Review: Sigma 24-35mm f2 Art Nikon / by Ferry Knijn

For the last week I had the new Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens for Nikon. I used it during a commercial shoot and on some portrait work. And I must say, I am a little puzzled about this lens.  How and why I will tell you further up in this review. 

First things first. As you might know. I am not a pixel peeping lab testing reviewblogger. I like to test camera's and lenses in the field and give my opinion based on my experience working with the gear. 

The quality of the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens

Let's start with the easiest part of the review, the quality of the lens. This is simply excellent. Like all other Sigma Art lenses the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens is build really well. It feels nice in you hands, focusses smoothly, feels like a high quality lens and performance as a high quality lens. I must say the lens is large. It is even bigger then my Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens. I can't find anything quality wise to say anything bad about the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens!

Where to place the Sigma 24-35 f4 Art lens

So now the hard part. Where should I place the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens in my current range of lenses, what will it add. While working, a lot of time I was just using my Sigma 24-105 f4. And I forget I had the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens in my bag. So later I switched to the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art because I had it and could try it.

While working with it, the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens performed greatly. The zoom range was convenient. When I thought it was a little to wide at 24mm I could zoom in or a little to tight at 35mm I could zoom out. In dark places the f2 was handy, and due the focal length a lot was even in focus at f2. But I could also get a small depth-of-field when getting close to the subject. And you could focus it nice and closely.

A storyteller lens

Working with the lens and thinking about where to place it I slowly was figuring it out. This lens is not build for studio and portrait work but for people in the field and story tellers. If I was a wedding photographer or journalist photographer I would buy this lens. I love the 35mm range. But sometimes it is just a little bit to narrow to tell the story or when you are shooting in small rooms. A 24mm lens is a great lens to get everything in, but a lot of time it is just to wide. When there is to much information and noise in the image. Also the f2 aperture makes it great for working indoors. I could see myself shooting weddings with a 85 1.4 or 70-200 2.8 on one camera and the Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens on the other and shooting all day without having to swap lenses. 

The conclusion

The Sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens is a very high quality lens! And I can recommend it highly to every wedding-, travel- or landscape photographer. Or everybody who doesn't own a basic high quality zoom lens. But for me I don't think it will add enough to my current range of lenses. The  Sigma 24-105 f4 Art lens covers the whole range from me, from wide to tele.

I hardly ever use the 24mm, so I am thinking about adding the 35mm art. I love the 35mm range my Fuji X100 and on the Leica M (Monochrome) (check the review for the Leica M type 240 HERE and the the M Monochrome HERE). But sadly the 24-35 f2 properly won't get back in my bag again. Although it is a great lens, it is not my lens.