Patent: Sigma 11-22mm f/4.5-5.6 Art Lens

[Canon Rumors]

Sigma has filed an optical formula patent for an 11-22 f/4.5-5.6 Art series lens for full frame DSLRs.</p>
<p>Patent Publication No. 2015-203734 (Google Translated)</p>
<ul>
<li>Published 2015.11.16</li>
<li>Filing date 2014.4.11</li>
<li>Zoom ratio 1.88</li>
<li>Wide-angle intermediate telephoto</li>
<li>Focal length 11.33 15.33 21.30</li>
<li>F-number 4.50 5.00 5.86</li>
<li>Total angle of view 2ω 126.85 108.80 87.93</li>
<li>Image height Y 21.63 21.63 21.63</li>
<li>Overall length of the lens 163.42 156.24 156.59</li>
</ul>
<p>An ultra wide angle full frame Art series lens from Sigma has been rumored for quite some time and is a logical addition to their Art series lineup.</p>

 

[tiltshift]

despite loving my 11-24 if/when they make this I will be a little jealous as I am guessing it will be a great lens at a more affordable cost. the downside of being an early adopter...

 

[Deleted member 68328]

Please make it stabilized for all these landscape shots while hiking/climbing where it's not possible to use a tripod !!!
Moreover, given the apertures we'll be able to mount filters ;D ;D ;D

 

[Lee Jay]

I wouldn't trade my 8-15L (on crop) for this or the Canon 11-24 on full-frame.

 

[NancyP]

Sounds interesting - if it is 95% as good as the Canon 11-24, it should sell well.
Me - I am still wanting a smallish 50-60mm f/1.4 to f/2 lens of high quality for FF - IS would be nice, too.

 

[wsmith96]

It will be interesting to see the price point. The variable aperture will keep the costs down, but maybe it will also allow for standard filter mounts.

 

[PhotographyFirst]

Not a chance in hell that this lens will take front threaded filters at all.

It should be lighter and cheaper than the Canon though. Hopefully Sigma does better with the image quality this time around as the previous 12mm version was kind of crap. Even their 8-16 on crop does much better for image quality.

I would rather see a 14-24 f2.8 from Sigma. Canon shooters have nothing in this range, which is arguably much more useful for landscape work than 11-24 f4. It would also be a cheaper option for Nikon shooters.

 

[preppyak]

Canon shooters have nothing in this range, which is arguably much more useful for landscape work than 11-24 f4.

You mean other than the 14mm f/2.8 that Canon already sells, and the 14mm f/2.8 from Rokinon, which is likely used by most doing astro work.

I actually dont think its an area where Canon is lacking. 11-24 for people who need the widest. 14mm lenses for night work. TS lenses for architectural work. Sigma even has the 20mm f/1.4 for people who need wider than 24mm and fast aperture.

My guess is they are just updating the 12-24 with improved optics and a little more range. Probably still targeting that $949 or $999 price range as they have been with other lenses

 

[ahsanford]

Wow. Just for conversation, let's presume this patent will become a real product and be the next Art lens released.

How on earth is an 11-22 lens a more desired product than an 85 Art prime or a 24-70 f/2.8 Art zoom?

(Don't get me wrong, they'll sell a bunch of this lens, given how expensive the 11-24 f/4L is.)

- A

 

[StudentOfLight]

Wow. Just for conversation, let's presume this patent will become a real product and be the next Art lens released.

How on earth is an 11-22 lens a more desired product than an 85 Art prime or a 24-70 f/2.8 Art zoom?

(Don't get me wrong, they'll sell a bunch of this lens, given how expensive the 11-24 f/4L is.)

- A

It will be hard for people to complain about autofocus issues at 22mm f/5.6. 85mm f/1.4 is a totally different story though.

 

[ahsanford]

How on earth is an 11-22 lens a more desired product than an 85 Art prime or a 24-70 f/2.8 Art zoom?

(Don't get me wrong, they'll sell a bunch of this lens, given how expensive the 11-24 f/4L is.)

- A

It will be hard for people to complain about autofocus issues at 22mm f/5.6. 85mm f/1.4 is a totally different story though.

Agree 100%. The wider (and narrower max aperture) these lenses get, the less folks will complain about the AF. There's also going to be a much higher percentage of tripod use with such an ultrawide compared to (say) a 35 Art shooting street, or a 50 / 85 Art shooting portraiture.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Not a chance in hell that this lens will take front threaded filters at all.

It should be lighter and cheaper than the Canon though. Hopefully Sigma does better with the image quality this time around as the previous 12mm version was kind of crap. Even their 8-16 on crop does much better for image quality.

I would rather see a 14-24 f2.8 from Sigma. Canon shooters have nothing in this range, which is arguably much more useful for landscape work than 11-24 f4. It would also be a cheaper option for Nikon shooters.

I agree that it will have a bulbous front element, but I don't see how a 14-24 f2.8 is a more useful landscape lens than an 11-24 f4, how many landscapes are shot at f2.8-4?

 

[ahsanford]

Not a chance in hell that this lens will take front threaded filters at all.

It should be lighter and cheaper than the Canon though. Hopefully Sigma does better with the image quality this time around as the previous 12mm version was kind of crap. Even their 8-16 on crop does much better for image quality.

I would rather see a 14-24 f2.8 from Sigma. Canon shooters have nothing in this range, which is arguably much more useful for landscape work than 11-24 f4. It would also be a cheaper option for Nikon shooters.

I agree that it will have a bulbous front element, but I don't see how a 14-24 f2.8 is a more useful landscape lens than an 11-24 f4, how many landscapes are shot at f2.8-4?

Astro astro astro. Besides that or environmental portraiture of yetis handheld in the dark, I'm hard pressed to think of anything else.

Also, 14-24 can likely be front filtered with an outrigger (Lee SW 150, Wonderpana, etc.) with only huge filters and not comically huge filters needed to get all the way to 11mm without vignetting. That's a small plus in my book.

- A

 

[rs]

Moreover, given the apertures we'll be able to mount filters ;D ;D ;D

I can't see how filters will fit on this:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fegami.blog.so-net.ne.jp%2F2015-12-14&edit-text=&act=url

 

[infared]

This lens should be interesting. Yeah...it will have a bulbous front end...that is part of the design.
(Just like my new 20mm F/1.4 Art....wonder if this lens will be as sharp as the 20mm....probably not as it is a zoom, but I bet its very good).
The price will be the most interesting part. You have to give it to Sigma ...they are attacking Canon like a pit bull!

 

[Loswr]

You have to give it to Sigma ...they are attacking Canon like a pit bull!

Yeah, like a very tiny pit bull attacking an elephant. I really don't think Canon is under any serious pressure at the high end, most people who would buy L lens won't be tempted by a cheaper 3rd party option unless it offers something beyond a lower price. The consumer zoom market is a different story, but Tamron is a bigger player there.

 

[Random Orbits]

Canon shooters have nothing in this range, which is arguably much more useful for landscape work than 11-24 f4.

You mean other than the 14mm f/2.8 that Canon already sells, and the 14mm f/2.8 from Rokinon, which is likely used by most doing astro work.

I actually dont think its an area where Canon is lacking. 11-24 for people who need the widest. 14mm lenses for night work. TS lenses for architectural work. Sigma even has the 20mm f/1.4 for people who need wider than 24mm and fast aperture.

My guess is they are just updating the 12-24 with improved optics and a little more range. Probably still targeting that $949 or $999 price range as they have been with other lenses

Agree it's an update to Sigma's existing 12-24. Interesting that they changed the range slightly to get a more direct comparison to Canon's 11-24L. Same f/4.5-5.6 as Sigma's existing 12-24.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I'd be interested in the Tokina Wide angle lens, they seem to excel at wide angles. I do not have a ultra wide zoom, because I don't have enough use to justify the high price of a good one. I do have a 17mm Tokina f/3.5 that is reasonably good.

I might be tempted to get the Sigma if its reasonably priced, but having has five Sigma lenses that were EOS compatible, but did not work on DSLR's, (and only one could be upgraded), I'm still a bit shy of Sigma. Tamron and Tokina have never has gross issues like that.

 

[RGF]

despite loving my 11-24 if/when they make this I will be a little jealous as I am guessing it will be a great lens at a more affordable cost. the downside of being an early adopter...

11-24 is F4, this is variable up to f5.6 may be a bit smaller and lighter.

I would rather have Sigma come out with something in the range 12-15 mm (prime, not zoom) F1.4 to F2.0

 

[ahsanford]

I would rather have Sigma come out with something in the range 12-15 mm (prime, not zoom) F1.4 to F2.0

I'm just amazed with the growth of astro why someone hasn't pumped out a Zeiss Otus like tool expressly for that purpose. Consider: No one can deliver ultrawide + f/1.4 + coma free. The first company to do that could ask a mint for such a lens.

- A