Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Price leaked

[slclick]

Sometimes the psychological stuff is really really illogical. Here's the situation we are dealing with performance numbers and perception wise:

Lens Designers: "Hi there Sir, there has been a major breakthrough in lens technology that allows us to double the performance of any prior 50mm primes, this is the single greatest improvement in image quality in the history of photography lenses in one generation, and it costs 25% less than the top of the line competitors, has better build quality and feel and has no drawbacks whatsoever"

Photographer: "Great that's the best thing I've ever heard a lens designer invent, perfect"

Lens Designer: "That's what we thought, it's called the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART, and it costs $1300"

Photographer: "That's too much for a Sigma"

This makes no sense.

It only makes sense if the next step is not:

Photographer: "What am I saying, of course I'll pay $1300 for it."

By the way, I am so annoyed! My sigma 35 has really performed perfectly until now, today it started showing first signs of imperfection! (AF inconsistency indoors. Viggo, I owe you an apology.) So sad. It's never done that before. It's still 99.5% perfect but... I really thought since it was a perfect copy it would stay that way. Sigma, please make your quality control better!

And that is why I will never, ever, buy a third party lens. Sure Canon lenses have issues, but I know how to get them fixed and I also know there will never be a compatibility issue with any EOS body, ever. To me that is worth far more than some extra lppmm.

Boy I am glad I don't that that philosophy, I love my Art lenses as much as my L's.

 

[Viggo]

Sometimes the psychological stuff is really really illogical. Here's the situation we are dealing with performance numbers and perception wise:

Lens Designers: "Hi there Sir, there has been a major breakthrough in lens technology that allows us to double the performance of any prior 50mm primes, this is the single greatest improvement in image quality in the history of photography lenses in one generation, and it costs 25% less than the top of the line competitors, has better build quality and feel and has no drawbacks whatsoever"

Photographer: "Great that's the best thing I've ever heard a lens designer invent, perfect"

Lens Designer: "That's what we thought, it's called the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART, and it costs $1300"

Photographer: "That's too much for a Sigma"

This makes no sense.

It only makes sense if the next step is not:

Photographer: "What am I saying, of course I'll pay $1300 for it."

By the way, I am so annoyed! My sigma 35 has really performed perfectly until now, today it started showing first signs of imperfection! (AF inconsistency indoors. Viggo, I owe you an apology.) So sad. It's never done that before. It's still 99.5% perfect but... I really thought since it was a perfect copy it would stay that way. Sigma, please make your quality control better!

And that is why I will never, ever, buy a third party lens. Sure Canon lenses have issues, but I know how to get them fixed and I also know there will never be a compatibility issue with any EOS body, ever. To me that is worth far more than some extra lppmm.

Oh, man, I'm so sorry to hear that, it really sucks.. But thanks for the apology, I didn't want to be right you know...

 

[privatebydesign]

Sometimes the psychological stuff is really really illogical. Here's the situation we are dealing with performance numbers and perception wise:

Lens Designers: "Hi there Sir, there has been a major breakthrough in lens technology that allows us to double the performance of any prior 50mm primes, this is the single greatest improvement in image quality in the history of photography lenses in one generation, and it costs 25% less than the top of the line competitors, has better build quality and feel and has no drawbacks whatsoever"

Photographer: "Great that's the best thing I've ever heard a lens designer invent, perfect"

Lens Designer: "That's what we thought, it's called the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART, and it costs $1300"

Photographer: "That's too much for a Sigma"

This makes no sense.

It only makes sense if the next step is not:

Photographer: "What am I saying, of course I'll pay $1300 for it."

By the way, I am so annoyed! My sigma 35 has really performed perfectly until now, today it started showing first signs of imperfection! (AF inconsistency indoors. Viggo, I owe you an apology.) So sad. It's never done that before. It's still 99.5% perfect but... I really thought since it was a perfect copy it would stay that way. Sigma, please make your quality control better!

And that is why I will never, ever, buy a third party lens. Sure Canon lenses have issues, but I know how to get them fixed and I also know there will never be a compatibility issue with any EOS body, ever. To me that is worth far more than some extra lppmm.

Boy I am glad I don't that that philosophy, I love my Art lenses as much as my L's.

Why? You can have any philosophy you want, I am happy for you, but I know that only photographers see the differences in most of these crazy lens choices 99% of the time. Clients just don't, clients see moments, posing, lighting, composition, post processing etc . This constant hand wringing about a few lppmm, or distortion, aberrations etc is just crazy.

As a working pro I value reliability, consistency, and compatibility far higher than many here, I also came to AF when Sigma were having huge issues with Canon camera protocols, so much so that I personally know one photographer who ended up with 8 Sigma paperweights as they would not re-chip them. Yep I really like the idea of a USB dock to micro AF at various distances etc, but that system will work until it doesn't, then my trusty EF 50 f1.4 will be taking the same shots it has for the last ten years and you will not.

 

[NancyP]

At that rate, my third party M42 and AIS Nikkor lenses will NEVER stop working, because they never communicated with the camera in the first place..... You can't get any more reliable than manual lenses treated kindly.

There are a lot of factors that go into purchase decisions, including price, size and weight, IQ vis-a-vis resolution, other IQ factors (astrophotographers want low coma, for example), AF reliability, need for cast-iron reliability on a crucial pro shoot and a preferred status in the repair queue in the Canon Professional Service system.

I will tell you that if I wanted a lens for hill-climbing backpacking, the Nifty Fifty or Shorty Forty might beat out the Otus.

 

[privatebydesign]

At that rate, my third party M42 and AIS Nikkor lenses will NEVER stop working, because they never communicated with the camera in the first place..... You can't get any more reliable than manual lenses treated kindly.

There are a lot of factors that go into purchase decisions, including price, size and weight, IQ vis-a-vis resolution, other IQ factors (astrophotographers want low coma, for example), AF reliability, need for cast-iron reliability on a crucial pro shoot and a preferred status in the repair queue in the Canon Professional Service system.

I will tell you that if I wanted a lens for hill-climbing backpacking, the Nifty Fifty or Shorty Forty might beat out the Otus.

Exactly, there are far more considerations than lppmm or corner sharpness involved in many peoples buying decisions.

 

[flowers]

Sometimes the psychological stuff is really really illogical. Here's the situation we are dealing with performance numbers and perception wise:

Lens Designers: "Hi there Sir, there has been a major breakthrough in lens technology that allows us to double the performance of any prior 50mm primes, this is the single greatest improvement in image quality in the history of photography lenses in one generation, and it costs 25% less than the top of the line competitors, has better build quality and feel and has no drawbacks whatsoever"

Photographer: "Great that's the best thing I've ever heard a lens designer invent, perfect"

Lens Designer: "That's what we thought, it's called the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART, and it costs $1300"

Photographer: "That's too much for a Sigma"

This makes no sense.

It only makes sense if the next step is not:

Photographer: "What am I saying, of course I'll pay $1300 for it."

By the way, I am so annoyed! My sigma 35 has really performed perfectly until now, today it started showing first signs of imperfection! (AF inconsistency indoors. Viggo, I owe you an apology.) So sad. It's never done that before. It's still 99.5% perfect but... I really thought since it was a perfect copy it would stay that way. Sigma, please make your quality control better!

And that is why I will never, ever, buy a third party lens. Sure Canon lenses have issues, but I know how to get them fixed and I also know there will never be a compatibility issue with any EOS body, ever. To me that is worth far more than some extra lppmm.

Oh, man, I'm so sorry to hear that, it really sucks.. But thanks for the apology, I didn't want to be right you know...

Thank you. It's not too bad, hopefully it won't get worse! I actually noticed it in a room that's really dimly lit, I'll try it out in better lit rooms, maybe it's just the low light levels and the camera's few AF points (though I was using the center point only so that really shouldn't happen...) I'll see if I need to play around with the MFA... I still love the lens, I just love the images it can produce, but I also need an AF I can rely on! And it should manage to nail focus on black text on white paper even in dim lighting! (I used it as a "if it's working fine it must at least nail focus on black text on white paper" test, but sometimes it even front focused in that case.) I really hope it's just a minor glitch. Hopefully it's not doing that whole "AF gets misaligned over time" thing. Or, and this is what I'm really hoping, I might just be worried for nothing and it might have been user error since I noticed it while hand holding and using AI servo to lock focus. I have pretty steady hands, but I really hope that I'm just an idiot and it was because of the hand holding. I haven't tested it using a tripod yet but I will tonight. I was hand holding because I was doing some AF testing that involved movement. When I noticed the inconsistency I did the tests hand holding still but not moving the camera or the subject. I'm still hoping it was just shaky hands! But I felt like it would be more honest to write it, I was pretty vocal about my 35 being so great...

 

[slclick]

At that rate, my third party M42 and AIS Nikkor lenses will NEVER stop working, because they never communicated with the camera in the first place..... You can't get any more reliable than manual lenses treated kindly.

There are a lot of factors that go into purchase decisions, including price, size and weight, IQ vis-a-vis resolution, other IQ factors (astrophotographers want low coma, for example), AF reliability, need for cast-iron reliability on a crucial pro shoot and a preferred status in the repair queue in the Canon Professional Service system.

I will tell you that if I wanted a lens for hill-climbing backpacking, the Nifty Fifty or Shorty Forty might beat out the Otus.

Or Brand

Exactly, there are far more considerations than lppmm or corner sharpness involved in many peoples buying decisions.

 

[sdsr]

[...] I know that only photographers see the differences in most of these crazy lens choices 99% of the time. Clients just don't, clients see moments, posing, lighting, composition, post processing etc . This constant hand wringing about a few lppmm, or distortion, aberrations etc is just crazy.

I'm sure that's right, if what matters is the perceptions of clients. Those of us (un)lucky enough not to be professional photographers are our own clients, as it were, and, just like any other interest/hobby, if you get "into" it enough you start to care about all sorts of details that others just don't notice (and, when they're pointed out, don't care). Some distinction that may seem trivial to me might matter to you, and vice versa; and while it's probably true that all manner of differences among lenses and bodies are simply invisible unless you go pixel-peeping - in which case it really is crazy to obsess with this sort of thing if you don't pixel-peep, print small, etc. - some of us do.

And for those sorts of reasons it's hard to answer questions such as "I own body x and lenses y & z; should I upgrade to body A or lens C", especially if what motivates the question is some hoped for change in image quality. In a different life I used to sell cds of classical music, and new customers would always be taken aback when they asked for a recommendation for a recording of some piece of music because, instead of just saying "this one's the best" I would ask them questions about their tastes in interpretation and tried to tell them that they mightn't notice what I notice (and vice versa), care about what I care about, etc.

Sometimes, just for the heck of it, I'll show my other half a couple of photos for comparison purpose (noise, botched lighting, etc.), and as often as not he'll prefer the "wrong" one and not notice what is, to me, an obvious flaw. It's an enviable state, in some ways - often, when looking at others' photos, I'll find myself looking at all the trivial stuff that we're supposed not to care about (and I'm quite sure that I never noticed chromatic aberrations, noise, etc. on HD TV shows until I got into photography a few years ago). But once you get into the habit of scrutinizing details it's hard to stop....

 

[Radiating]

I noticed it while hand holding and using AI servo to lock focus. I have pretty steady hands, but I really hope that I'm just an idiot and it was because of the hand holding. I haven't tested it using a tripod yet but I will tonight. I was hand holding because I was doing some AF testing that involved movement. When I noticed the inconsistency I did the tests hand holding still but not moving the camera or the subject. I'm still hoping it was just shaky hands! But I felt like it would be more honest to write it, I was pretty vocal about my 35 being so great...

AI servo isn't designed to lock focus, it tries to achieve focus quickly and constantly refocus to track action at the cost of accuracy. You shouldn't expect AI servo to get accurate focus in low light, switch to one shot in low light situations, it's a night and day difference in those situations.

 

[privatebydesign]

[...] I know that only photographers see the differences in most of these crazy lens choices 99% of the time. Clients just don't, clients see moments, posing, lighting, composition, post processing etc . This constant hand wringing about a few lppmm, or distortion, aberrations etc is just crazy.

I'm sure that's right, if what matters is the perceptions of clients. Those of us (un)lucky enough not to be professional photographers are our own clients, as it were, and, just like any other interest/hobby, if you get "into" it enough you start to care about all sorts of details that others just don't notice (and, when they're pointed out, don't care). Some distinction that may seem trivial to me might matter to you, and vice versa; and while it's probably true that all manner of differences among lenses and bodies are simply invisible unless you go pixel-peeping - in which case it really is crazy to obsess with this sort of thing if you don't pixel-peep, print small, etc. - some of us do.

And for those sorts of reasons it's hard to answer questions such as "I own body x and lenses y & z; should I upgrade to body A or lens C", especially if what motivates the question is some hoped for change in image quality. In a different life I used to sell cds of classical music, and new customers would always be taken aback when they asked for a recommendation for a recording of some piece of music because, instead of just saying "this one's the best" I would ask them questions about their tastes in interpretation and tried to tell them that they mightn't notice what I notice (and vice versa), care about what I care about, etc.

Sometimes, just for the heck of it, I'll show my other half a couple of photos for comparison purpose (noise, botched lighting, etc.), and as often as not he'll prefer the "wrong" one and not notice what is, to me, an obvious flaw. It's an enviable state, in some ways - often, when looking at others' photos, I'll find myself looking at all the trivial stuff that we're supposed not to care about (and I'm quite sure that I never noticed chromatic aberrations, noise, etc. on HD TV shows until I got into photography a few years ago). But once you get into the habit of scrutinizing details it's hard to stop....

Absolutely, I am not belittling "hobbyists", enthusiasts, and amateurs, indeed many here have much more equipment, and more expensive equipment than me. There is nothing wrong in owning something just for the sake of owning it either, as an extreme, if people want to spend a million dollars on a Leica they will never use I fully understand too and is fine with me. I just worry sometimes that impressionable enthusiasts read too much into some of the "chat", yes ultimate this or that has its place, but that is very often far removed from what you need to make great images and sometimes that gets lost in the noise. Having said that, this is primarily a gear orientated forum and maybe I am just being overly sensitive, after all there are many forums and sites where people more focused on image making post.

 

[Ewinter]

If it's $1300 I likely will not buy it. In the rare circumstance in which my 35mm Art is just too wide, I'll settle for my Canon 50mm f/1.4. This may be mostly psychological but at $1100 I might just go for the 50mm Art.

Coming in at 1/3 the price of the Otus but with similar build quality, nearly-as-good optics and AF? If all that can be said, I think Sigma will get quite a few takers even at this price.

The only difference is that the Otus is cool and can be shown off, the Sigma can't. This is why I think the price will be < 1000 USD.

I show most people the 35mm 1.4 Art and they'd die to own one. I'd rather go "look at my amazing lens, it cost me $1300 and I can do everything I want with it" than "Look at my amazing lens. It cost me $4500 and doesn't autofocus, so I can't use it for work. But my wallet is sure big"

 

[ahsanford]

If it's $1300 I likely will not buy it. In the rare circumstance in which my 35mm Art is just too wide, I'll settle for my Canon 50mm f/1.4. This may be mostly psychological but at $1100 I might just go for the 50mm Art.

Coming in at 1/3 the price of the Otus but with similar build quality, nearly-as-good optics and AF? If all that can be said, I think Sigma will get quite a few takers even at this price.

The only difference is that the Otus is cool and can be shown off, the Sigma can't. This is why I think the price will be < 1000 USD.

Shown off to who, if you don't mind my asking? It's such an exotic piece of tech that only other photogs would know what it is.

With that same money, you can you get a second FF body along with this new Sigma 50... Just saying.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Zeiss is counting on a few of the Ferrari-driving enthusiasts to pick up an Otus and say "hey, look at my pricey new toy", but more likely they are aiming to impress the best pros with the best tool in that focal length.

- A

 

[Viggo]

I noticed it while hand holding and using AI servo to lock focus. I have pretty steady hands, but I really hope that I'm just an idiot and it was because of the hand holding. I haven't tested it using a tripod yet but I will tonight. I was hand holding because I was doing some AF testing that involved movement. When I noticed the inconsistency I did the tests hand holding still but not moving the camera or the subject. I'm still hoping it was just shaky hands! But I felt like it would be more honest to write it, I was pretty vocal about my 35 being so great...

AI servo isn't designed to lock focus, it tries to achieve focus quickly and constantly refocus to track action at the cost of accuracy. You shouldn't expect AI servo to get accurate focus in low light, switch to one shot in low light situations, it's a night and day difference in those situations.

If that's how you have set up your Servo you're doing it wrong. I can keep servo on a target for half an hour if I want to and move a little back and forth, or stay still and it's always locked right. I never ever use One Shot.

 

[flowers]

I noticed it while hand holding and using AI servo to lock focus. I have pretty steady hands, but I really hope that I'm just an idiot and it was because of the hand holding. I haven't tested it using a tripod yet but I will tonight. I was hand holding because I was doing some AF testing that involved movement. When I noticed the inconsistency I did the tests hand holding still but not moving the camera or the subject. I'm still hoping it was just shaky hands! But I felt like it would be more honest to write it, I was pretty vocal about my 35 being so great...

AI servo isn't designed to lock focus, it tries to achieve focus quickly and constantly refocus to track action at the cost of accuracy. You shouldn't expect AI servo to get accurate focus in low light, switch to one shot in low light situations, it's a night and day difference in those situations.

If that's how you have set up your Servo you're doing it wrong. I can keep servo on a target for half an hour if I want to and move a little back and forth, or stay still and it's always locked right. I never ever use One Shot.

I do the same with my AI S, it even stayed on target when I jumped at it and pressed the shutter mid-air!
I got some worrisome results I used normal objects as targets in all cases, not printed targets, but that shouldn't matter. See:

AI F:
1/11 PF
2/11 PF
3/11 FF 5-10mm
4/11 PF
5/11 PF
6/11 BF 7-10mm
7/11 PF
8/11 PF
9/11 PF
10/11 BF 20mm (??)
11/11 PF

PF: 8/11 (72.7%)

AI S:
1/20 PF
2/20 PF
3/20 PF
4/20 PF
5/20 0-2mm BF
6/20 PF
7/20 PF
8/20 PF
9/20 misF (prev.FP)
10/20 PF
11/20 misF?
12/20 PF
13/20 PF
14/20 PF
15/20 slight FF
16/20 misF
17/20 slight FF (same target as 15)
18/20 PF (white on white? really? that works?)
19/20 misF
20/20 misF

PF:12.9/20 (64.5%)
brighter room:

AI S:
1/30 PF (white on white)
2/30 PF
3/30 PF
4/30 PF
5/30 misF (??)
6/30 PF
7/30 PF
8/30 PF
9/30 PF
10/30 PF
11/30 misF (previous FP) *
12/30 massive FF (what's going on?) *
13/30 misF *
14/30 PF *
15/30 PF *
16/30 PF *
17/30 misF *
18/30 misF *
19/30 misF * ** these were all overexposed, I forgot to
adjust when moving to the brighter areas
20/30 PF
21/30 PF
22/30 PF
23/30 PF
24/30 PF
25/30 PF
26/30 misF (prev FP)
27/30 PF
28/30 PF
29/30 PF
32/30 PF

PF: 23/30 (76.6%)

Wow that's bad. I admit I didn't always choose the perfect (most contrasty) targets, but this from a lens that manages to AF in low light mid-air no problem.
The previous were all on a tripod. I just tried handheld (AI S), 8/11 (72.7%) in the dim room. That's the exact same result as with the tripod (with AI F), and I used different targets and the camera was in a different place.

It's never been that bad before, it's been reliable even in lower light levels. Now I'm a little worried How can the AF just suddenly get so much worse? Or did I just try to focus on impossible things? What really gets me is that it nailed all the white-on-white targets. That doesn't even make sense (unless it nailed them because they were the only things emitting enough light?)
All tests were done wide-open. I was hoping it would just be a problem wide-open but I tried AFing on my black lens cap on bubble wrap on white in the dim room and it front focused even though i had the middle point at the edge of the cap so there must have been plenty contrast.
I should note that both rooms have like the dimmest lighting ever. Many normal homes are probably a lot brighter. This lens still focuses perfectly in bright light. It only seems to have problems in low light.

I love you Sigma 35... Please don't give up, stay with me...

edit: I talked it over with Viggo and realized that's not bad results at all because the light I tested in is actually terrible! (I just never realize how terrible because I'm used to it (really need to replace the light bulbs!))
In bright light it works great so I was just worrying for nothing

 

[sdsr]

Shown off to who, if you don't mind my asking? It's such an exotic piece of tech that only other photogs would know what it is.

With that same money, you can you get a second FF body along with this new Sigma 50... Just saying.

Or, if you make that second FF body a Sony A7/A7r, you could get the Zeiss/Sony 55mm 1.8, which probably makes photos that are indistinguishable from the Otus 99% of the time, and has AF (and, at present, is $200 off - i.e. $799 - if you buy it with an A7/A7r). Come to that, the Zeiss/Sony on a 7R could well create better images than the Sigma, no matter how good it is, or even the Otus would on any current Canon sensor (leaving aside such questions as whether you need to track fast action). Interesting times....

 

[ahsanford]

Hands on from CP+

Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | ART

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Hands on from CP+

Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | ART

- A

As is normal with internet experts who have become popular via links, clicks, likes, and linked advertising, he makes several basic errors that are just noise, this, for me, means he loses any credibility.

First, if the lens is projecting a circle then a lens hood needs to be a circle, but if we are using a rectangular section of the projection, as we do in photography, then the petal hood is correct for primes, or a rectangle.

Second, more glass equals bigger T Stop, unless your glass has exceptionally higher transmission characteristics than your comparison. Though the loss is small, the more glass light goes through the less less light comes out the right end, that doesn't mean the Sigma is not an f1.4 but his use of T stop and glass is entirely inappropriate.

He is just repeating memes he doesn't understand and using popular terms in irrelevant contexts, which kinda makes the video an annoyance to me.

 

[Eldar]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Zeiss is counting on a few of the Ferrari-driving enthusiasts to pick up an Otus and say "hey, look at my pricey new toy", but more likely they are aiming to impress the best pros with the best tool in that focal length.

- A

This is simply silly! The Zeiss Otus is a lens like no other and the consumer group you refer to would never bother to use something that requires that much attention to detail to have any use of it at all.

All this comparison between an unreleased Sigma and the Otus has no meaning. They are built for totally different applications and use. The Sigma will Never compete with the Otus and the Otus will Never compete with the Sigma. Just like a Bentley does not compete with a Ford and a Ford never competes with a Bentley.

I have the Sigma 35/1.4 Art and based on the images we have seen of the 50/1.4 Art, the build quality can be expected to be the same. And it is a very fine lens. But compared to the Otus, the Sigma is plastic! The production tolerances, glass quality, mechanical quality, focusing mechanism (manual as it is) etc. is in a totally different league. It is a very long way from having a great design to produce stable, maximum performance from that design.

Yes, I´m sure that in certain cases the Sigma will produce equal IQ to the Otus and in lots of shooting situations I would much rather have the Sigma than the Otus. But looking at the sum of quality differences it is not difficult to understand why the Zeiss is a much more expensive lens.

And for the record, I have not received a single comment about the Otus other than a raised eyebrow why I bother to use i MF lens in these AF times. And I will most likely also buy the Sigma 50/1.4 Art, because it would fill a totally different need.

 

[Albi86]

Shown off to who, if you don't mind my asking? It's such an exotic piece of tech that only other photogs would know what it is.


- A

Let me rephrase: Zeiss lenses are prestigious items, Sigma lenses are not.

Do you think everyone who buys Leica couldn't be happy with a Canon or Nikon?
Did you notice manufacturers try to differentiate their premium products also visually? Canon has red rings and white lenses, Nikon has gold rings, etc.
If you buy a Rebel, the strap says Canon EOS. If you buy a 5D3 the strap says Canon EOS 5D Mark III.

I wasn't insinuating that the Otus is all about appearance; I'm saying that people are reluctant to spend too much money on items that don't give them gratification at various levels besides performance. Vanity is an important motivational component behind expensive purchases. This happens at a parallel level with respect to performance and is not limited to photography. Sometimes it merges with performance in the desire to own the latest & greatest.

 

[flowers]

Hands on from CP+

Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | ART

- A

So do we finally know the price? I tried to look for it but I didn't see it for sale?