[Rover]

You're right, sorry for wasting your time. I confused the filter thread of 85/1.4 Art with 24-105/4 Art. Really strange, that 135/1.8 "goes back" to M82 (this time I double-checked  :wacko: )

Oh, you're not "wasting" it - I kinda enjoy reading / posting in friendly forums. My life would've been boring without the discussion (anything to draw my attention away from work and gigabytes upon gigabytes of yet unprocessed photos...)

[JJ_SO]

If a photo wants to be published or viewed, it will not hide in the Gigabyte-pile.  :ph34r: At least, that's what I'm hoping for...

 

And since this is the Sigma thread: I'm just processing some GB of pictures of 2015 and 2016 - will keep my Mac busy for some hours. This lazy software of Sigma processes 44 pictures in 30 minutes... Aperture or C1 would do 10× more in that time.

 

Main reason not to invest more into Foveon. So sad ( © DJT).

 

And every 50 pictures or so it's whining about insufficient memory. Yeaj, just 6 GB free RAM to be used, 1 TB diskspace, but for Sigma PhotoPro I need to rent a mainframe...

[Rover]

Shoot JPEG. This way, you only have to worry about sifting through the pics and deleting them - the pile gets smaller, never bigger.

 

But speaking of the new Sigma lenses as we should... when re-reading the review of the 24-35/2 lens, I suddenly thought that this lens looks just about perfect (definitely so among the wide zooms). The new 24-70 seems to be butt ugly in comparison for some reason.

 

P. S. You have to pardon me... it's half past midnight and I'm sleepy like hell, so strange ideas are coming into my head.

[JJ_SO]

I'm no fan of these 24-70 standard zooms. The 24-35/2 would be of more interest to me, too. If I would not have all kinds of primes round this region, that is.

[Rover]

I meant the exterior appearance. I, too, have long since eschewed 2x-7x/2.8 zooms, opting for a smaller 24-85/3.5-4.5 instead, but I fully understand that I'm in a minority - most of my colleagues rely on a Canon/Nikon 24-70/2.8 lens as their main tool.

[JJ_SO]

The 24-85/3.5-4.5 for Nikon is an example for a poor kit-lens design. Only for people who love distortions.  <_< To me, the 70 mm end-range is not enough. I really prefer 24-105 but saying that, I also need to add, very often I prefer taking a ton of primes instead the zoom. Although it's a nice Sigma and the VR is good enough for 1/15 @105 mm, I usually miss shallow DoF.

 

And it's quite a brick - like the new 24-70/2.8A or the 135/1.8 (sample pictures in relation to human hands on DPReview). Anyway, although I expect optical qualities of Tamron / Sigma  / Nikon (new type) close to each other, the design of the Nikon with the full metal housing and lots of seals will be more ruggedized than Sigma's - here the Art series has less to offer than their Sports series.

[JJ_SO]

Sample pictures of pre-production 14/1.8 Art: https://www.dpreview.com/samples/8743754...le-gallery

 

Yummy.

 

Me want one!

 

And also a trolley for all the tons of glass.