Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Price leaked

More expensive than I was thinking.

It's going to kill the Nikon 58mm price/quality wise but it must be really close to the Otus to make a compelling choice. The 35mm came in another market and at another price.

The canon is not so much about optical performance but rather about the optical rendering at f/1.2.

I guess Sigma is (understandably) trying to capitalize the recent recognition gained with the 35mm.
 
Upvote 0
If it's true then they got too greedy too early.

On the other hand, I don't know the price difference between the Aussie and the U.S. markets. For example, the U.S. prices are about 30-35% lower than where I live. The 50L is about 2300 dollars where I live.
 
Upvote 0
giltaminphotography said:
The price is not to bad considering the 50L goes for 1600 and I think the 50L is nothing special. If the 50 performs like the sigma 35 art I think its worth it. I've been waiting so long for a good 50 to come out.

I must say that I am surprised a bit (if this turns out to be the US price).

The 35 Art, at $899 at launch, was in the very sweet price point between the venerable $300-500 non-L primes (before the IS refreshes) and the $1400+ 35 F/1.4L. By many metrics & opinions (though not all), the Sigma 35 Art outpunched Canon and Nikon's 35 highest (1st party) 35mm prime lenses at a significantly lower price. Further, the build quality of that lens (though it is still relatively young in terms of actual years in service) has been quite good. This lens was so well received that it singlehandedly changed a lot of people's minds about Sigma as a designer and manufacturer of lenses.

Then came the 18-35 F/1.8 for EF-S mount. I'm a FF shooter now, but I understand that this lens was also quite good. And, for an industry first lens like this, the price tag of $799 was altogether shocking. One might argue there was a limit to how much you can reasonably charge for an APS-C mount lens as Canon themselves doesn't get much pricier than this with an EF-S mount lens (I want to say the 17-55 F/2.8 IS was price dropped to $900 or so late last year), but value is value, and this lens was a very good offering.

Then came more info on the USB lens calibration tool, the inexpensive mount conversion service, etc. and it was clear that Sigma was trying to grow their business with pros and enthusiasts. They were thinking down the road rather than just what lens they'd price-undercut next. Good for them, and good for us, I say.

So it surprises me to see -- if $1300 US is indeed going to be the asking price -- that Sigma is charging this much. Rather than being the 'sensibly priced high performance lens' like the two examples above, it appears that the Sigma must believe some combination of the list below is true:

  • The lens is truly that good, and can go punch for punch with Canon's 50 F/1.2L or possibly get near the Zeiss Otus.
  • Enough pros are fed up with the lack of sharpness of the 50/1.2L (yes, yes: there's much more to the 50L than sharpness...) that they demand a better pro offering
  • Their performances of late (see above) no longer require a lowered price point to entice buyers -- Sigma innovation / design / quality coals are hot of late and you will now pay for said hotness
  • There's simply a ton of glass in there and it's not as cheap a design as the 35 Art or 18-35 F/1.8

I'm curious to see where this lands. I would have guessed that Sigma would come in around $799-$899 in this space. To think they'd come in so high despite full-well knowing Canon has a brand spanking new 50 F/something IS coming down the pike is a surprise.

- A
 
Upvote 0
drjlo said:
Arctic Photo said:
If it's true then they got too greedy too early.

Agree x 1000 :-[

Or this lens could be that good... I await the testing and reviews from the experts. I need a new 50 prime, and as much I think I'm getting Canon's yet-to-be-announced IS refresh of the 50 F/1.4 for IS and size/weight reasons, I would consider a pickle jar of a 50 prime if it was truly that good.

- A
 
Upvote 0
ahsanford said:
drjlo said:
Arctic Photo said:
If it's true then they got too greedy too early.

Agree x 1000 :-[

Or this lens could be that good... I await the testing and reviews from the experts. I need a new 50 prime, and as much I think I'm getting Canon's yet-to-be-announced IS refresh of the 50 F/1.4 for IS and size/weight reasons, I would consider a pickle jar of a 50 prime if it was truly that good.

- A
This may be good news for those who want a real top performer. Sigma claimed they are aiming for the Otus. To price it in L-series territory may indicate that they have something great to show us.
 
Upvote 0
Arctic Photo said:
If it's true then they got too greedy too early.

On the other hand, I don't know the price difference between the Aussie and the U.S. markets. For example, the U.S. prices are about 30-35% lower than where I live. The 50L is about 2300 dollars where I live.

Perhaps they're encouraged by the $999 charged for the new Sony/Zeiss 55mm 1.8!
 
Upvote 0
I welcome that price, it might be much less copy variation, higher tolerance, actual precise AF and superb optical quality. It might even be both sharp and nice bokeh.

Put me down for one :D
 
Upvote 0
Viggo said:
I welcome that price, it might be much less copy variation, higher tolerance, actual precise AF and superb optical quality. It might even be both sharp and nice bokeh.

Put me down for one :D

I'm just wondering how many pros who use an auto-focusing 50mm prime are still using the ancient Canon 50 F/1.4 (not-quite-modern-)USM as they just don't have a sharper / more reliable AF lens to shoot with.

Those folks will gladly pay $1300 for this lens (if that is the price). I just don't know how many are out there.

- A
 
Upvote 0
As this is a rumor only we may be getting well ahead of ourselves.

Sigma has a good record of late of delivering outstanding lenses in its Art line. As others have noted, if it is as good as we hope it should be able to command a high price.

The fact that Sigma is burdened with a history of budget pricers lenses is what is hurting it at the moment. They want to occupy the space that Zeiss now inhabits as they have seen that solid construction and superb optics are able to command a loyal base of eager buyers.

If the lens is good why don't we accord them the respect they have earned by paying a price that reflects the quality they have put into the product?
 
Upvote 0
ahsanford said:
Viggo said:
I welcome that price, it might be much less copy variation, higher tolerance, actual precise AF and superb optical quality. It might even be both sharp and nice bokeh.

Put me down for one :D

I'm just wondering how many pros who use an auto-focusing 50mm prime are still using the ancient Canon 50 F/1.4 (not-quite-modern-)USM as they just don't have a sharper / more reliable AF lens to shoot with.

Those folks will gladly pay $1300 for this lens (if that is the price). I just don't know how many are out there.

- A

A lot... There are a few 50 L's out there and not even close to half of them are owned by pro's. And if people actually got a sharp 50 for the same money or less, I think it well sell by the boatload :D
 
Upvote 0
Arctic Photo said:
If it's true then they got too greedy too early.

On the other hand, I don't know the price difference between the Aussie and the U.S. markets. For example, the U.S. prices are about 30-35% lower than where I live. The 50L is about 2300 dollars where I live.
I agree. I expected it to be around $1000. That's $300 too much!
It better be a flawless lens.
Edit: removed comment about fringing, I was thinking about the 85!
 
Upvote 0
During all this speculation, keep in mind that the MSRP of the 35 Art on Sigma's own website is $1400. As we all know, the actual price has always been $899. I would expect the new 50 to be similarly priced. Since I'm waiting for the 85 & the 135 Art, I really really hope so...
 
Upvote 0
brad-man said:
During all this speculation, keep in mind that the MSRP of the 35 Art on Sigma's own website is $1400. As we all know, the actual price has always been $899. I would expect the new 50 to be similarly priced. Since I'm waiting for the 85 & the 135 Art, I really really hope so...
Yes, there are large discrepancies in prices between different countries. I also hope that costs up to $ 1,000 in the U.S. market.
 
Upvote 0
Normalnorm said:
As this is a rumor only we may be getting well ahead of ourselves.

Sigma has a good record of late of delivering outstanding lenses in its Art line. As others have noted, if it is as good as we hope it should be able to command a high price.

The fact that Sigma is burdened with a history of budget pricers lenses is what is hurting it at the moment. They want to occupy the space that Zeiss now inhabits as they have seen that solid construction and superb optics are able to command a loyal base of eager buyers.

If the lens is good why don't we accord them the respect they have earned by paying a price that reflects the quality they have put into the product?

+1

Good points. I would say they are much more clearly going after the red-ringed devils more than Zeiss. This is an autofocus lens looking for autofocus users. These Art series lenses (despite anyone making Otus comparisons) are aimed at besting their L-series counterparts for less money. That's a great goal and I love the extra value these guys are now giving us.

That said, these new primes are big. I believe the new 50's specs describe a lens very close in dia x length to my Canon 24-70 F/4L IS zoom. So it's a pickle jar of a lens when I'm looking for standard primes to be more the size of a cocktail tumbler. I've really enjoyed the non-L IS refreshes' smaller size and weight in comparison, but again, I want to see how this new Sigma performs. It might be worth the size...

- A
 
Upvote 0