Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN REVIEW: compact ULTRA WIDE!

[@cameralabs]

My Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN review: a fun and affordable ultra-wide lens! Check prices on the Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN at B&H: bhpho.to/3U2RYXG // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3KsDHAo Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: kzbin.info Check MPB to buy and sell used gear: bit.ly/3ULU9yL Check eBay to find vintage gear: rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=1&pub=5574908462&toolid=10001&campid=5338329149&customid=&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg Lost photos? I recover mine with: www.dpbolvw.net/click-100568658-13808570?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stellarinfo.com%2Fphoto-recovery-software.php Equipment used for producing my videos Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5 Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV 00:00 - Introduction and alternatives 01:03 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN design and controls 02:15 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN focusing and face tracking 03:13 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN focus breathing 03:37 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN lens profile 03:57 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN landscape quality 04:51 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN portrait quality 05:15 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN vlogging quality ZV-E1 07:31 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN bokeh quality 08:06 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN diffraction sunstars quality 08:13 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN close-up macro quality 08:55 - Sigma 17mm f4 DG DN sample images and verdict Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

[@ginjeff]

I picked this up last month ($499 USD on sale) and I'm really enjoying it on my A7rV. Love the build quality, low weight (yeah, I know the camera isn't light) and contrast. I don't understand all the negativity in the comments.

[@AprilClayton]

Thanks for mentioning the distortion on wide angle lenses. It happened to me and I didn’t understand why my face looked so odd. I held it too close to my face when vlogging

[@bondgabebond4907]

Thank you for this great review. I will keep this on my shipping list for Santa. This being a small prime makes it an easy choice for the fun factor. I have the 14-24 Sigma. It is a bear to carry around, heavy, yet a beautiful zoom. I'm getting more into small primes now that I have my camera, the A7CR. It's small, I have the Sony trio and the Sigma 65mm f2. Now I want to complement it with an ultrawide and this 17 seems to fit the bill. Will look for a sale or maybe even used if there are any. My ultra fun lens on my Nikon F2 was the 16mm fisheye. Now that is a crazy portrait lens.

[@vvlist]

I love the Sigma 24mm f3.5. I recommend it if 17mm is too wide for you.

[@kjltube]

I have the 24,45 and 90, so this sharing the same filter size is very tempting…

[@bretti4763]

Great video! Really helped me make my decision!

[@cameralabs]

Happy to help!

[@jayforcinema]

Thanks Gordon! I would probably spend a bit more and just opt for the Sigma 16-28 f/2.8. It is a pretty versatile lens and not that much heavier. I personally have never used ultrawide primes much, but if I was doing architecture and real estate kind of work, I think I might miss the leeway the faster primes provide, or the variable flexibility of zooms. Good lens, but not too exciting

[@cameralabs]

Yes, the 16-28 is a really nice lens, I've reviewed it too, but this one really is very compact.

[@Folly_Inds]

I dunno if its its just the way that the new ZV-e1 stabilizes or something but that footage at 6:30 onwards looks pretty awful.

[@bijosn]

$600 for a 17mm f4 is NOT low cost. I was eagerly waiting for this lens but the price is a turn off, the tamron 20-40mm f2.8 which only costs 100$ more at $699 is a much better investment .

[@cameralabs]

For a 17 of this quality, I'd say $600 is low cost. Anything cheaper that I've tested doesn't come as close. Sure, the Tamron is also a good choice, but it isn't as wide, and for some people that extra coverage is everything. Plus the Sigma 17 is really small. They are aiming at different needs.

[@Jimmyageek]

You just get the compact trio , 17mm F4, 45mm F2.8 and 90mm F2.8

[@kevin.itruth6880]

Next up lets get a COMPACT quality 18mm F2 (28mm Equivalent) for Sony APS-C...Its well overdue.

[@bondgabebond4907]

Gordon, from your experience, has the lack of weather sealing on lens like the Sigma 17mm caused any issues with dust and moisture entering the barrel? Are these lens focusing internally? And if so, does this help in keeping junk out of the interior of the lens. I was looking at some of my prime lens and I saw move movement of the barrel when manually focusing. It's not like the lens I had with my old Nikon F2 where there was considerable movement of the lens when focusing.

[@cameralabs]

I've not experienced any issues with them, BUT equally I've not had them in really bad conditions!

[@VynZography]

Wow Sigma is killing it with these primes! I don't think it does enough more for me tho as I have the Panasonic 20-60 already, which is an awesome lens. OMG just seen you 50mm review...going to watch that now!

[@cameralabs]

Hope you enjoy the other review too!

[@BartSantello]

I would like to see Sigma make a 14mm i-series. I have the 24mm, so the 17mm is a tough decision.

[@cameralabs]

I agree, that'd be nice

[@findbinnu]

If this was $300, it would have been a no-brainer, but not at this price! The Sony 20-70mm f/4 has changed the game, and is a much smarter buy, despite being double the cost.

[@cameralabs]

Yeah, I know but if Canon hadn't made the 16 2.8, this 17 Sigma would seem like good value for the spec. It also outperforms the Canon which may be a bargain, but is a lower cost design with more corrections required.

[@janvanroekel6787]

Hi Gordon. Please compare image quality of this Sigma 17mm F4 and the Sigma zoom 16-28mm F2.8 @ 17mm..... Thanks!!!

[@cameralabs]

Yes, that would be interesting

[@keithadb1821]

Brilliant as always thanks Gordon. Long overdue I've bought you a coffee.

[@cameralabs]

Cheers!

[@PauloHenriqueSantos1982]

10:22 Very Cool 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

[@cameralabs]

Sigma everywhere all at once!

[@RandumbTech]

It looks like a fun lens, but too expensive for what it is. I have the Sigma 16-28/2.8 and see no reason to ditch that for this new lens. The 16-28 is Sigma’s best kept secret - internal zoom, great contrast, and as sharp as most Sony GM lenses.

[@cameralabs]

Yeah I like the 16-28

[@pawebaran3601]

If you like this kind of lens and think it is affordable and compact... you should check Canon RF 16mm 2.8. It is smaller, brighter, wider and cheaper than this Sigma

[@cameralabs]

I have reviewed it. They're for different systems and the Canon is amazing value but more of an entry level model

[@maZec31]

As usual amazing review. And i want this lens so badly!!! But the price?!!

[@cameralabs]

Glad you found it useful!

[@paololarocca7684]

I do not really understand sigma, there is already the samyang 18mm which I have and I like, they should have improved on that, especially on build quality and features, but without making it slower, the 2.8 aperture is also the minimum required for astrophotography and is very handy for interiors…..

[@bijosn]

The sigma will be a lot sharper the samyang, the samyang needs to be stopped down to be usable making the f2.8 Ireland on it.

[@cameralabs]

I've tried the Samyang, it may be a bargain for the money, but this one is much better optically.

[@paololarocca7684]

I am happy with the image quality of the Samyang (except for flare in some situations), and it's just 145g, trading an f2.8 for an f4 isn't a great idea, although I bet the sigma is more reliable in terms of toughness and durability, which is something to consider for long distance travels....also it would be interesting to compare the actual field of view of both, considering that in some lenses recently released sigma's fov is a bit narrower than the claimed focal length....

[@martin9410]

@@paololarocca7684 I owned the Samyang before I bought this one. The Sigma is in a different league.

[@Jimmyageek]

Gordan, its better to review Sigma lenses on L-Mount bodies!

[@cameralabs]

This is a tough one for several reasons. I'd like to review the version which will be more popular, and I suspect Sigma sells more e-mount lenses than L-mount ones. BUT as you say, L is truly native for them now, and I do have an S5 II for testing, so it would make sense too. Ultimately though I can only test what I'm supplied, and for pre-release lenses, Sigma normally only has e-mount versions for loan.

[@Jimmyageek]

​@@cameralabsit's very sad of Sigma is doing this , it's better if Sigma only loan the L-Mount for reviewers which will increase the sales of L-Mount bodies , I going to buy this 17mm for S5 II

[@cameralabs]

@@Jimmyageek I'm not sure of the politics if any behind this - it could simply be the ramping-up of manufacture and that e-mount versions are available earlier or for press evaluation sooner. But yes, it would be a good les for the S5 II, but do compare with the Lumix S 18mm f1.8 as well.

[@truthseeker6804]

17mm f4 for 600 bucks. Canon has 16mm f2.8 at 300. Sigma smoking crack.

[@cameralabs]

Big price difference, true, but quite different in quality and corrections if you compare them in my reviews of both. Plus they're not available for each other's systems, so it's an academic comparison.

[@Jimmyageek]

​@@cameralabsalso Sigma 17mm is Made for S5 in mind

[@wordlv]

You sound ridiculous..

[@codeofcodedotorg]

Lol, only Leica fanatics would think these are affordable.

[@cameralabs]

Have you seen Leica prices? Nothing near this

[@christopherfox735]

Nearest Leica made for the L mount is a 28mm f2 at £4,260.00 or a 16-35 f3.5-4.5 at £5,040.00 so this a bargain. I have 90mm version & it’s a great lens. I do like lenses that have aperture rings which is why I didn’t buy the Panasonic 85mm.

[@codeofcodedotorg]

@@cameralabs Can’t blame you Gordon for saying what you’re supposed to in order to get product prior to release.

[@cameralabs]

@@codeofcodedotorg I can say whatever I like, I'm an independent journalist, not an influencer, so all the companies send me product to review prior to launch regardless of the outcome. I've been doing this job for the last 30 years - very few others can say that.

[@frankfeng2701]

It'd only make sense for half the price and size.

[@hohosiu]

17mm f4 this specification is tasteless for photography though tiny size. This is only good for vlogging but f4 is really hard to use at night.

[@martin9410]

Actually, I've found it to be a wonderful, small landscape lens.