Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Outed?

[AussieSimon]

<p>I will leave you guys to debate how legit the photograph is below. To my eyes, it looks pretty good.</p>

TLDR: That is not a photograph!

If it's not blindingly obvious to you that this is a 3D rendering, your eyes need checking. And it's not even a particularly good 3D rendering either, with absolutely no surface texture to speak of. I'm not saying it isn't an official press picture created by Sigma, but it's pretty embarrassing for a photography website to mistake an artificial drawing for a photograph.

 

[luciolepri]

I'm not interested in this lens, so I don't care much about this rumor. My only hope is that putting a little focusing ring at the bottom of the lens and a big zoom ring at the top, like in the Tamron 24-70/2.8 and in these pictures of the Sigma 24-105, won't become the new trend...
I can't find any good reason for that, while I can find plenty of downsides. I really don't get it.

 

[flanker]

Photo/3D rendering looks professional.
But 82mm and +200g? It must be priced like 17-70. In other way forget.
For other brands than Canon can be more attractive.
"A" sign is strange. But Sigma should think different to users. That's is no problem.

 

[endiendo]

hi,
It's true that the Canon 24-105 F4 L is not really impressive. One of the "cheapest" L.. but the range is very useful when we want to walk "light".
That's said, the Sigma is much bigger and heavier, and, I think, every Canon 24-105 owner has a better lens when he wants to really take a very good shot on a specific "goal" subject. I'm not sure if I would change if I was in that case.
And, my wife and I have had already 2 sigma, one small for the first reflex of my wife.. I remember it was something like 24-135.. I'm not sure.. the first example we receive was just out of focus. The second, even well focused, was not sharp at all.
Then, more recently, we bought the 100-300 f2.8 is os hsm (first stabilized version), and after 4 months, we had it back to service.. the stabilizer was broken and making noise. they changed it and it is now ok.
But, 2 sigma lenses = 2 lenses back to sigma.
And, 4 canon lenses, 4 lenses without any problems.
I'm not sure I would buy a new sigma lens...

 

[AdamJ]

<p>I will leave you guys to debate how legit the photograph is below. To my eyes, it looks pretty good.</p>

TLDR: That is not a photograph!

If it's not blindingly obvious to you that this is a 3D rendering, your eyes need checking. And it's not even a particularly good 3D rendering either, with absolutely no surface texture to speak of. I'm not saying it isn't an official press picture created by Sigma, but it's pretty embarrassing for a photography website to mistake an artificial drawing for a photograph.

My Sigma 35mm also has "no surface texture to speak of." This image is in pretty much the same style as the official images released by Sigma for all other Global Vision lenses so, as you rightly say, this may well be an official Sigma image, which is the central point here.

 

[HankMD]

NOTE: there is a shiny silver "A" on the side of the lens in the picture, meaning this is their "Art" line of lenses - the same breed as the 35/1.4 that has blown away many many people.

It's also proof positive that the pic is a fake. IIRC the Art designation is for lenses with a large maximum aperture.

It's not a fake unless someone has hacked Sigma's website as part of an elaborate joke.

I know because I stumbled onto Sigma's page on this camera lens, in both Japanese and English. I don't see Sigma linking to it on their list of Art lenses.

It says "Planned date available: September 2013 for Canon (to be determined for Sigma, Sony, Nikon, Pentax)".

English:
http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_24_105_4/

Japanese:
http://www.sigma-global.com/jp/lenses/cas/product/art/a_24_105_4/

Enjoy!

(First-time poster here.)

 

[mrsfotografie]

NOTE: there is a shiny silver "A" on the side of the lens in the picture, meaning this is their "Art" line of lenses - the same breed as the 35/1.4 that has blown away many many people.

It's also proof positive that the pic is a fake. IIRC the Art designation is for lenses with a large maximum aperture.

It's not a fake unless someone has hacked Sigma's website as part of an elaborate joke.

I know because I stumbled onto Sigma's page on this camera, in both Japanese and English. I don't see Sigma linking to it on their list of Art lenses.

It says "Planned date available: September 2013 for Canon (to be determined for Sigma, Sony, Nikon, Pentax)".

English:
http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_24_105_4/

Japanese:
http://www.sigma-global.com/jp/lenses/cas/product/art/a_24_105_4/

Enjoy!

(First-time poster here.)

Looks real, thanks. Dual telescoping barrel is a bit of a disappointment - more wobble and potential leak paths.

 

[flanker]

C: 83,5mm x 107mm, 670g, weather sealed, one telescoping barrel,
S: 88,6mm x 107mm, 885g, NOT weather sealed, two telescoping barrels.

Sigma must have awesome-cosmic-stellar IQ and price if I will buy it.

 

[sanj]

<p>I will leave you guys to debate how legit the photograph is below. To my eyes, it looks pretty good.</p>

TLDR: That is not a photograph!

If it's not blindingly obvious to you that this is a 3D rendering, your eyes need checking. And it's not even a particularly good 3D rendering either, with absolutely no surface texture to speak of. I'm not saying it isn't an official press picture created by Sigma, but it's pretty embarrassing for a photography website to mistake an artificial drawing for a photograph.

Hahahaha. It is real dude. You just embarrassed yourself!

 

[sanj]

I am very interested.

 

[Tiedtke]

This is awesome. Now, Sigma, give me that 135mm f/1.8 OS please? 8)

 

[Einstein333]

sounds a bit unnecessary the canon is not even that expensive..

Disagree. I guess it's not the price that will make the big difference, but the Sigma will most probably be way sharper than the Canon

 

[preppyak]

What's that sound I hear? It's the sound of Canon 24-70/4 IS sales imploding

Yep, if they can price this at like, $800 retail...then it probably destroys the 24-105L (because it retails at $1150 and is only "cheap" if you buy used or from un-authorized dealers), and the 24-70L IS would have to drop a lot in price to stay relevant.

That may be what Sigma is going for. Either force canon to update their 24-105, or kill their profit from their newest lens

 

[Albi86]

Guys, it's 19 elements in 14 groups.

Sigma is not in for a cheap lens, most likely they're in for the best walkaround in the block.

 

[Pi]

Yep, if they can price this at like, $800 retail...then it probably destroys the 24-105L (because it retails at $1150 and is only "cheap" if you buy used or from un-authorized dealers), and the 24-70L IS would have to drop a lot in price to stay relevant.

That may be what Sigma is going for. Either force canon to update their 24-105, or kill their profit from their newest lens

With the typical Sigma AF problems, the Sigma poses no real danger for Canon. Canon will still sell thousands of 24-104's in kits.

 

[deleteme]

While I am interested in any new lenses that promise quality and novelty I am surprised at how many people are disparaging the Canon 24-105L.
Enormous numbers of copies are out there and still command high-ish prices used and new ones sell steadily it hardly seems that it is a pig.
My own copy is very sharp with admitted weakness in soft edges and distortion but I am able to overcome the distortion in LR and the sharpness in the corners is acceptable when stopped down to f11 in those images that need it.

My biggest concern with the Sigma is that even with the great and admirable improvements they have made in IQ and build quality, their AF performance leaves a lot to be desired. Various review sites have noted the sometimes iffy AF performance and my own experience mirrors that.
If I knew that the AF would be on par with any of my Canon lenses I would be on it in a flash.

 

[preppyak]

Enormous numbers of copies are out there and still command high-ish prices used and new ones sell steadily it hardly seems that it is a pig.

I dont know if I'd call it high-ish prices anymore...they don't move for anything more than $750 anymore, and you can get them brand-new unkitted for <$800 quite commonly. It's really the drop in price (easily $100-150 drop in the market over the last year) that has them selling steadily. But, as Sigma has shown, they can produce sharper lenses with less distortion for that same price. It at least forces Canon to make their prices reasonable.

I agree with some of the initial posters though, this is probably a bigger steal for Nikon users who can get it much cheaper than their 24-120.

 

[AndreeOnline]

While interesting, a 24-70 2.8 OS would have made an even more exciting combatant.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Looking forward to reading some test results when (if) this lens comes out. I have no issue with buying Sigma lenses these days. However, I think this lens would be more interest to Nikon shooters.

Now if the rumours on the rumour that it will be faster than f4 are true, that's a different story.

In any case, it will be a while before anything happens.

 

[hovland]

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_24_105_4/