Future Sigma Releases?

[Markw]

There's been alot of talk lately about Nikon and Canon releases alike. Does anyone have any idea what Sigma, Tamron, or Tokina have planned for the next few months/year? I know Sigma has announced their 18-200 F/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSMII recently, but anything else? Something of real interest?

Mark

 

[Derrel]

Sigma has been digging its own grave for quite some time now, by trying to hike prices up to ridiculously high levels. Like their new d-slr...it's priced in the same league as a Nikon D3x, and yet it's a toy-like camera that is almost as clunky as an old East German Pentacon...Sigma attempting to price its better lenses at 80-85% of Canon and Nikon offerings...wow...just wow...that shows they have absolutely no idea of their role in the market. And being that clueless, there's no telling WHAT it is they might try to foist off on the marketplace.

 

[Markw]

I thought there was something odd about their pricing. Their new 18-200/3.5-6.3 is said to be priced at $720. That's entirely too much money, and too close to the Nikkor model. I'd still like to see them come out with some more killer lenses like the 50/1.4, 150/2.8OS, and 17-50/2.8. Maybe a 300/4, 400/4, and an upgraded 80-400, at 60% the price of the Nikkor, and damn good optics. But, one can dream.

Mark

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I've been peeking at Sigma's 85mm 1.4 lately, but I'm still on the bench about that one.

It costs about as much as a new 85 1.4"D" Nikon

 

[Markw]

The difference is still roughly $300. I'd go with the Sigma, especially if you can find it used. It's bound to be much cheaper used than the Nikon used. But I've always been a Sigma fan.

Mark

 

[Overread19]

Eh new lens prices are always inflated - Canon do it - Nikon does it and so do Sigma - a few weeks/months on the shelves and the prices do drop from release statements (excluding shifts in international currencies).


As for their overall market aim I get the feeling sigma is aiming to be serious with its lenses - a few (eg the 50mm 1.4) are already showing up the main market leaders so it makes sense that sigma would adjust their prices accordingly. They've recently upgraded their macro line so I wouldn't be surprised if a new 70mm and even 50mm macro were rolled out with general improvements - though these two might not get the OS that the 150 and 100mm got .

 

[Markw]

Uh oh. Sigma making a MPE-65 equivalent lens would throw a wrench in the system, wouldnt it! Great for me, not so good for Nikon or Canon, unless they both pop out a similar lens with better IQ, and not too much more money.

Mark

 

[Overread19]

Considering that they ran 5 different macro lenses and now run 4 - two with OS; I'm actually a little surprised that sigma hasn't tried to market a higher powered macro lens. They could roll out a 1-3:1 and still get a good amount of interest even if they didn't get all the way to 5:1. Then again the MPE sells in very small numbers and unlike things like the 200-500mm it doesn't really have very many big professional market areas (since a lot of science groups will mount cameras to microscopes).

 

[Markw]

That would be very nice. It'd be really nice to have something like a 60-105/2.8-4 HSM/AF-S OS/VR Macro/Micro. 3:1 at 60mm, 1:1 at 105mm. I don't know if this is even possible at all, but it sure would be cool.

Mark

 

[Derrel]

I thought there was something odd about their pricing. Their new 18-200/3.5-6.3 is said to be priced at $720. That's entirely too much money, and too close to the Nikkor model. I'd still like to see them come out with some more killer lenses like the 50/1.4, 150/2.8OS, and 17-50/2.8. Maybe a 300/4, 400/4, and an upgraded 80-400, at 60% the price of the Nikkor, and damn good optics. But, one can dream.

Mark

If Sigma wishes to jack its prices to comparable levels as those of the Canon L-series and the Nikkor gold-ring premium lens designs, then they need to do three things: get rid of their warm, sunset-yellow color rendition; improve wide-open image performance; get a grip on build quality and lens-to-lens assembly quality. Sigma has had issues with all three of these things for decades, over many dozens of lens designs. If a lens is going to be priced at a level comparable to Canon and Nikon offerings, then it damned well ought to be designed well, and assembled properly, otherwise why would anybody buy it. As to this idea that Nikon and Canon introduce lenses at high prices and lower the prices...that's a bit of an oversimplification, and is not in fact how the market actually behaves, and it ignores the longer-term pricing movement of Sigma. Sigma less than 24 months ago just simply RAISED ITS PRICES...as if, suddenly the Sigma name was worth more money.

What they ought to do is do what a smart company would do: create a new brand. Significant Malfunction is what the company used to be referred to as. The people at Lensrentals.com have had to drop multiple Sigma lens models because of serious, grave reliability issues. If Sigma wants to really "wow!" people, I think they need to spin off a new name, the way Honda did with Accura. Or the way Canon did with is L-uxury series lenses.

As to the desired lenses on your wish list Mark, like a 150/2.8 OS, 300/4, and 400/4 and a new 80-400 OS--ANY and ALL of those lenses might have a shot at making it. Personally I think the 300/4 and 400/4 or 400/4.5 even, would be good sellers for Sigma. Filling an unfilled niche, at a good price, is what Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina have done for a long time:witness the success of Sigma in off-spec macro lenses like 70mm and 150mm!!! Or 120-300mm f/2.8. Or 11-300mm f/4 EX HSM.

Sigma's new attempt to move up-market is, I think, foolish. The depreciation on anything branded Sigma means it's not a good idea to pay new, full-retail price for Sigma gear that is anywhere close in price to camera-maker gear. A new name might really help them.

 

[Overread19]

*really wants that new 150mm OS macro!*

Also Derral - remember a lot of those sigma malfunction lenses were in their superzooms - their 150-500mm and 50-500mm type lenses - even Canon has a poor reputation with their own 100-400mm and Nikon don't even risk making a higher end option zoom that covers that much range. I think the simple fact is that those lenses do result in harder to control manufacture tolerances and this results in a much bigger number of "failed" units (or rather units that are simply not middle of the row in tolerances). Canon mostly got their act together with the 100-400mm though it does appear that it took sigma a little longer (far as I know all their stock is now back on Lens Rentals - in addition I recall that their complaint wasn't just about the manufacture problems but also more so about the repair services that Sigma offered).