[Sylvain]

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-et-vo...rame-lens/

 

Sigma really is on fire.

 

 

[Klaus]

IF this is real, I'm a little wondering about the size of the front filter. 102mm ?

[Sylvain]

I thought about playing with the mount to scale it up against other lenses, but can't be bothered. It's going to be a little big, for sure, but judging how many pro still carry their bricks around, not too many will care, or will they ?

[popo]

Who rated it 5? I don't see that on SAR, and CR put it as 1 on their scale which means it is practically worthless.

I'd love to see such a lens, but I'm really sceptical if it could be done for a reasonable cost and quality. If they do a full frame f/2 zoom, I'd expect a shorter zoom range.

[Sylvain]

Who rated it 5? I don't see that on SAR, and CR put it as 1 on their scale which means it is practically worthless.


I'd love to see such a lens, but I'm really sceptical if it could be done for a reasonable cost and quality. If they do a full frame f/2 zoom, I'd expect a shorter zoom range.

Sorry, it was a SR3 (older posts) and the picture, on closer inspection, looks like a collage of the 18-35 a the 120-300... no ?

[Guest]

Not sure if it is true (after all it is only a rumour - well the rumour is certainly true but the lens might be fiction but if this rumour is true...) but if so I have only one comment: TOOOOO HEAVY.

[popo]

Define too heavy? I can't imagine it being worse than the 120-300 so in that sense, I don't see a problem with it. The 120-300 is about my personal all day hand holding limit... and I have weedy arms too.

[Klaus]

The 120-300mm is actually nice both in terms of size and weight - given its max. aperture.