A Summary of Sigma Lens Rumors

[Chapman Baxter]

My missing Art lens list is:
Sigma 12mm f/2.8 DG ART
Sigma 20mm f/1.8 DG ART
Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG MACRO (1:3-ish) ART
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG ART
Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG OS ART
Sigma 100-300 f/4 DG OS ART

+1 to all of the above. My picks would be 20mm f/1.8 and 135mm OS, only because they'd fill the gaps in my current prime collection.

Sigma's previous 100-300mm f/4 was, by most accounts, a superb lens, and much smaller, lighter and easier to handle than the 120-300 f/2.8. I'd love to see the 100-300mm f/4 given Sigma's Global Vision treatment.

 

[9VIII]

The cost of new "white glass" is beyond most of us now. Sigma has proven it can make a competing lens in the lower prime and zoom range. Cost versus performance is the key to success here. The market for under 200mm is flooded with options. Sigma needs to go big and fast if they want to capture the market. Attacking the longer lens market makes good marketing sense. A competing lens for Canon's 200-400 would be a smart move. Quality has to be the #1 objective to break into this "deep pockets" territory. Personally, I think they should not attempt going past 500mm at the top end due to f stop considerations. I think that's why Canon stopped at 400mm. If you can deal with the light loss of an extender, Canon's flip in 1.4x makes perfect sense. If Sigma wants to deliver a knock-out punch, The perfect range would look more like 150-300mm f2.8-f4 with a flip in 2x converter resulting in a 300-600mm.
If Sigma could produce that lens at the quality/cost breakaway point, they would break into a huge market.

I don't like the IQ degradation with extenders. Yes they work ok, but you're far better off without.

I think the 200-400 and Sigma 300-600 are in different markets. One is sports shooter's dream, the other is a wildlife lens with added flexibility.
If they want to compete with the 200-400 they should make a 200-400. Of course what I really want from Sigma is a 600mm prime, but apparently zoom sells so I'll just have to suck it up (if the new Canon 800mm is over $15K I'm going to cry).

 

[Bob Howland]

A 300-600 f/4 would be huge. An f/4.5 slightly smaller but might create problems when used with TC's, especially the 2X, i.e., 600-1200 f/9 wouldn't be usable with 1Dx AF while a 600-1200 f/8 would. A 300-600 f/5.6 wouldn't be usable at all with a 2X TC. The problems are even worse with camera bodies that only AF with lenses f/5.6 or faster.

So, at the risk of repeating myself yet again, why not a 200-500 f/2.8-4, that holds f/2.8 max aperture from 200mm to 350mm? And why not a 300-800 f/4-5.6 that holds f/4 from 300mm to 560mm?

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

The two I'm most hoping for are the 24mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/1.8/2 OS. The 85mm would be welcome but I have a Vivitar (Rokinon/Samyang) 85mm f/1.4 that I'm extremely happy with (which is strange, as its contrast is pretty bad and flare control non-existent, but I just love the aesthetic it gives; very filmic). I'd also love a 24-70 f/2, and I wouldn't care how heavy or big it is. However, I'd still be stoked if they put out a 24-70 f/2.8 OS offering, as I do video a lot.

Additionally, if any of you checked out sigma-rumors they also have this exciting lens listed:

• 16-20mm f/2 DG Art - listed as "60%" likely.

I would LOVE a fast uwa zoom like that. I shoot concerts a lot from the pit and I need the fastest glass I can get. They did list other focal lengths as possible (16-24, 14-20) but with a f/2 constant aperture I imagine they'd have to keep the zoom range short. 16-24 would be ideal for me. Wouldn't have to get a 24mm f/1.4 in that case!

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Appeared secret images of the new
Sigma 24-70mm F2 OS

 

[RLPhoto]

Sigma 135mm f/1.8 OS Art. Aghhhhh.....

It be a shutup and take my money moment.

 

[Grummbeerbauer]

I am looking for some halfway affordable longer zoom for occasional birding/wildlife/airshow shooting. The Tamron 150-600 almost had me convinced, but at least on APS-C the long end seems to be bad enough that one should probably use it as an 150-500. That puts me off and the fact that it is on backorder everywhere in .de. :
If Sigma had something in that range (200-600mm?) with better IQ at the long end than the Tamron while keeping the price at a reasonable level (<2000), I might be tempted. I wouldn't even mind f6.3 at the long end if wide-open performance was acceptable.

 

[Isurus]

I was hoping for some primes to compete with Canon's 400/500/600mm primes. A 300-600 would be interesting, but it likely won't be f/4 throughout; probably something like the Tamron instead as the weight would get too significant. Ah well; I can still hope for something in the future.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I was hoping for some primes to compete with Canon's 400/500/600mm primes. A 300-600 would be interesting, but it likely won't be f/4 throughout; probably something like the Tamron instead as the weight would get too significant. Ah well; I can still hope for something in the future.

I'm sure they are coming, although I doubt they will deisng a 400mm f2.8.
Their 500mm f4.5 is a well regarded lens and one which seriously do with an update. An IS unit, opening up to f4 and the ability to take teleconverters without Af issues and weather sealed should do the trick.

 

[AlanF]

I was hoping for some primes to compete with Canon's 400/500/600mm primes. A 300-600 would be interesting, but it likely won't be f/4 throughout; probably something like the Tamron instead as the weight would get too significant. Ah well; I can still hope for something in the future.

I'm sure they are coming, although I doubt they will deisng a 400mm f2.8.
Their 500mm f4.5 is a well regarded lens and one which seriously do with an update. An IS unit, opening up to f4 and the ability to take teleconverters without Af issues and weather sealed should do the trick.

The current Sigma big primes are over-heavy, over-priced (£4799 for the 500 f/4.5 and £5499 for the 800/5.6) under-perform in MTF and lack IS. To compete with Canon they will have to improve hugely and keep the price really down. When you want the ultimate, a £1000 here or there in £5000-8000 is not usually a deal breaker. I would like an ultra-light very sharp 400, 500 or 600 f/5.6 at a competitive price and leave the f/2.8 and f/4 to Canon.

 

[Plainsman]

Surely 300-600/5.6 ie same front lens size as their 120-300.

With very moderate 600/300 ratio it should in theory mean consistent performance across the zoom range.

Best of luck to Sigma if they pull it off and actually make this one.

Unfortunately, the 120-300 weighs 3.39 kg, just over a kilo more than the Canon 300mm f/2.8 II. That is too heavy for me without a tripod or monopod.

...when you add a Canon 2x TC to the 300/2.8II then the weight difference is not very much.

If you include the Canon 2x and 1.4x TCs the cost difference in favour of the Sigma could be considerable.

Canon's answer to this lens is the 200-400 which will reach 560 with built in TC. But this is an elite lens aimed at people with very deep pockets.

This Sigma could replace a lot of lenses in one package : 300/4, 400/5.6, 100-400, 400/4DO ....etc.

 

[NancyP]

Part of the problem in going head to head with the Big Whites is that users want super-fast and reliable autofocus. That is a challenge for any third party manufacturer, although Sigma has done the sensible thing and created the dock, so that new firmware can be loaded at any time. OEM engineers make sure that all lenses are back compatible with older cameras and vice versa. Sigma doesn't have OEM protocols, so the necessary reverse engineering into hardware has left some older Sigma lenses unable to function on newer cameras. Now at least there is a hope of Sigma engineers catching up with newer camera models.

The 300-600 would be the successor to the 300-800 Sigmonster - big.

 

[mrsfotografie]

My missing Art lens list is:
Sigma 12mm f/2.8 DG ART
Sigma 20mm f/1.8 DG ART
Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG MACRO (1:3-ish) ART
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG ART
Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG OS ART
Sigma 100-300 f/4 DG OS ART

Missing in this list is the 28mm, or is 28mm a dead prime focal length?

 

[Pieces Of E]

Why all the Sigma reporting here, isn't this Canon Rumors? :

 

[Marsu42]

hmmmmm...I rather like the sound of a 24-70mm f/2 DG ART....

But you probably wouldn't like the weight. Or vignetting. Or price (ymmv). Really, this won't happen, where's a reason the rest of the world builds f2.8 zooms - "faster" means accepting a unbalance not compatible with mass market production/sales.

Why all the Sigma reporting here, isn't this Canon Rumors? :

All the talk about premium 3rd party lenses proves that Canon doesn't manage to hit the enthusiast's "sweet spot" recently, though they probably don't care as their IS video primes and high-end primes/zooms will get them excellent revenues.

My problem is: If you use these lenses, why use a Canon camera body? Well, yes, rt flashes and Magic Lantern, but beyond that?

 

[mrsfotografie]

My problem is: If you use these lenses, why use a Canon camera body? Well, yes, rt flashes and Magic Lantern, but beyond that?

Ergonomics.

 

[Marsu42]

My problem is: If you use these lenses, why use a Canon camera body? Well, yes, rt flashes and Magic Lantern, but beyond that?

Ergonomics.

I agree, but then again I've never shot with a Nikon for a longer time and I'm inclined to believe millions of people *are* able to adjust to them :-> ... and the difference between a right-hand 60d/6d design vs. a "pro" dual-hand joystick 5d3/1dx is probably as large as towards another brand.

 

[mrsfotografie]

My problem is: If you use these lenses, why use a Canon camera body? Well, yes, rt flashes and Magic Lantern, but beyond that?

Ergonomics.

I agree, but then again I've never shot with a Nikon for a longer time and I'm inclined to believe millions of people *are* able to adjust to them :-> ... and the difference between a right-hand 60d/6d design vs. a "pro" dual-hand joystick 5d3/1dx is probably as large as towards another brand.

Still, there was something 'natural' about the Canon bodies when I was looking for a DSLR. Nikon somehow always confuses me. That said, Sony isn't all that great either. I wish my NEX-6 had a better menu structure, and an easier way to do exposure compensation. The A7(r) looks like it is massively better. However I'm not ready for a full-frame mirrorless... Yet.

OTOH, on that NEX, I'm using (old) Canon lenses on a third party body. How's that?

 

[AlanF]

Surely 300-600/5.6 ie same front lens size as their 120-300.

With very moderate 600/300 ratio it should in theory mean consistent performance across the zoom range.

Best of luck to Sigma if they pull it off and actually make this one.

Unfortunately, the 120-300 weighs 3.39 kg, just over a kilo more than the Canon 300mm f/2.8 II. That is too heavy for me without a tripod or monopod.

...when you add a Canon 2x TC to the 300/2.8II then the weight difference is not very much.

The Canon 300/28 II with 2xTC III weighs 2.675 kg, which is 0.715 kg or 1lb 9 oz lighter than the Sigma 120-300mm, which some of would find to be quite significant held at the end of a camera.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

24mm ART lens sounds very tempting.