Sigma 24 f/1.4 ART glass: Hello What is the popular consensus on this lens? It’s sharp, how often does it need calibrating, etc? I have the opportunity to acquire one very cheaply.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

Hello

What is the popular consensus on this lens? It’s sharp, how often does it need calibrating, etc? I have the opportunity to acquire one very cheaply. Here is a snap of it attached to one of my rigs.

And why are today’s primes as big as some zooms? 😡

Thanks

Farm Boy Loc: Mendota Illinois

very good even shows a few dust spots

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

All the reviews are very flattering - wish it was made in Sony A-mount !

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

An f1.4 is a big piece of glass, no zooms are that fast.

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

I love mine!!!!!! Use for landscape and MW.
OOOps - sorry - I have the 14-24.

saxman71 Loc: Wenatchee

The two Sigma prime lenses I own are tack sharp. And neither one is an ART lens. If it's "cheap", in good working condition and you have use for a 24mm prime lens I think you should snap it up.

Photec

Spirit Vision Photography wrote:

Hello

What is the popular consensus on this lens? It’s sharp, how often does it need calibrating, etc? I have the opportunity to acquire one very cheaply. Here is a snap of it attached to one of my rigs.

And why are today’s primes as big as some zooms? 😡

Thanks

(Simplified response) The f1.4 lenses allow 4 times the amount of light to enter the camera than a f2.8. Therefore, the full light path has to be 4 times the area of the f2.8. Making larger lens elements is also 4X harder to maintain the quality standards of smaller lens elements, and also add to the weight of the end product. If you require a quality low light lens, you have to pay for it in cash and strength for carrying it around.

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

Photec wrote:

(Simplified response) The f1.4 lenses allow 4 times the amount of light to enter the camera than a f2.8. Therefore, the full light path has to be 4 times the area of the f2.8. Making larger lens elements is also 4X harder to maintain the quality standards of smaller lens elements, and also add to the weight of the end product. If you require a quality low light lens, you have to pay for it in cash and strength for carrying it around.

guyweech Loc: southern Idaho

I like mine do some astrophotos with it seams sharp to me