Ive been shooting with the Sigma fp L for a while now and usually stick to the i-series primes because the rendering is so crisp but I have a trip to Banff coming up next month and I really dont want to be swapping glass in the wind and snow. I picked up an older 24-70mm Art recently thinking it would be the one but I dont know if I got a bad copy or what because the corners felt a bit mushy at f/2.8 compared to my 35mm prime. My budget is around $1600 and I need something that can actually handle that 61MP sensor without losing the bite. Is the new Mark II version worth the jump or is there something sharper from Panasonic I should look at...
Totally agree that those 24-70mm lenses are a gamble. I hauled a heavy zoom through the snow once and it was a total nightmare for my wrists. You might want to consider these instead:
- Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art: Heavy, but the sharpness finally matches that 61MP sensor.
- Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Contemporary: Cheaper and way lighter, tho maybe not as crisp. Make sure to check the weight before buying.
Just saw this. Like someone mentioned, the newer glass is unfortunately a letdown. I had issues with the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN II Art resolving power on that 61MP sensor... it just isnt as crisp as the Panasonic Lumix S PRO 24-70mm f/2.8 which is bulky but optically superior. Are you shooting mostly landscapes at infinity? That corner mushiness usually shows up way more on distance shots.
Yep, this is the way
This thread is gold. Bookmarking for future reference 🔖
To add to the point above: honestly, I've been down this exact road before. In my experience, those high-res sensors like the one in your camera are basically a torture test for any glass you put on them. A couple years ago, I took what I thought was a sharp zoom on a trip to the Lofoten Islands, and it was a total reality check. Here's what I've learned after years of pixel-peeping and testing:
- That 61MP sensor is gonna show every single flaw in the optical design that you wouldnt even notice on a lower-res body.
- Field curvature is usually the silent killer... you think the corners are soft, but the plane of focus is just weirdly shaped.
- I ended up realizing that for big landscape trips, I had to stop compromising on weight if I wanted that prime-like bite. It took me forever to find the one I use now that actually holds up across the whole frame. I spent way too much time returning copies that just werent centered properly. If you're seeing mushy corners now, it wont get better in the Banff cold, trust me.
Honestly, I grabbed that newer version for a shoot last month but it was pretty underwhelming. The corners just stayed soft and I ended up going back to my primes...
To add to the point above: its truly disappointing that we still dont have a perfect 'do-it-all' zoom that matches the fp L sensor. I had issues with three different copies of standard zooms before realizing the 61MP sensor is just too demanding for most of them. Honestly, if you want that prime-level crispness in Banff without swapping glass, you might have to look at these instead:
- Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art: For pure landscape work, this thing is a beast. The corner sharpness blows the 24-70mm out of the water.
- Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro OIS: It is an f/4, which is a letdown for some, but the consistency across the frame is much better than the Sigma 24-70mm Art. Plus, the OIS is a huge help since the fp L lacks internal stabilization. I even tried checking the mount alignment myself on a wonky copy once thinking it was a DIY fix... total waste of time. Better to just get glass that actually resolves the detail you paid for.
