Sigma 135mm f/2 DG OS Art Coming? [CR1]

[Solar Eagle]

I'd love to see a 24mm 1.4 from Sigma. I doubt it would be as sharp as the 35mm wide open but even if it comes close it would be great for night skies. Would be cheaper than the 24L for sure and HOPEFULLY a little sharper.

 

[ejenner]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

I guess you do something like this :
http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=388

Add AF and OS to that and I'd pay $2k for sure.

I do like the 135L though. If sig came out with something I'd probably keep both for a while (whatever the reviews) to see if I really did like the sig as much.

Of course I may be in the minority, but I'd like to see how good they could get a 135 at a price point of $1200-$1600. If it's not quite as good as the 135, but with IS for $800, then blah.

 

[Artifex]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

I guess you do something like this :
http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=388

The Zeiss from all accounts is an amazing lens, what we have come to expect from Zeiss, they make few poor Lenses, but.

For Canon & Nikon, this particular 135f/2, though sublime, lacks auto focus, so it's all manual, which is Ok as well, but the Canon 135L is a pretty hard act to follow considering it's maybe 98% as good as the Zeiss 135f/2, and has auto focus, on a Canon body.

I haven't actually used the Zeiss 135f/2, but I do own the Canon 135f/2, and it's pretty good.

I own the Sigma Art 35f/1.4 as well as the Canon 35f/1.4 L, and both are excellent Lenses, the Sigma may have the sharper image, but the Canon has the better Bokah, it's all subjective to the individuals taste & preference, and wallet.

I think also "distant stars" original "How do you improve on the 135L" didn't need to inspire the "Canon Fan Boy" tirade that followed, this is an open forum, people are allowed to post their views, and within normal reasonable bounds, shouldn't expect to be hammered for them.

I totally agree with you! You could also add that the Zeiss is more than twice the price of the Canon. I wasn't saying the Canon 135L is a bad lens, far from; it is exceptional, especially considering it's price. However, I was just pointing out that it can always be better. I am very curious of what Sigma can do with a 135mm, considering their latest products and the lack of choice in EF-mount for 135mm prime. Moreover, you can call me crazy, but I wouldn't even be disappointed if Sigma choses a different direction and produce an 135mm f/2.8 OS, which could be lighter, smaller and cheaper than a 135mm f/2 OS. I personally have difficulty believing such a lens is possible without being of size, weight and price similar to the EF 70-200 2.8L IS II.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

F/1.8 and IS.

Lol. I feel like 98% of your posts are about a 135mm 1.8 OS

 

[Etienne]

Sigma has my attention now. Stabilized 135 f/2 ... hell ya!
Please make it compatible with the Canon teleconverters.

 

[sanj]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

I guess you do something like this :
http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=388

The Zeiss from all accounts is an amazing lens, what we have come to expect from Zeiss, they make few poor Lenses, but.

For Canon & Nikon, this particular 135f/2, though sublime, lacks auto focus, so it's all manual, which is Ok as well, but the Canon 135L is a pretty hard act to follow considering it's maybe 98% as good as the Zeiss 135f/2, and has auto focus, on a Canon body.

I haven't actually used the Zeiss 135f/2, but I do own the Canon 135f/2, and it's pretty good.

I own the Sigma Art 35f/1.4 as well as the Canon 35f/1.4 L, and both are excellent Lenses, the Sigma may have the sharper image, but the Canon has the better Bokah, it's all subjective to the individuals taste & preference, and wallet.

I think also "distant stars" original "How do you improve on the 135L" didn't need to inspire the "Canon Fan Boy" tirade that followed, this is an open forum, people are allowed to post their views, and within normal reasonable bounds, shouldn't expect to be hammered for them.

I have the Zeiss 135. It is AMAZING. And besides stills, works great for video.

 

[privatebydesign]

Moreover, you can call me crazy, but I wouldn't even be disappointed if Sigma choses a different direction and produce an 135mm f/2.8 OS, which could be lighter, smaller and cheaper than a 135mm f/2 OS. I personally have difficulty believing such a lens is possible without being of size, weight and price similar to the EF 70-200 2.8L IS II.

Why? A 135 f2 OS could easily be made with a 72mm filter thread, the 70-200 f2.8 can't. When the EF 100 f2.8 Macro gained IS it put on just one ounce. The complexity of a high quality zoom is magnitudes above a simple prime, there is nothing complicated about a 135 f2 IS prime for the EF mount.

 

[ksagomonyants]

That'd be great but not at a much higher price. Lots of people buy 135 f2 not only because it's great optically but also because it's one of the cheapest L lenses. I'd personally love if Canon could make it weather sealed.

I was asking this question before but got no answer. What's the experience of Sigma lens owners in terms of warranty and customer support? Is it as good as Canon's?

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

F/1.8 and IS.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

We’re told that Sigma is working on a 135 f/2 DG OS Art series prime lens for release some time in 2014. Possibly around Photokina in September.
The source goes on to say that Sigma is going to be very aggressive next year and announce a lot of high performance glass.
The same source also says that Sigma may have a surprise camera announcement. There are a few details to be worked out, but there’s a possibility of a big DSLR announcement.

This is good news ... I still believe that if Sigma does come up with a decent full frame DSLR (even if it is as good as 6D), it would make a compelling option ... I would definitely be interested to buy one as Sigma already makes some decent lenses ... and, hopefully, those lenses would be free from AF issues, (due to "firmware upgrades" from Canon & Nikon), thus giving Sigma the opportunity to prove to the consumers that their lenses are just as good as the big boys if not better or they just aren't up to the mark. Either way, these are good times for the consumer.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

I guess you do something like this :
http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=388

The Zeiss from all accounts is an amazing lens, what we have come to expect from Zeiss, they make few poor Lenses, but.

For Canon & Nikon, this particular 135f/2, though sublime, lacks auto focus, so it's all manual, which is Ok as well, but the Canon 135L is a pretty hard act to follow considering it's maybe 98% as good as the Zeiss 135f/2, and has auto focus, on a Canon body.

I haven't actually used the Zeiss 135f/2, but I do own the Canon 135f/2, and it's pretty good.

I own the Sigma Art 35f/1.4 as well as the Canon 35f/1.4 L, and both are excellent Lenses, the Sigma may have the sharper image, but the Canon has the better Bokah, it's all subjective to the individuals taste & preference, and wallet.

I think also "distant stars" original "How do you improve on the 135L" didn't need to inspire the "Canon Fan Boy" tirade that followed, this is an open forum, people are allowed to post their views, and within normal reasonable bounds, shouldn't expect to be hammered for them.

Falling off my chair in suprise here...a reasoned discussion about lens brands and choice!
Your experiance pretty much mirrors my own
The Canon 135 f2 L is a lovely lens, but it's a little dated in terms of modern design. If Canon imcrease the filter size to 77mm, they can easily make f1.8. They could easily add an IS unit, which would make this lens a low light performer. The min focus distance is a little long when compared to the 70-200 f2.8 II LIS and the aperture blades aren't very round (stop down to f2.8 and point at some highlights to see my point). Then there's the AF unit. It's good, but it's a little slower against the 70-200 cousins. It could benefit from the newer coatings and weather sealing...but all these thing do not detract from the superlative photos that the current version is capable of taking. It's a great lens, but could do with a few tweeks for a 2014 context.

 

[Eldar]

I must admit I don´t use the 135/2 very much. I tend to go for either the 85/1.2 II or the 70-200/2.8 IS II. The IQ is excellent though and I probably should use it more often.

To really tempt me, I think I would want f1.8 and IS. If I could get that at the same IQ and AF speed (always wants faster ..), I´d be first in line.

 

[WoodyWindy]

Just one quick suggestion - whenever there's a new rumor for an upcoming Sigma lens, please PLEASE find some stock image other than the Jolly Green Giant to head it with, unless of course it is a replacement for that particular ultra fast telephoto...

 

[fox40phil]

Hoping for weather sealed lenses..... :-X please...

 

[AvTvM]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

Well, I'd love to get any or all of the following improvements:

• 100% more IS
• 10% better IQ
• 50% less price

 

[infared]

I would LOVE to see a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art lens in 2014. Should not be too difficult to best the Canon offerings...and being that the Otus is totally out of my reach...a guy can hope for something in between.

 

[ScottyP]

Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat

Interesting, but they'd need to ditch the Foveon sensor and go regular. Too large a data file not to have any real improvement in resolution, at least not that ive read anywhere outside the Sigma website. Or maybe non-Bayer like Fuji's x-trans. That would be exciting indeed.

What if Sigma made a Canon EF mount camera with a Sony sensor. So-sigma? Sig-ony? Sig-can-nony?

I'd rather see them to with the non-Bayer design though.

 

[lol]

My 135L is a lens I'd like to update, but not even the Zeiss is quite there in performance/value ratio (I would go for an Otus level one if they ever do that!). My biggest beef with the L is the longitudinal colour is rather poorly corrected. Can we have a true APO or better design please?

 

[Quasimodo]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

+ 100

 

[privatebydesign]

My 135L is a lens I'd like to update, but not even the Zeiss is quite there in performance/value ratio (I would go for an Otus level one if they ever do that!). My biggest beef with the L is the longitudinal colour is rather poorly corrected. Can we have a true APO or better design please?

Wow, you are the first person I ever heard of complain about the longitudinal (axial) CA from a 135L, can you post some images of yours that demonstrate this?

Of course as far as CA goes axial is the one to have as it is far simpler to correct for in post than lateral.

 

[EOBeav]

.
How do you improve on the 135L?

+ 100

I'll go one further, how do you improve on the 135L and price it competitively? If you catch it at the right time, you can get one for <$1kUSD. They're going to have to work hard to build one to beat the priceerformance ratio without cutting some corners.