Sigma new lens announcements

[Overread]

Didn't see a report on this anywhere so here it is - new lenses from sigma!!

SIGMA 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 II DG HSM
SIGMA 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 II DG HSM - SIGMA CORPORATION

SIGMA APO 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM
SIGMA APO 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM - SIGMA CORPORATION

SIGMA MACRO 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
SIGMA MACRO 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM - SIGMA CORPORATION

SIGMA APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
SIGMA APO 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM - SIGMA CORPORATION

SIGMA DP2x
SIGMA DP2x - SIGMA CORPORATION

I get a horrible feeling that in another 6 months or so my poor 70mm macro is going to get an upgrade to 70mm EX HSM OS and I just know I won't be able to resist!

Really nice to see the 105mm getting an upgrade - though I'd like to see them put a release date and price on their last round of releases - like the 150mm OS!

 

[Derrel]

The new 50-150mm f/2.8 looks interesting; it is a DC lens, meaning that in Sigma-speak its image circle is designed to cover APS-C,not full-frame. If the lens can have better sharpness at the longer end of the zoom range, it might be a REALLY hand lens to have for portraiture and scenic work both indoors and outdoors. The zone between 50mm and 70 or 80mm is really,really handy to have covered by a zoom lens, especially when confronted with tight working quarters, or in smaller locations where a 70-200/2.8 is just a little bit too long.

 

[Overread]

I'll agree with that.
Personally I prefer having the longer reach of 200mm for my own style of shooting, but I've been in plenty of situations where 70mm is just too long (esp with portrait and people shooting when out with family and the like). It's then that the 50-70mm range really would come into its own on a single zoom lens.

It also means you don't have to be swapping between a 70-200mm and a something-70ishmm lens all day either.

 

[Robin Usagani]

can someone explain what they mean again? DG APO EX etc. I dont speak sigmese.

 

[Overread]

Sigmese:
Lens Technology - SIGMA CORPORATION

 

[smeat]

Does anyone know if you have an OS lens on a sony Internal Stabilized body, do you get any extra stops out of that doubling up?

 

[blakjak8]

If I understand "OS" to mean a lens stabilizing system...In my a200 manual it says to turn off the camera's "steady shot" if using a "vibration control" lens...I may not have the wording quite right but the manual's meaning is to use one or the other...not both. Why? Is the obvious next question and for that I do not have an answer.

 

[Trever1t]

The Fovian sensor in the DP2x...any feedback regarding this technology?

 

[smeat]

If I understand "OS" to mean a lens stabilizing system...In my a200 manual it says to turn off the camera's "steady shot" if using a "vibration control" lens...I may not have the wording quite right but the manual's meaning is to use one or the other...not both. Why? Is the obvious next question and for that I do not have an answer.

Yeah, as soon as you mentioned it I found that too and also am left with the same after thought of why? ...

Though... Ok, here's my guess, the lens has an element/s that swivels to keep light coming in the same path to the "film" plane even when moving. The in body system moves the "film" plane along with the lens' motion so it might move the plane off axis, THOUGH the in body one shouldn't budge until the shake is so bad that the lens system has gone off a bit in which case it should compensate. Thanks for letting me think out loud, and find that I still don't know why one couldn't use both

 

[Derrel]

I do not think one could use both the in-lens and the in-body stabilizing systems because the two systems would set up a network of constantly-competing stabilizing efforts...which would cause massive blurring of the image. A good case in point is when people use the Nikon VR lenses with VR switched to ON, but the lens on a steady tripod...the VR system creates what is called a feedback loop, as it tries to correct vibrations that really are not severe enough to need correcting. I would imagine that shifting the sensor, and also shifting lens elements would be a bit too much; one or the other would be adequate.

 

[ghache]

that 50-150 is REALLY interesting. lets just hope its a better lens than the previous 50-150 wich was complete **** with tons of problems

 

[Derrel]

that 50-150 is REALLY interesting.

Yes, it is. I have the Nikkor 50-135mm f/3.5, which is a manual focusing, one-ring zoom lens that Nikon made in the early 1980's in one production run. It was very expensive in its day, and its high price and the then-current lack of love for zoom lenses doomed the lens, and the unusual focal length range made it kind of a black sheep; back in the early 1980's, many zooms were 70-210mm models, and there were a few 70-150 or 75-150mm models, as well as 70-240 models, and 80-200's.

The thing is...the region from 50mm to 70,75,or 80mm encompasses a WIDE range of angle of view settings...with today's 1,5x and 1.6x field of view reductions AND ever-higher megapixel counts, we can easily, easily crop-in at the PC if we need more telephoto reach.

At an event where I have to stand in basically ONE location, like say a Fourth of July parade where I will be relegated to the sidewalk,and where the entire event plays out around 20-60 feet from me, the 50-135mm zoom lens is vastly preferable to my 70-200 zoom.

People need to think about being 1) focal length constrained or 2) being location constrained. For events, weddings, portraiture, things like that, the 50-150mm lens makes much,much more sense than the 70-200 does.

 

[ghache]

that 50-150 is REALLY interesting.

Yes, it is. I have the Nikkor 50-135mm f/3.5, which is a manual focusing, one-ring zoom lens that Nikon made in the early 1980's in one production run. It was very expensive in its day, and its high price and the then-current lack of love for zoom lenses doomed the lens, and the unusual focal length range made it kind of a black sheep; back in the early 1980's, many zooms were 70-210mm models, and there were a few 70-150 or 75-150mm models, as well as 70-240 models, and 80-200's.

The thing is...the region from 50mm to 70,75,or 80mm encompasses a WIDE range of angle of view settings...with today's 1,5x and 1.6x field of view reductions AND ever-higher megapixel counts, we can easily, easily crop-in at the PC if we need more telephoto reach.

At an event where I have to stand in basically ONE location, like say a Fourth of July parade where I will be relegated to the sidewalk,and where the entire event plays out around 20-60 feet from me, the 50-135mm zoom lens is vastly preferable to my 70-200 zoom.

People need to think about being 1) focal length constrained or 2) being location constrained. For events, weddings, portraiture, things like that, the 50-150mm lens makes much,much more sense than the 70-200 does.

I have to agree with you. Now ill get my hands on one to try it out before buying a 70-200

 

[smeat]

I do not think one could use both the in-lens and the in-body stabilizing systems because the two systems would set up a network of constantly-competing stabilizing efforts...which would cause massive blurring of the image. A good case in point is when people use the Nikon VR lenses with VR switched to ON, but the lens on a steady tripod...the VR system creates what is called a feedback loop, as it tries to correct vibrations that really are not severe enough to need correcting. I would imagine that shifting the sensor, and also shifting lens elements would be a bit too much; one or the other would be adequate.

This is getting ridiculous. Someone is just going to have to try it out. ;-)
But if you think about it - vibrations move the lens system. They don't move the in-body system. That's moved by light tracking, infrared maybe (I forget), but it's done by the sensor finding a point at the last moment and staying with it. I don't believe it would compete with the lens because as long as the lens image didn't move neither would it. And if it did move a little bit because there was a bit too much vibration/movement, as I understand it, the sensor should move to compensate.

 

[Ginu]

I would love to try the 150-300 2.8 and the 50-150 sure looks very interesting. Do you happen to know the prices for all these new lens?

As I keep looking at them, they all seem pretty nifty.