Sigma 24 70 2.8
While optically identical, there are other factors to consider. One thing is clear though: as much as the optical formula appears to be the same on both lenses, they certainly have some notable differences that make it difficult to label the Leica just a “rehoused” Sigma. If you use these lenses on an L-mount system other than Leica, the ability to quickly change the AF/MF mode using the button(s) on the Sigma lens is a definite advantage. You may notice the Sigma lens is a little more front-focused. Below is an example of a photo shot at the minimum focus distance at f/2.8 with both lenses with the (camera left) eye as the focal point. While the bokeh patterns appear very similar between the Leica and Sigma lenses, what is also apparent is that there is a difference in the “bokeh zone” between these two lenses. Leica Vario 24mm at f/2.8 Sigma Art 24mm at f/2.8 These issues are quickly and easily removed with the built-in lens profiles in editing applications like Capture One and Adobe Lightroom, but the issue definitely stands out when you compare the RAW files side by side. Additionally, the Sigma lens does have very noticeable distortion and vignetting present (on the wide focal lengths) in the RAW files when compared to the same shots using the Leica lens. I also noticed that the camera was slower to boot up when I used the Sigma lens versus the Leica lens, which leads me to believe these issues are caused by firmware that could, theoretically, be adjusted by Leica in the future. Sigma 24-70mm DG DN Art at 24mm and f/8 Leica Vario 24-70mm f/2.8 at 24mm and f/8 On a Leica SL-2, this delay made using the Sigma version almost unusable when I attempted to shoot a moving subject wide open. The images all came out sharp and clean in both cases, but the time to autofocus with the Sigma lens always took noticeably longer. This behavior was consistent regardless of the environment or lighting. While the autofocus on the SL-2 is nowhere near as fast as the new generation of mirrorless systems From Nikon, Sony, or Canon, there is a significant performance difference between each of these lenses on a Leica camera.įor instance, if for example, an autofocus task were to take 0.5 to one second to lock on to an object with the Leica lens, the Sigma lens would take 1.5 to 2.5 seconds in the identical situation. Where they differ, however, is most noticeable while actually shooting. I also want to mention that in my testing, simply applying the lens profile for the Sigma lens in post-production makes the RAW images look nearly identical to one another.Īs far as image quality, colors, and sharpness are concerned, both lenses perform incredibly well with nearly identical images coming out of each lens. It is also worth noting that for the purpose of this comparison, no lens-profile adjustments were made to the images shown in this post, so the corner behavior can be plainly seen from lens to lens. To test these lenses, I used a Leica SL-2 and found that, effectively, the images from both of these lenses were incredibly similar to one other, but there were some noticeable performance differences when using the Sigma lens on the Leica SL-2 body that I will get to in a moment.