[Klaus]

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/ca..._400_5_63/

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/ca..._24_70_28/

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/ca.../features/

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/ca...fications/

 

The 24-70 is not so hot if we can believe the MTFs

[JJ_SO]

Maybe, but not so bad either   Let's see at what price they will thrown it into the shelves.

 

And as it's extending, the Minimal focus distance doesn't creep between 0.38 and 0.41 m like the new Nikon, but remains at 0.37 m throughout zoom range.

[Brightcolours]

Maybe, but not so bad either   Let's see at what price they will thrown it into the shelves.

 

And as it's extending, the Minimal focus distance doesn't creep between 0.38 and 0.41 m like the new Nikon, but remains at 0.37 m throughout zoom range.

 

Though, the new Nikkor does extend too... So that must not be the entire reason

[Brightcolours]

The Irix 11mm f4 is finally being introduced too.

http://en.irixlens.com/11mm

[JJ_SO]

The Nikon extends at the wide end - the Sigma at the long end. This does make a difference.

[Brightcolours]

That 100-400mm looks pretty neat (weight/size/MTF chart) too. Not as heavy breather (widening FOV towards MFD) as the Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 L IS USM for instance, with :

 

1.6m MFD, 1:3.8 = 0.26x magnification at 400mm setting. 

 

For (my) comparison, my Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM gets 0.21x at 1.2m, the EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 L IS USM gets 0.21 at 1.2m also.

 

With its relative low weight and possibly nice price, it might just be a lens for me in future.

[Brightcolours]

The Nikon extends at the wide end - the Sigma at the long end. This does make a difference.

You are right in that that is a difference. However, the old Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM also extends at the wide end, and does not show the variable MFD (as far as I know). So the correlation still is not that solid?

[toni-a]

Well at least for Canon and Nikon users a decent and adequately priced 24-70f2.8 stabilized would be most welcome

[Brightcolours]

Well at least for Canon and Nikon users a decent and adequately priced 24-70f2.8 stabilized would be most welcome

Tamron offers that for a number of years now.

[Klaus]

That 100-400mm looks pretty neat (weight/size/MTF chart) too. Not as heavy breather (widening FOV towards MFD) as the Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 L IS USM for instance, with :

 

1.6m MFD, 1:3.8 = 0.26x magnification at 400mm setting. 

 

For (my) comparison, my Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM gets 0.21x at 1.2m, the EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 L IS USM gets 0.21 at 1.2m also.

 

With its relative low weight and possibly nice price, it might just be a lens for me in future.

 

It's still heavier than 1Kg. In the good ol days, there was the Minolta 100-400mm with just 840g.

The MTFs are looking decent though.