Preorder: Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art

[Cthulhu]

Sigma got a little greedy with this lens. Yes it will most likely be slightly sharper and faster than the legendary 135L but at a cost of inconsistent AF, huge size and weight, price, and Sigma's not so great color. Oh yeah, it costs quite a bit more. No thanks!
The 135L is a no brainer with superb image quality, AF, Bokeh, Color, small size, and price.

I tend to agree. Kind of funny when the 3rd party is charging the 50% markup, premium over the 1st party. It would be one thing if the 135L had some big weaknesses, but it's an awesome lens. And yes, throw in used, refurbished and the savings are even greater (I think I paid $700 for mine).

I love what Sigma is doing and their 35mm Art is one of my favorite to shoot with. However this is a bit of tougher sell IMO since the Canon is already so good!

I think who'll be really happy about this are Nikon shooters. Their 135 offering is the same price as the Sigma, and it's an awful piece of glass.

 

[ExodistPhotography]

The so called need for IS has reached insane levels. Initially it was considered a necessity for telephoto glass only and now anyone will and can make a case for a need for any focal length. I however am in the camp that 135 and longer is a good starting point. YMMV depending on your styles of shooting and use of available light. I will make no judgments on this lens until I experience it first hand but I will say not having stabilization isn't a non starter issue for me... owning the 135L is.

If you are shooting on a a 20-24MP Full Frame body, you will likely not see any need for IS. But like I have stated before. Higher MP cameras like the 5DS need IS to get pixel level sharpness. Even your current APS-C bodies need IS to get sharp images. If not you will have to use much much higher shutter speeds on higher MP cameras. Which may not always be an option.

I shoot flash both in studio with my strobes and outdoors with my speedlites. I almost never not use flash even during the daylight simply becuase the freezing power of the speedlites give much much sharper images. Even when the model is standing still. Simply because it also helps reduce some of the camera shake. Adding IS only helps to improve the overall image sharpness and clarity. So in my expert opinion. Every new lens released at this point should have a minimum of 4 stops of IS..

 

[eguzowski]

I'd buy it if it had image stabilaization (I'd stop using my 70-200 L 2.8 and 85 1.8)....as an event photographer and mainly weddings I need IS...most of the time I'm shooting 3200-6400 Iso in dimly lit ballrooms at 90th sec...I'd need to shoot this lens at a min of 150th sec to handhold it.

I do love Sigma Art glass though and have sold most of my Canon L glass and replaced it with it. It's better made in several ways...smoother manual focus, better or on par IS, sharper, black (white lenses are obnoxious for suit and tie events), and less expensive...no brainer.

 

[Maiaibing]

The so called need for IS has reached insane levels. (...)

Higher MP cameras like the 5DS need IS to get pixel level sharpness.
(...)

So in my expert opinion. Every new lens released at this point should have a minimum of 4 stops of IS..

1) That you need IS to get pixel level sharpness @50MPIX is actually an insane claim...

2) However, I still agree that stabilization is always a useful option, and that's why Canon needs to introduce in-body IS NOW.

 

[sanj]

Sigma put IS on their wide angle but not on this. Me no like.

 

[RayValdez360]

Some of you people just throw around the word sharpness but this think is supposed to resolve more than 50mp making it future proof when cameras around 50mp and over become more common.

 

[RayValdez360]

The so called need for IS has reached insane levels. Initially it was considered a necessity for telephoto glass only and now anyone will and can make a case for a need for any focal length. I however am in the camp that 135 and longer is a good starting point. YMMV depending on your styles of shooting and use of available light. I will make no judgments on this lens until I experience it first hand but I will say not having stabilization isn't a non starter issue for me... owning the 135L is.

Only if the sensor is small with a large amount of MP. The fuji gfx is much sharper than the 5drs handheld from the samples i have seen. I own a 5dsr and you are right about needed IS at slower shutter speeds. As soon as you zoom in alittle you see that 50mp isnt as good as it should be without a fast shutter speed.

If you are shooting on a a 20-24MP Full Frame body, you will likely not see any need for IS. But like I have stated before. Higher MP cameras like the 5DS need IS to get pixel level sharpness. Even your current APS-C bodies need IS to get sharp images. If not you will have to use much much higher shutter speeds on higher MP cameras. Which may not always be an option.

I shoot flash both in studio with my strobes and outdoors with my speedlites. I almost never not use flash even during the daylight simply becuase the freezing power of the speedlites give much much sharper images. Even when the model is standing still. Simply because it also helps reduce some of the camera shake. Adding IS only helps to improve the overall image sharpness and clarity. So in my expert opinion. Every new lens released at this point should have a minimum of 4 stops of IS..

 

[RayValdez360]

The so called need for IS has reached insane levels. (...)

Higher MP cameras like the 5DS need IS to get pixel level sharpness.
(...)

So in my expert opinion. Every new lens released at this point should have a minimum of 4 stops of IS..

1) That you need IS to get pixel level sharpness @50MPIX is actually an insane claim...

2) However, I still agree that stabilization is always a useful option, and that's why Canon needs to introduce in-body IS NOW.

It's true. I own a 5dsr and a 5d Mark III. unless you are shooting a shutter speed equal or over the lens MM, you get slight motion blur.

 

[Talys]

The so called need for IS has reached insane levels. Initially it was considered a necessity for telephoto glass only and now anyone will and can make a case for a need for any focal length. I however am in the camp that 135 and longer is a good starting point. YMMV depending on your styles of shooting and use of available light. I will make no judgments on this lens until I experience it first hand but I will say not having stabilization isn't a non starter issue for me... owning the 135L is.

It's not a need for IS -- it's just that IS is such a nice feature if you're shooting handheld that if option A has it and option B doesn't, I'll pick option A every time, even if the price is more. If you're happy without IS, why by the newest lenses? There are awesome non-IS lenses that are way, way cheaper used.

Thinking forward, too, IS lenses generally do better in resale or trade-in ratios compared to non IS lenses, because they resell easier.

 

[AE-1Burnham]

Short story: Walked into a brick&mortar camera store this weekend and played with some gear. From across the room I saw a group of Sigma lenses next to a 5D-something and thought, look at the big lens, that must be the new 135! ...it was the HUGE 85 and of course, no 135 yet! (Hah) After playing with it, wow the 85 is nice, but it is also very big. (B&H says 135 is actually smaller than 85..? OK) Looking forward to trying it out but still love the size and punch of the 135 2L.

 

[Redline]

I'm an avid sigma fan (see my previous posts haha). But I'm seriously disappointed with the 135 art pricing to be honest. No way I'm paying that much for a 135 art

Ya but the manufacturing cost of f/1.8 for this size lens with 13 elements vs 8 elements in the Canon 135 f/2 makes sense as far as the increase in price.

Honestly I was expecting $1799 or something ridiculous...if the f/1.8 version is hint better than Canon I can see people justifying the overall cost over the Canon's.