Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM Coming? [CR1]

[roadrunner]

jdramirez, thanks for another point of view. I can certainly understand that point. I find when I am attending family functions or going on personal trips, I only take one lens, and then size is important. I guess I should have clarified that my choices do differ depending on whether it is just for fun or for profissional use.

 

[pj1974]

I'm a big guy, and when I'm in shape, which may or may not be the case, I can usually work out with 40 lbs dumbells for bicep curls, and up to 60 lbs for chest...

So the weight doesn't really affect me all that much, but if you have an extra lbs or two hanging from your neck over 8+ hours, it can start to give you a cramp... and your wrists and forearms can start to ache... mine too... but I just ignore the pain.

For an hour... most people can deal... but over the course of a day... then that starts to wear on you.

As an example... when I played football, I would be in incredible shape before camp started... but wearing the helmet for two a day practices cause a pretty severe ache in my neck and shoulders.

Maybe it's just that different fram of mind then. I don't mind hurting, if it's the right tool for the job. I'm definitely not a big guy (5'10" 150lbs) and I find I hurt whether I am carrying two bodies with primes, or my 70-200 F2.8 and 24-70 F2.8. I figure If I am going to hurt either way, I may as well hurt while having the best gear readily accessible.

I suppose I could see weight being very important for those that do a lot of hiking with their gear though.

I'm a pack mule for out family, but if you and the family ever go to Disney World/Land, it is hard to take just one lens, but with cold water in the bag, souvenirs, those stupid pins, your phone, your daughter's camera that she decides she no longer want to carry, a bag of sugared nuts, etc... it all starts to get heavy. I didn't have my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii the last time I went, but I might be hard pressed to have to CARRY ALL THAT plus a few lenses. So I will have to plan accordingly.

Thanks jdramirez for what you wrote - I appreciate the personal touch and 'hands on description' - that you've given, and what works for you (as roadrunner has also posted)

I'm a slightly smaller than average man (171cm, 62kg)- reasonable level of fitness / stamina, but I'm not big / muscly by any stretch of the imagination.

Over the years I've taken tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of photos - many at camps, and on outings, etc. When I started with my first DSLR (about 8 years ago, with a 350D). The 350D with 28-135mm lens which I used most of the time (or even the 18-55mm kit lens) was of course 'huge' compared to my previous Fuji P&S.

Now I own a 7D also, and that's my go-to camera for most things - along with my 15-85mm lens. I can (and often do) use the camera for many hours at a time. I recently bought my fiancee a Sony RX-100 - a great P&S camera - larger sensor than others in its class, with good optics.

As much as I enjoy photography, I certainly appreciate times when am at an event, or walking, or sight-seeing and I do NOT have 1.5 kg of camera & lens dangling from my neck (or being held in my hand). That's the main reason I got my fiancee a true pocketable P&S, because I know she'll appreciate the smaller size of that camera.

So...... back to the original topic: rumour of Sigma producing a 24-70mm f/2 for FF. I believe laws of optics determine that the lens would need to weigh substantially more than any existing current 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. Therefore a 24-70mm f/2 might not be an ideal 'light / travel companion' to eg a Canon 6D as your travel lens.

That's where I see the 24-70mm f/4 L IS (or the 24-105mm f/4 L IS) fitting in - ie for those doing a lot of travelling, and where IS is more convenient than a tripod. (And that's the same reason why I on occasion even use my 18-55mm on my 350D as my 'long bushwalk / travel combination' - where weight is really a serious consideration, even though the grip on the 350D isn't as comfortable as that on a 7D).

Again, back to a rumoured 24-70mm f/2.... For those interested in the ability to control DOF and/or shooting in low light- a 24-70mm f/2 would have an envious amount of flexibility, particularly if it was available with OS/IS. And if it has superb high quality optics - that would be the dream lens for many on a FF. Roll on Sigma!

Regards

Paul

 

[JayY]

Let's hope that this lens will be part of their Art line. I'm really confused at how Sigma is managing to pull off what they have done recently. Canon, Nikon, and Zeiss charge top dollar for their best lenses and they are presumably already pushing the state of the art. I would expect these companies to pull out all the stops to design the sharpest lens possible using the best design and manufacturing techniques. Yet Sigma comes along and produces a set of lenses that are significantly sharper than these guys. WTF ? How is this possible ? If lens design were a sport I would suspect that Sigma is cheating.

 

[Wildfire]

I would expect these companies to pull out all the stops to design the cheapest lens possible using the easiest design and manufacturing techniques.

Fixed.

 

[infared]

This is intriguing news! I would love to see more fast Art-Line Primes (like a killer 50mm)...but hey, this could be entertaining. I own the Canon 24-70mm II ...and I doubt that a Sigma f/2 IS lens could come close to the sharpness of the Canon II...but they are on a roll lately, so who knows. The new Sigma 35mm is fantastic..I own one and love it! This rumored new Sigma would have to be somewhat bigger than the Canon, too.... I would imagine.

This sounds like a much more sensible rumor regarding the recent Sigma Liberation-Teaser Ads that are running. I am also reading speculative rumors that Sigma is supposedly releasing a MFT mirrorless camera...That one is total bunk....
..this rumor here makes much more sense...and based on Sigma's teaser ads, the new zoom would have to be reasonably priced..or there is no "liberation" from the Canon system.

 

[RGF]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4). Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

 

[adhocphotographer]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4). Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

Good point... And in part i agree, but if it is sharp wide open, it will cramp into some prime lens sales, especially for video guys... if it close to the IQ of the 24, 28 and 35 IS lenses, it is going to be very appealing. I agree completely with the sharpness at mud apertures!

as for the weight, IQ, size etc... we will have to wait! The more options the better really!

 

[Radiating]

If Sigma releases a lens like this and it was as good as their recent offerings it would be a dream come true.

 

[roadrunner]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4). Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

I shoot weddings, so every single wedding. No matter how much light you have at a wedding, it's never enough. Shooting at F2.0 and having IS would be great.

That, and I love the look of shallow DOF primes, and I shoot quite often at F1.4 with my 35mm and 50mm, so I would love to get a zoom lens down to 1.8 or 2.0.

 

[ecka]

Sigma 24-70 f/2 OS HSM - great! It could be THE lens for videographers. Now let's think about it realistically:
very BIG, very HEAVY, not weather-sealed (most likely);
much more expensive than 24-70/2.8L'II, could be $3k+ (just look at the 120-300/2.8 ).

 

[vscd]

>This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4). Unless the IQ is
>significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

Could be, but doesn't have to. The aperture is the proportion from focal length to aperturesize. So, let's calculate it for f2 to f2.8 --> 25 mm rises to 35mm... so, this is no big deal. This centimetre can be done within nearly the same size. Don't compare it to a 200mm lense, the difference is there much bigger.

One or two years ago, I would have been thinking "nice try, sigma"... but after recent releases I assume they can make it quite small and light. Even with OS.

 

[Marsu42]

We’re told this could be a Photokina 2014 lens

Boys and girls(any?), this is a [CR1] wild guess and be explicit: This lens would only be announced in end of September, 2014, more than a year from now...

... and by then it won't be in mass production but available in limited quantities, after all they're producing it not only for the Canon mount and new lenses always take time to be available everywhere.

And here I am, just having bought the Tamron 24-70 VC not a year ago...

The date and a high demand make very suspicious if the price could really be less than Canon's mk2, after all the Canon's price will have dropped in the meantime and even more facing real competition if the Sigma's af is better than Tamron.

Plus of course this will be large and heavy, it's not like Canon wouldn't be able to build something like this, they just gave in to pro photographers' demand with their mk2 to *reduce* weight rather than to build an impractical dream lens for moving about and handholding a long time: [CR1] doesn't change the laws of physics...

 

[Chosenbydestiny]

We’re told this could be a Photokina 2014 lens

Boys and girls(any?), this is a [CR1] wild guess and be explicit: This lens would only be announced in end of September, 2014, more than a year from now...

... and by then it won't be in mass production but available in limited quantities, after all they're producing it not only for the Canon mount and new lenses always take time to be available everywhere.

And here I am, just having bought the Tamron 24-70 VC not a year ago...

The date and a high demand make very suspicious if the price could really be less than Canon's mk2, after all the Canon's price will have dropped in the meantime and even more facing real competition if the Sigma's af is better than Tamron.

Plus of course this will be large and heavy, it's not like Canon wouldn't be able to build something like this, they just gave in to pro photographers' demand with their mk2 to *reduce* weight rather than to build an impractical dream lens for moving about and handholding a long time: [CR1] doesn't change the laws of physics...

But isn't that the purpose of having a rumors forum? To make redundant yet professional sounding statements about related products in speculation?

 

[GMCPhotographics]

If Sigma releases a lens like this and it was as good as their recent offerings it would be a dream come true.

As long as it's sharp wide open and AF's well, then it'll be a game changer.
I just wonder how big and large it'll be. The front element would probably need to be twice the area of the current f2.8 version....that'll be a big lump of glass!

 

[thewaywewalk]

I'm gonna buy Sigma stock.

Sorry for little offtopic...
I got curious and was looking for a chart, but under what name is Sigma noted at the stock market? I haven't found anything related to photograhy.

 

[Marsu42]

But isn't that the purpose of having a rumors forum? To make redundant yet professional sounding statements about related products in speculation?

Absolutely :-> and as it happens I just wrote the same thing in another thread.

It's just that if it's about a product I might actually want to buy and lay off other purchases for it (i.e. the Tamron 24-70), I'm also interested in the likelihood of a [CR] actually becoming true. And this Sigma 24-70/2 about to be "THE" lens somehow reminds me of the many threads about the Canon mk2 which was also to be "THE" lens... but I'm also feeling free to speculate about where the trade-offs were made, i.e. price, weight, size or iq.

 

[verysimplejason]

Just wondering, how often do you (the readers) shot at 2.8 and want something faster?

Or is the desire for better AF or ?

This will be a large 24-70 lens (just like the 70-200 F2.8 is larger than the 70-200 F4). Unless the IQ is significantly better than Canon's at mid apertures, I will skip this lens.

You forgot, with OS. Seems good to me if at least its weight, IQ and price is near that of Tamron's 2.8 version. With the USB dock, this might be a better alternative than the Tamron.

 

[tron]

I do not believe they will make a FF 24-70 f/2 lens. I mean technically they can but then how will it weigh and how big will it be?
It would be silly to use such a lens.

 

[verysimplejason]

I do not believe they will make a FF 24-70 f/2 lens. I mean technically they can but then how will it weigh and how big will it be?
It would be silly to use such a lens.

Technically, they can reduce the weight. Sigma might just do that. It's a new tech. They can also sacrifice the materials used a little bit to reduce weight. I don't know but right now, I'd like to see the lens first before any conclusions. Sigma has a habit of breaking stereotypes nowadays.

 

[Marsu42]

Seems good to me if at least its weight, IQ and price is near that of Tamron's 2.8 version.

Probably, if the fairy queen sprinkles the lens and your camera with magic dust :->

Technically, they can reduce the weight. Sigma might just do that. It's a new tech.

Ugh, did I miss something, where does it say that? I know there's a lot of potential in DO lenses, but all I heard about that was for tele focal lengths and not for standard/wide-angle.