Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM Coming? [CR1]

[RGF]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4).  Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

[adhocphotographer]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4).  Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

Good point...  And in part i agree, but if it is sharp wide open, it will cramp into some prime lens sales, especially for video guys...  if it close to the IQ of the 24, 28 and 35 IS lenses, it is going to be very appealing.  I agree completely with the sharpness at mud apertures!

as for the weight, IQ, size etc... we will have to wait! The more options the better really!

[Radiating]

If Sigma releases a lens like this and it was as good as their recent offerings it would be a dream come true.

[roadrunner]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4).  Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

I shoot weddings, so every single wedding. No matter how much light you have at a wedding, it's never enough. Shooting at F2.0 and having IS would be great.

That, and I love the look of shallow DOF primes, and I shoot quite often at F1.4 with my 35mm and 50mm, so I would love to get a zoom lens down to 1.8 or 2.0.

[ecka]

Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM - great! It could be THE lens for videographers. Now let's think about it realistically:
very BIG, very HEAVY, not weather-sealed (most likely);
much more expensive than 24-70/2.8L'II, could be $3k+ (just look at the 120-300/2.8 ).

[vscd]

>This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4).  Unless the IQ is
>significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

Could be, but doesn't have to. The aperture is the proportion from focal length to aperturesize. So, let's calculate it for f2 to f2.8 --> 25 mm rises to 35mm... so, this is no big deal. This centimetre can be done within nearly the same size. Don't compare it to a 200mm lense, the difference is there much bigger.

One or two years ago, I would have been thinking "nice try, sigma"... but after recent releases I assume they can make it quite small and light. Even with OS.

[Marsu42]

We’re told this could be a Photokina 2014 lens

Boys and girls(any?), this is a [CR1] wild guess and be explicit: This lens would only be announced in end of September, 2014, more than a year from now...

... and by then it won't be in mass production but available in limited quantities, after all they're producing it not only for the Canon mount and new lenses always take time to be available everywhere.

And here I am, just having bought the Tamron 24-70 VC not a year ago...

The date and a high demand make very suspicious if the price could really be less than Canon's mk2, after all the Canon's price will have dropped in the meantime and even more facing real competition if the Sigma's af is better than Tamron.

Plus of course this will be large and heavy, it's not like Canon wouldn't be able to build something like this, they just gave in to pro photographers' demand with their mk2 to *reduce* weight rather than to build an impractical dream lens for moving about and handholding a long time: [CR1] doesn't change the laws of physics...

[Chosenbydestiny]

We’re told this could be a Photokina 2014 lens

Boys and girls(any?), this is a [CR1] wild guess and be explicit: This lens would only be announced in end of September, 2014, more than a year from now...

... and by then it won't be in mass production but available in limited quantities, after all they're producing it not only for the Canon mount and new lenses always take time to be available everywhere.

And here I am, just having bought the Tamron 24-70 VC not a year ago...

The date and a high demand make very suspicious if the price could really be less than Canon's mk2, after all the Canon's price will have dropped in the meantime and even more facing real competition if the Sigma's af is better than Tamron.

Plus of course this will be large and heavy, it's not like Canon wouldn't be able to build something like this, they just gave in to pro photographers' demand with their mk2 to *reduce* weight rather than to build an impractical dream lens for moving about and handholding a long time: [CR1] doesn't change the laws of physics...

But isn't that the purpose of having a rumors forum? To make redundant yet professional sounding statements about related products in speculation?

[GMCPhotographics]

If Sigma releases a lens like this and it was as good as their recent offerings it would be a dream come true.

As long as it's sharp wide open and AF's well, then it'll be a game changer.
I just wonder how big and large it'll be. The front element would probably need to be twice the area of the current f2.8 version....that'll be a big lump of glass!

[thewaywewalk]

I'm gonna buy Sigma stock.

Sorry for little offtopic...
I got curious and was looking for a chart, but under what name is Sigma noted at the stock market? I haven't found anything related to photograhy.

[Marsu42]

But isn't that the purpose of having a rumors forum? To make redundant yet professional sounding statements about related products in speculation?

Absolutely :-> and as it happens I just wrote the same thing in another thread.

It's just that if it's about a product I might actually want to buy and lay off other purchases for it (i.e. the Tamron 24-70), I'm also interested in the likelihood of a [CR] actually becoming true. And this Sigma 24-70/2 about to be "THE" lens somehow reminds me of the many threads about the Canon mk2 which was also to be "THE" lens... but I'm also feeling free to speculate about where the trade-offs were made, i.e. price, weight, size or iq.

[verysimplejason]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4).  Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

You forgot, with OS.    Seems good to me if at least its weight, IQ and price is near that of Tamron's 2.8 version.  With the USB dock, this might be a better alternative than the Tamron.

[tron]

I do not believe they will make a FF 24-70 f/2 lens. I mean technically they can but then how will it weigh and how big will it be?
It would be silly to use such a lens.

[verysimplejason]

I do not believe they will make a FF 24-70 f/2 lens. I mean technically they can but then how will it weigh and how big will it be?
It would be silly to use such a lens.

Technically, they can reduce the weight.  Sigma might just do that.  It's a new tech.  They can also sacrifice the materials used a little bit to reduce weight.  I don't know but right now, I'd like to see the lens first before any conclusions.  Sigma has a habit of breaking stereotypes nowadays.

[Marsu42]

Seems good to me if at least its weight, IQ and price is near that of Tamron's 2.8 version.

Probably, if the fairy queen sprinkles the lens and your camera with magic dust :->

Technically, they can reduce the weight.  Sigma might just do that.  It's a new tech.

Ugh, did I miss something, where does it say that? I know there's a lot of potential in DO lenses, but all I heard about that was for tele focal lengths and not for standard/wide-angle.