... because Sigma announced the 85mm T1.5 Cine as someone out there pointed out.
Sounds logical at least.
I wonder how many of the people waiting for this lens for two years think about the same way as I do now:
"It will be heavy, with great IQ but still in front of a DSLR, so sorry Sigma, this time you came too late".
Let's see the pricing of this lens, I expect 700-800EUR
If it's less I might well consider it
The old one was like $950 at launch, the new one is probably going to be moderately more expensive. $1200ish is my (uneducated) prediction.
I bet on less than 1000$.
We'll see, so far all fast Art-primes were cheaper than 1k $ and this lens is no rocket tech. I just realized the efficiency of face- and eye-detection which is no common feature in DSLRs, so I stick with my statement of "too late" and just like to add "...for me" ^_^
But there's also a
500/4 Sports about to come which will be around 200 grams heavier than the current Nikon with Fluorite glass - this thing really can shake things up a bit.
The SIgma 85mm T1.5 cine lens weighs a lot, it weighs 1475 grams in EF-mount version. The Art version will weight a little less, because of the less elaborate shell. With 14 elements of which 2 SLD and 1 aspherical element, it is quite elaborate for a 85mm lens.
With the 815 grams 50mm f1.4 Art with 13 elements costing $800, t surely will be more than $800.
A tad over $1000 is my guess.
Looks like this time around everyone is going to get something from Sigma - both the diehard reporters that wade smack into the action and yearn for the widest stuff to capture the mayhem (12-24/4 Art), the portrait/shallow DOF aficionados (85/1.4 Art) and the grizzled mud-trotting birders and wildlife 'togs (500/4 Sport). So says the Nikonrumors.com site - complete with pics and details.
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/09/19/pictur...nses.aspx/
I have to admit I'm seein' all sorts of things I like here...
Liking the 0 grams of weight of the 85mm f1.4, for sure! Still puzzling on the zoom ratio of 1:8.5, though.
The 12-24mm f4 should give the Canon 11-24mm some competition, for quite a bit less.
Anyone have an idea what they mean with Nikon (D)?
Still puzzling on the zoom ratios...
The amount of typos and weird data is looking as if someone just hammered it into a keyboard before getting drunk beyond consciousness.
But I also have to admit, if I would have any interest in continuing AFMA-saturday afternoons or so much money to waste to fill a second cupboard with stuff I eventually could use once, I'd be tempted, too. Even by the ugly 85/1.4...