Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Sigma 24-105/4 confirmed. What do you think for run and gun.

After the 18-35 f1.8 (measure t1.8), I'm kind of hoping they do some other sorcery and get another f1.8 zoom to fill out the range. Like 35-80 t1.8 or something. GL would probably get REALLLY busy then.
 
Not much excitement here. I was hoping that rumored 24-70/2.0 OS is coming next.
Anyway, the Canon 24-105/4.0 IS is a nice versatile tool, if the Sigma beats that (i bet it does) i might consider upgrading.

EDIT: Keep in mind that IS on 3rd-party lenses is a bit problematic on RED.
 
Last edited:
Will wait for another 1.8 or 2.0 zoom
 
Hopefully the price is under 1k if they plan to make this lens competitive next to the L series version. But I have seen the 24-105L for $660 New
 
Hello everyone.

I'm going to be renting out my Red Scarlet soon and the people renting it asked me if the Optical Stabilization on this recent Sigma 24-105 F4 is working with Red cameras since they intend to use it.

Can someone tell me if the OS is working or not?

Thanks everyone.
 
Edward Hall said:
The Canon 24-105 is a brilliant lens
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call it brilliant, but it's a mostly underrated tool. It holds up pretty good against the SIGMA, there are only minimal differences in terms of IQ.
Build-wise, the focus-ring on the SIGMA looks damn thin and the Canon has this super-small step between 24mm and 35mm on the zoom-ring. Try hitting 28mm here. ;) IS on Canon works for sure. SIGMAs OS might be better (newer), if it works. Does it work? SIGMA's lens is updateable and tuneable via USB-dock.

I think Sigma should have given this lens a C instead of the A which made me expect more from it.

If would buy today i would go for the SIGMA, but there is absolutely no need to think about it if you own the Canon.
 
Edward Hall said:
The Canon 24-105 is a brilliant lens
Click to expand...

I assume you're referring to the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L.

I've used this lens, and generally been happy with it, but unless it's the one I've been using, there's no way that it's a True F/4 at the long end. I don't know by how much, but it's not subtle.
 
Thanks everyone for your input.

But has anyone used the OS of the sigma with a Red camera successfully?

That's what I really need to know.
 
So I'm guessing no one has used this lens on a Red Camera? No one can tell me if the Optical Stabilization works? Guess I better warn my clients to ready themselves with other lenses.

Thanks anyway guys
 
Raphael Madeira said:
So I'm guessing no one has used this lens on a Red Camera? No one can tell me if the Optical Stabilization works? Guess I better warn my clients to ready themselves with other lenses.
Click to expand...
A warning would be smart, they should get a Canon as Backup. (And btw, if IS is that important, tell them to have a look at the Canon 16-35/4.0 too.).
If you get the chance to check the SIGMA please don't forget to share your impressions.
 
Maik Müller said:
A warning would be smart, they should get a Canon as Backup. (And btw, if IS is that important, tell them to have a look at the Canon 16-35/4.0 too.).
If you get the chance to check the SIGMA please don't forget to share your impressions.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice Maik.

Funny you should mention that since I decided to pass by my favourite lens store this weekend just to test the sigma with the Scarlet.

I'll be sure to report and share my findings with you guys.
 
I tried the Sigma on my Epic 2 or 3 months ago (with whatever firmware was latest at the time) and the OS didn't work.
A real bummer because the Sigma feels like the superior product in every way.

D
 
Roger Singh said:
I assume you're referring to the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L.

I've used this lens, and generally been happy with it, but unless it's the one I've been using, there's no way that it's a True F/4 at the long end. I don't know by how much, but it's not subtle.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is an obvious light loss at the long end. Looks like almost a stop to me. 2/3 of a stop perhaps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top