Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art Preorders Start June 22, 2017

[Canon Rumors]

Preorders for the brand new Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art will begin on Jun 22, 2017 at 1:00AM EST.</p>
<p>We’re also told the lens will ship at the end of June for the EF mount. So it looks like a quick turnaround, which is always a good thing.</p>
<p><del>We do not have a price for the 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art or the 24-70mm f/2.8 DG HSM OS Art</del>, which can also be preordered on June 22, 2017 at 1:00AM EST.</p>
<p><strong>We’ve now been told that pricing will be as follows, which has been confirmed by a few retailers (in USD).</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://bhpho.to/2swJrCl">Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG HSM OS Art $1299</a></li>
<li><a href="https://bhpho.to/2rkYCub">Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art $1599</a></li>
</ul>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[Hector1970]

I'll be interested in the reviews for this. Was there any detailed testing of its Astro capability. I'm surprised they haven't pushed this so far. It's the reason I would buy it. I wonder is it's coma poor. An agent I spoke to expects it to be good.

 

[NorbR]

Not cheap ... but that was expected.

This is a lens that will most likely find its way into my kit eventually, barring any bad surprises regarding image quality, which would be very surprising coming from Sigma. But it will have to wait, the next purchase is already reserved for the 85L (which will probably be even less cheap : )

 

[davidcl0nel]

Why hide Sigma always the weight of the lens...
It is an important fact. Always.

 

[BeenThere]

It will have to be very good at that price. Anxiously awaiting independent testing.

 

[applecider]

Yes testing for Astro at f1.8 is how to test the mettle of the king.

Weight is reportedly 2.57lbs or 1170gms if you go that way.

The Rokinon SP hefts at 791 gms while the old 2.8 adds 550gms to the package.

 

[The3o5FlyGuy]

faster and cheaper than the Canon L, but will it preform better?

 

[cellomaster27]

I think the price for the 24-70mm is aggressive! I like that a lot. I'm going to give it some time for the tamron and sigma variants to battle it out first. Maybe canon will release one with IS in the meantime?

 

[chrysoberyl]

Yes testing for Astro at f1.8 is how to test the mettle of the king.

Weight is reportedly 2.57lbs or 1170gms if you go that way.

The Rokinon SP hefts at 791 gms while the old 2.8 adds 550gms to the package.

I fully agree on the testing.

Wow - twice the price of the Rokinon! I have the Rokinon but am somewhat interested in f/1.8.

 

[SecureGSM]

Sigma MTF charts for the 24-70 Art lens look a bit ordinary, unfortunately. Distortion levels are also quite substantial. I am not convinced so far but open to re-evaluate based on professional product reviews.

I think the price for the 24-70mm is aggressive! I like that a lot. I'm going to give it some time for the tamron and sigma variants to battle it out first. Maybe canon will release one with IS in the meantime?

 

[LesC]

Prices in the UK will I suspect be the same in in GBP as in $ but the price for the 24-70 does indeed seem aggressive at $1299 compared to the Canon 24-70 which doesn't have IS.

Of course this all depends on how good or otherwise it turns out to be. Need to see what reviews make of it in the coming weeks; everyone got excited about the new Canon 24-105 MKII until reviews started to roll in...

And the Sigma is very heavy - Sigma UK's site quotes 1.020g

 

[Antono Refa]

Not cheap ... but that was expected.

How so?

The 24-70mm f/2.8 is $400 cheaper than the Canon equivalent, and has optical stabilization.

The 14mm f/1.8 is $500 cheaper than the Canon 14mm f/2.8, and is 1.2 stops faster.

 

[BeenThere]

Not cheap ... but that was expected.

How so?

The 24-70mm f/2.8 is $400 cheaper than the Canon equivalent, and has optical stabilization.

The 14mm f/1.8 is $500 cheaper than the Canon 14mm f/2.8, and is 1.2 stops faster.

A lot of pricing history for third party lenses (Zeiss excluded) has us expecting low prices. But if manufactures are stepping up their game, and giving us near first party equivalent, or lenses that first parties will not take a risk on, then the high cost are justified. I just need to see the proof from independent testing.

 

[Antono Refa]

Not cheap ... but that was expected.

How so?

The 24-70mm f/2.8 is $400 cheaper than the Canon equivalent, and has optical stabilization.

The 14mm f/1.8 is $500 cheaper than the Canon 14mm f/2.8, and is 1.2 stops faster.

A lot of pricing history for third party lenses (Zeiss excluded) has us expecting low prices. But if manufactures are stepping up their game, and giving us near first party equivalent, or lenses that first parties will not take a risk on, then the high cost are justified. I just need to see the proof from independent testing.

Proof from independent test will be, indeed, required.