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

[ScottyP]

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.

Sigma is a privately held company. There is no public trading of their stock. It is owned by the founder's family.

A few more lenses like these last 4 or 5 and it would seem like a very good moment for them to go public at a successful IPO though. Selling 20 or 30% of their stock would give them money for even more R&D to make more products and to advertise more.

 

[vscd]

>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!

@GMCPhotographics
Interesting sentence, how do you justify this? For example the Canon 24-70 f2.8 and the
Canon 24-70 f4 have the same filtersize. Now surprise me. ???

 

[garyknrd]

Sigma is trying to put the smack down on Nikon , Canon. Interesting times ahead. Even if just a CR1 rumor.

 

[lol]

I find this lens a bit hard to believe, although of course I hope it is true! For a given quality and build level, there is a trade off between aperture and zoom range... to go a whole stop further at the same range as other lenses in its class without sacrificing quality is a big task. To me, it would be more believable if the zoom range was shorter at f/2. Perhaps a 2x zoom range, but I'll leave it to others to speculate what they may choose as the actual focal length range in that case.

Sigma, if you do it, please get the zoom ring the right way around.

 

[padmasana]

I've been content to keep shooting primes in the 24-70 range (two Sigmas and one Canon) while waiting for Sigma to show its hand with regard to this zoom. A stabilized 2.8 from Canon might have moved me but that didn't happen. With all of Sigma's recent success, it just seemed a matter of time until they moved in this direction.

 

[luciolepri]

I'm not so excited by this rumor. A lens like that, to have an IQ and an AF speed comparable to the Canon f/2.8, should be extremely big, heavy and expensive. I can't imagine Sigma producing a "monster" like that. Not even Canon, BTW. So we'd probably end up with yet another super fast lens that you can't use WO and that has an IQ far from stellar. What's more, I never liked Sigma lenses. All the samples I worked with didn't handle flare & ghosting well enough. I actually keep the 105 Macro in my equipment because of that, I like the effect. Maybe I always had bad copies, but I find it hard to believe.
I'd be much more interested in Canon producing a 24-105 (or even just a 24-85) f/2,8 with IS. Until then, the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC is a good option, though I abhor the positioning of the focus ring... why the hell they put it there???

 

[Zv]

It seems a bit unbelieveable but then again so did the 18-35 f/1.8 at the time. I reckon they'll pull it off and surprise us. They seem to be on a mission! I would like to see a few more primes or updates to their existing primes such as the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4.

Some really exciting prospects for the next few months anyway, from Sigma and Canon. And hope Tamron can get in on some prime action. Though I'm not a fan of their lens design. They look a bit dated and ugly compared with the Sigma Art aka lens porn!

 

[AJ]

Very unlikely. But it'd be cool if they could pull it off. With a matching 70-200/2 OS.

 

[Etienne]

The next trend will be hiring Sherpas to carry your camera gear on family vacations.

 

[lol]

Maybe for the class of lens it is, it would be considered heavy. But it would still be nothing compared to something like a 300/2.8, and I have carried those around for days. Hand held too. No 'pods.

 

[DzPhotography]

If it's sharp wide open (comparable to 18-35 f/1.8), I need to have one...

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

I don't understand why so many people complain about weight. Everyone's muscles must be so poorly neglected.

Realistically this thing will probably be in at 1 kg or slightly over. Not a big deal.

 

[JayY]

I would much rather have them reduce the zoom range to 24-50. That would allow them more freedom to have top notch image quality while reducing the weight. The 24-50 would give you 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm. Replacing these three useful primes would be great. 70mm is not that useful. There's a reason why you don't have a 70mm prime lens. It's close to the portrait range but not quite there. Might as well change to an 85mm prime or that 70-200. If you look at all the existing 24-70 lenses on the market they are stronger at the wide angle than the tele. Manufacturers seem to know that the 24-50 is the useful range and have optimized the lens in that region while sacrificing the 70mm end. Might as well just leave the 70mm off so you can really optimize the 24-50mm range.

 

[dirtcastle]

70mm is not that useful. There's a reason why you don't have a 70mm prime lens. It's close to the portrait range but not quite there.

I totally agree on the weight issue. But I'm highly skeptical of the idea that 85mm is infinitely more useful or practical than 70mm. It may be that people have unwittingly gravitated toward a convention. But I can't imagine there is anything inherently better about 50mm or 85mm, except that they are evenly spaced from other lenses in a lineup, and photographers have based their shooting around these ultimately arbitrary lengths.

 

[Daniel Flather]

Erm... Bring the 70-200 f/2 too and damn I'll buy those two preciousssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

Doable, I guess, big and heavy for sure, and a filter size of 105mm+. Similar to size/weight of 120-300mm f/2.8 or 200-400mm f/4. Betting now the price will not be less than Canon 70-200mm II if it ever materializes.

Less than the 70-200/2.8? The 200/2 is $5k+ so a 70-200/2 would be more costly and very heavy.

 

[luciolepri]

70mm is not that useful. There's a reason why you don't have a 70mm prime lens. It's close to the portrait range but not quite there.

I totally agree on the weight issue. But I'm highly skeptical of the idea that 85mm is infinitely more useful or practical than 70mm. It may be that people have unwittingly gravitated toward a convention. But I can't imagine there is anything inherently better about 50mm or 85mm, except that they are evenly spaced from other lenses in a lineup, and photographers have based their shooting around these ultimately arbitrary lengths.

85mm instead of just 70mm makes not a big difference, but enough, to me, to make sense. At 85mm you have that little bit shallower dof and that little extra reach (along with a "flatter" perspective) that can come in handy in a walkaround lens. That's actually what I miss most using my 24-70/2,8.
A 24-50mm, in my opinion, wouldn't be much popular, unless it is very fast and has an outstanding IQ. I once had a Pentax 24-50/4, but I always preferred to carry around three primes, which were much faster and had a much better IQ, since I had anyway to switch lens quite often, with such a small focal range zoom.

 

[theyapici]

l thlnk its amazing but i have 24 70 L II

 

[KyleSTL]

Erm... Bring the 70-200 f/2 too and damn I'll buy those two preciousssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

Doable, I guess, big and heavy for sure, and a filter size of 105mm+. Similar to size/weight of 120-300mm f/2.8 or 200-400mm f/4. Betting now the price will not be less than Canon 70-200mm II if it ever materializes.

Less than the 70-200/2.8? The 200/2 is $5k+ so a 70-200/2 would be more costly and very heavy.

Sorry, I should have been more clear, I know what I said was a huge understatement. I was trying to show that if this lens ends up becoming a reality, AND costs less than the Canon 2.8 lens it will be awesome, but the idea that an equivalent telephoto f/2 lens for the same relatively bargain price does not seem feasible.

 

[jdramirez]

I think Sigma has hired a witch. I think witchcraft is the only explanation for being able to bend light this well.

 

[blacksap]

I think Sigma has hired a witch. I think witchcraft is the only explanation for being able to bend light this well.

witches the illuminati and probably some reptilians are behind this.