Lens review

Sigma C 24 mm f/3.5 DG DN

19 May 2021
Maciej Latałło

11. Summary


  • solid and weather-sealed mechanical construction,
  • very good image quality in the frame centre,
  • sensible image quality on the edge of the APS-C sensor,
  • decent image quality on the edge of full frame,
  • very good correction of longitudinal chromatic aberration,
  • slight lareral chromatic aberration,
  • lack of problems with spherical aberration,
  • low distortion that, additionally, is corrected better than in case of direct rivals,
  • very low astigmatism,
  • moderate vignetting on the APS-C sensor,
  • sensible performance against bright light,
  • fast, silent, and accurate autofocus.


  • huge vignetting on full frame.
I've always thought that slower primes should provide something more than zoom lenses with a similar focal range. In my opinion, if you decide to construct a 24 mm prime it sould have an aperture of at least f/2.5, so it can provide better possibilities than any of classic journalistic 24-70 mm f/2.8 devices. However if that prime is slower than f/2.8, it should be either very small or relatively cheap.

Meanwhile the Sigma C 24 mm f/3.5 DG DN tested here is, in my view, a tad too slow, a bit too big and also too expensive. I understand the idea behind this lens – it is supposed to complement the Sigma C 28-70 mm f/2.8 DG DN with an even wider angle. Still, in current situation instead of spending almost $550 on the Sigma the owners of Sony cameras might rather look at the cheaper Tamron or Samyang instruments. After all these lenses are faster, and the Tamron is additionally a bit sharper in the frame centre.

Still, I wouldn't call the Sigma a failure; my complaints are mostly a result of high expectations I usually have when dealing with such instruments. I am sure if you buy the Sigma you will be pleased with its performance – it's a lens without any serious flaws and with many important assets. In many categories, e.g. distortion, astigmatism, or resolution on the edge of full frame, it performed so well that it was able to defeat the more expensive Sony.

Please Support Us

If you enjoy our reviews and articles, and you want us to continue our work please, support our website by donating through PayPal. The funds are going to be used for paying our editorial team, renting servers, and equipping our testing studio; only that way we will be able to continue providing you interesting content for free.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - advertisement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

What's more, the Sigma's build quality is superior to that of its cheaper rivals manufactured by Tamron and Samyang. If you care about quality and solidity of the barrel you definitely should get interested in either the Sigma or the Sony and the Sigma is cheaper of these two, being able to compete on equal terms with the Sony in many categories.

As you see, in this class of equipment your choice is really rich, always a piece of good news for prospective customers. I only regret that none of the producers decided to offer aperture fastness at least a tad better than f/2.8.