like retraining my muscle memory for one lens.Every zoom lens I own has the wider focal length on the left, and the more zoomed in focal length on the right. Why would you think that flipping this would just somehow fly under the wire. Zooming is built into our muscle memory. This is how we catch instantaneous moments and candids. We react and respond. Using the backwards zoom on this lens feels like riding my bike with my hands crossed on the opposite handlebars. It feels like writing a small essay limited to gripping the pencil with my toes. This lens is not the Sigma 24-35, it's the Sigma 35-24. And I petition you to correct your listing as it is misleading.*did I somehow get a prototype?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Maybe this will help, this page is user reviews of that lens, mostly written in a language other than English and then translated so it takes some effort to understand what they are saying, however below the user reviews you will find pages and pages of images created with that lens.... Good Luck and just know these folks are mostly pro or very advanced enthusiasts, your images will be only as good as your skill level which very well may be better than theirs.

https://www.juzaphoto.com/recensione.php?l=en&t=sigma_24-35_f2art

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

I have the sigma 24-35 F2 Art lens; I searched for one for many moons! Believe it or not, a mint copy arrived in my local store, and I snapped it up on the second day; all I can say, is that lens is very well worth it- the colours it produces are superb, and it is razor sharp. Go for it, you won't be disappointed !

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Bill … you've got Ralph R.'s negative Review, in there, twice - had you realized?

I wonder if the 35-24 guy, at the end - wrote this, with his pencil in his toes. Do ya think, Bill?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I own 6 Sigma lenses, 4 of which are Arts, the other two are badasses for other reasons.... But the one thing I will note is that of my Art Lenses the 50mm has the most focusing issues, my 135 Art is dead on, I read a lengthy review that stated that Sigma is using a new algorithm that was introduced somewhere around the time of the 135 release, this is just a cautionary post suggesting that with the older lenses focusing could be an issue, and the dock won't fix it because the issue is intermittent.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

I think Sigma updated the 50, though, Blurry … oh, no - maybe that was Tamron - with the 45 f1.8 - which some say is the best nifty fifty - EVER made … high praise, indeed …

I'm all for f2, or f1.8 - wherever available - as it always strikes me the f2.8 lenses are way too slow …

DennisC. Loc: Antelope, CA

I also have the 135 1.8 and mine is spot on. I even took a gamble and purchased it from on EBay from Hong Kong. It’s a beautiful lens and I love the manual focus feel of it too.