Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS HSM Delayed

[Canon Rumors]

Tweet

Delay of the first “sport” product
Sigma has delayed the release of the new 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS HSM lens. This lens was to be the first in their “sport” line of lenses. Along with the lens, the USB dock they announced with it has also been delayed.

Sigma suggests that the delay is due to sourcing parts for the new lens. It was originally scheduled for a March release, but now a release date is undetermined.

Sigma has been riding a wave of great publicity because of the 35mm f/1.4, so this is a disappointment.

cr

[lol]

I'm not sure this is much of a disappointment, since as far as I understand the optical design is unchanged from the existing model. And we can be sure the new one will be significantly more expensive. Of course we have to wait and see if this is how it plays out.

I'm more annoyed the street price dropped some 20% since I bought the current version, but have no regrets as it is a good leans already.

[kubelik]

yeah this one was disappointing from the moment it was announced, given that it is pretty much a rehash of a previous lens. it's about as exciting as the new 18-55 kit lens from Canon or the t5i, in that it's already an existing product available on the market.

[Rat]

Well, if they get AF right for a change, it could be a winner regardless of optical improvements.

[wallybarthman]

I'm not sure this is much of a disappointment, since as far as I understand the optical design is unchanged from the existing model. And we can be sure the new one will be significantly more expensive. Of course we have to wait and see if this is how it plays out.

I'm more annoyed the street price dropped some 20% since I bought the current version, but have no regrets as it is a good leans already.

Where did you read that it was the same optical formula?  I'm not doubting you - I just hadn't read that and was curious. 

[kubelik]

I'm not sure this is much of a disappointment, since as far as I understand the optical design is unchanged from the existing model. And we can be sure the new one will be significantly more expensive. Of course we have to wait and see if this is how it plays out.

I'm more annoyed the street price dropped some 20% since I bought the current version, but have no regrets as it is a good leans already.

Where did you read that it was the same optical formula?  I'm not doubting you - I just hadn't read that and was curious.

if you compare the lens diagram that sigma posted for the new one, and the lens diagram they posted for the old one, it's the exact same diagram.

[Albi86]

I'm not sure this is much of a disappointment, since as far as I understand the optical design is unchanged from the existing model. And we can be sure the new one will be significantly more expensive. Of course we have to wait and see if this is how it plays out.

I'm more annoyed the street price dropped some 20% since I bought the current version, but have no regrets as it is a good leans already.

Where did you read that it was the same optical formula?  I'm not doubting you - I just hadn't read that and was curious.

The optical formula is pretty much the same, and this is not a bad thing. Read the opinions of whoever has it, they will tell you it's prime-like.

What they did is using their new composite material for the housing (same as the 35mm), adding support for the USB dock and few customizable quirks via software like focus limiters etc.

[ddashti]

Certainly the range on this lens (with the constant aperture) will be the main factor that will attract photographers not really into Sigma products. Sigma is raising the bar with its recent products.

[9VIII]

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?art=135

First of all we are in the middle of reorganization of our line-up of products as all lenses are going to be sold in new casings. Sooner or later the Sigma 120-300 mm would have to be remodelled as well. Its optical construction is so perfect that we currently cannot noticeably improve it. We decided to leave it unchanged and present it in a new, better casing with switches that allow you to use new possibilities of the Sigma Optimalization Pro software as soon as possible.

I would have loved it they could have just sharpened the 300mm end a bit more. It was so close to being the ultimate 300mmf2.8 for crop sensors (blurry on the corners, super sharp in the middle, and at half the price).

[wickidwombat]

what about people reporting that its not really 300mm on the long end so not providing much benefit over the 70-200 from canon anyway?

I've been interested in this lens but unsure

[brad-man]

It'd be kind of funny if Sigma came out with a 200-400 f/4 OS...

[lol]

what about people reporting that its not really 300mm on the long end so not providing much benefit over the 70-200 from canon anyway?

It is an industry standard practice to round the values. Canon do it too.

In theory, the front aperture should be 300/2.8=107mm in size. I just put a tape measure across the unobstructed front element of mine. It's near enough 100mm diameter. Therefore either the focal length is a bit less, and/or the focal ratio is a bit slower. It could be either 300mm f/3, or 280mm f/2.8, or somewhere in between. Regardless, it's still a truck load more than 200mm f/2.8.

[AJ]

what about people reporting that its not really 300mm on the long end so not providing much benefit over the 70-200 from canon anyway?

It is an industry standard practice to round the values. Canon do it too.

In theory, the front aperture should be 300/2.8=107mm in size. I just put a tape measure across the unobstructed front element of mine. It's near enough 100mm diameter. Therefore either the focal length is a bit less, and/or the focal ratio is a bit slower. It could be either 300mm f/3, or 280mm f/2.8, or somewhere in between. Regardless, it's still a truck load more than 200mm f/2.8.

Indeed.

What's more, the maximum focal length is probably a function of focusing distance.  For example (I'm just inventing numbers here, don't quote me on this) the lens could be 280 mm at infinity, 240 mm at headshot distance, and less than 200 mm at closest focusing distance.

Edit to add: a quick bit of googling suggests 296 mm maximum (Amateur Photographer mag. review), dropping off pretty quickly to 260 mm when shooting test targets.

[lol]

What I nickname as "focal length shrinkage" at close focus isn't exactly unknown either. The 70-300L does that quite strongly too.

[Albi86]

What I nickname as "focal length shrinkage" at close focus isn't exactly unknown either. The 70-300L does that quite strongly too.

It's called focus breathing

And it may happen that objects get larger too