Rumor: New Sigma announcement in very early February!

[Brownie]

How do you feel about these slowish telephoto primes? Are they even worth producing?

The 18-30/1.8 would have my interest!

One trusted source told me that Sigma will have a press event in very early February (likely in the days between Feb 4 and 8). He didn’t share yet what Sigma will announce and I am working to get some info in this.

But I hope that Mr Yamaki will hold on his promise made exactly one year ago that they are now going to focus on announcing more “unique” lenses. After all the past 12 months we had a bunch of exciting lens patents. Now, those patents are by no means final proof that it will make it into mass production. But just for the sake of discussion I will list you those lens specs and you can vote which one you would love to get for real:

Sigma patented the following lenses. Which one would you liek to get?

• 40mm f/1.2
• 50mm f/1.2
• F/1.8 zooms: 15-24mm f/1.8 or 16-28mm f/1.8 or 18-30mm f/1.8 zoom
• 400mm f/5.0 OS
• 500mm f/5.6 OS
• 700mm f/8.0 OS
• Fisheye zooms: 7-12mm 8-14mm or 11-16mm
• 65mm f/1.4

Rumor: New Sigma announcement in very early February! – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

What use case would apply to a slow tele prime? Not sports, not birds, maybe wildlife on a bright day? A full moon? lol

The 1.8 zooms are technologically interesting. I'm really curious to see how big and heavy that wide an aperture makes the lenses.

 

[iain clyne]

The 500mm f5.6 might be interesting of they can keep the weight and size down to the likes of the Nikon 500 PF.

 

[Brownie]

The 500mm f5.6 might be interesting of they can keep the weight and size down to the likes of the Nikon 500 PF.

But since the Sony 200-600 is 6.3 @500mm, are you gaining enough of anything to warrant purchasing a whole other lens? Maybe if it were f/4.

Same with the F/5 400. You're only gaining 1/3 stop over the 200-600. To me, not worth it.

 

[iain clyne]

Yes but if the weight is in the same area as the Nikon it would be 1.4kg lighter.

 

[Brownie]

Yes but if the weight is in the same area as the Nikon it would be 1.4kg lighter.

I suppose, but then again I ask myself if it's worth an entire new lens?

 

[iamdlewis]

But since the Sony 200-600 is 6.3 @500mm, are you gaining enough of anything to warrant purchasing a whole other lens? Maybe if it were f/4.

Same with the F/5 400. You're only gaining 1/3 stop over the 200-600. To me, not worth it.

People seem to like those Canon 600 and 800 f11 lens but I can't image these would be anywhere near the size of those.

On a different note I was at a talk once in which a guy was telling people that if they want to do bird photography the best lens is a 300 f4 because you won't need to zoom, the lens are cheap and that is what someone at a now long gone camera shop (in no way was it a good shop) told him. To put that into perspective the talk was last year and Nikon released a 300 f4 in Aug of 2000 and Canon in Mar 1997. If the right sales guy gets to the right person you never know what will sell and how many.

 

[AlphaWorld]

People seem to like those Canon 600 and 800 f11 lens but I can't image these would be anywhere near the size of those.

On a different note I was at a talk once in which a guy was telling people that if they want to do bird photography the best lens is a 300 f4 because you won't need to zoom, the lens are cheap and that is what someone at a now long gone camera shop (in no way was it a good shop) told him. To put that into perspective the talk was last year and Nikon released a 300 f4 in Aug of 2000 and Canon in Mar 1997. If the right sales guy gets to the right person you never know what will sell and how many.

I cannot imagine myself buying an f/11 lens today, but I can imagine myself doing so 20 or 30 years ago. That me would have been delighted with that much reach. Oh, but it would have been purely manual focus, because even 15 years ago AF cut out at f/8 on the best cameras, and f/4 or f/5.6 on lesser beasts. I think the longest lens I owned 15 odd years ago was something like a Sigma 100-300 f/4, or something like that.

Me of today is looking forward to a 300/2.8 weighing less than 1.5kg. And me of today has AF past f/16

 

[Matthias]

How do you feel about these slowish telephoto primes? Are they even worth producing?

The 18-30/1.8 would have my interest!

Rumor: New Sigma announcement in very early February! – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com

The 65mm f/1.4 also sounds interesting... Even more so if it has macro capabilities.

 

[Brownie]

The 65mm f/1.4 also sounds interesting... Even more so if it has macro capabilities.

Kind of a weird focal length for me. Few steps closer and you can use a 50, few steps farther back and you can use an 85. Sigma seems lately like they produce oddball focal lengths just so they don’t conflict with other manufacturers .

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

So the erase for ire orders has been made. £2800 for the 500 5.6, which is cheap IMO, but the big thing for me is that close focus is 300mm. That's impressive at 500mm.
IQ should be excellent, so I'm watching this one to see some sample shots from real world users (not paid testers)