You really should have included the source—Nokishita, as usual—when posting this. That's someone else's work you've copied & pasted; naming and linking them is the least you should do.
Anyway.
Well, Sigma have made it quite clear over the last few years that they don't give a second thought to weight or size. Want to travel light? Sigma doesn't care. Want to fit your entire kit in a shoulder bag? Sigma doesn't care. Want to use screw-in filters? Sigma doesn't care.
Usually the optical quality and price is enough to justify it, but I do think they have recently gone overboard. The 105mm f/1.4, we were told, has the gigantic front element and weighs as much as a 70-200 in order to reduce vignetting. In reality it has almost exactly the same vignetting as the much smaller and lighter Nikon 105mm f/1.4. The Sigma 85mm is an optically superb lens, but there are several other 85-135mm lenses which outclass it while also being smaller.
I really want a pro-grade, fast 28mm lens for Canon. But that's a focal length I want because I grew up with it as the de facto walkaround lens. That's a focal length I like for environmental portraits, not studio portraits. 83x108mm and a 77mm filter thread mean it's almost certainly going to be over the 1kg mark. For a totally neutral, extra-high-quality 65mm lens I may use for a full-body shot in the studio, 77mm filters and 1kg+ bulk is fine. For a 28mm lens to use in the middle of a crowded trade show or bringing around a stately home? Nope. Nope, nope. Nope nope nope nopenope. Nope.
I mean, I expected it to be large, but that's taking the piss.
Good news is, as I mentioned on the last post about these lenses, I've handled the 56mm a while back and not only is it relatively light (
especially by Sigma standards) but it's also extremely high-quality, despite the 'C' badge which I know a lot of people don't trust. Of all these, that is the lens which is really going to make a significant difference to the market.
I suppose I'll have to keep my fingers crossed Tamron will be inspired and make a more practical 28mm, since they do already have a quality 45mm. Lord knows Canon's had a 28mm f/1.4L patent forever and never acted on it...
60-600 is only 140g less than the new Canon/Sony 400/2.8s....what a pig of a lens....
Yes, but that's a case of the new 400mm primes being exceptionally light, and a 60-600 zoom having so much range that there's really no way it wouldn't be heavy. That's not a lens which is ever going to be used handheld, anyway, so I don't see it as much of a problem. If someone needs that kind of insane range in a zoom, they're not going to mind the size of it.