New Member Registered: April, 2017 Posts: 12 | | Review Date: September 24, 2021 | Not Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | bokeh at short distance, short min focus distance, price | | Cons: | sharpness also in the centre | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: Fujifilm XT-20
New Or Used: Used
| |
I took a few shots at shot/mid-distance with it and the Canon FD 24mm here: https://www.rustichelli.net/Hobbies/Photography/LensTests/24mm-a-tale-of-two...-and-Sigma.php
The Canon is maybe a bit better apart from the point of view of bokeh, definitely better for centre sharpness, but the performance of the Sigma is not shabby and it can produce very usable images, with good contrast and vibrant colours.
This lens is capable of decent shots and the price is so low that you can buy it without hesitation, but I have tested some other cheap 24mm and I think there are better options, possibly incl. the Vivitar 24mm make by Cosina.
| |
Site Supporter Registered: November, 2012 Location: North Wales Posts: 2,868
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 11, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | pretty decent | | Cons: | not as good as superwide II | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-r
New Or Used: Used
| |
Since I had both the early superwide and the the superwide II for a wee while I was able to do some comparison shots.
While the lenses have clear similarities they also have clear distinctions in optical performance. Most immediately noticeable: the superwides warmer tone. Resolution was fairly similar at matching f, I would say, although that assessment was blurred by the very distinctly better contrast of the superwide II. Add in the more natural and brighter colours and that's overall a clear preference. But the superwide is pretty decent and can be picked up much cheaper.
Sample pics + crop, pentax K-r, from RAW, same default pp LR3, f8.
Superwide.
Superwide II
 | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
