[Brightcolours]

One "C" and one "S".

 

"C":

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/150-60...g-os-hsm-c

 

"S":

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/150-60...g-os-hsm-s

 

 

[davidmanze]

Looks very promising indeed and puts them up against the Tamron, there's probably no doubt about their  general performance,but  let's see how sharp they are at the long end, where the Tamron struggled a little. The lock at any focal length is a plus!  The different filter size for each model and it looks like one is faster focusing than the other makes these an intriguing pair of lenses,

 Is Sigma is raising the bar in all areas? It certainly looks like it!

[popo]

Is this a first? A manufacturer releasing two lenses at the same time, with similar basic specification but differing in placement?

 

Nice idea though. Put the C against the Tamron for those who want something smaller/cheaper/lighter (as far as you can for a 600mm lens), and the S for those demanding something more.

 

Now, the thing is I got their 120-300 + x2 to get a 600mm zoom. Either of these 600mm zooms might take its place, with potentially better image quality at 600 and better zoom ration too. Weight isn't any worse...

[Rover]

Double post - please delete.

[Rover]

Is this a first? A manufacturer releasing two lenses at the same time, with similar basic specification but differing in placement?

 

Nice idea though. Put the C against the Tamron for those who want something smaller/cheaper/lighter (as far as you can for a 600mm lens), and the S for those demanding something more.

 

Now, the thing is I got their 120-300 + x2 to get a 600mm zoom. Either of these 600mm zooms might take its place, with potentially better image quality at 600 and better zoom ration too. Weight isn't any worse...

I guess it has happened before... at the very start of the EOS system, Canon offered two 100-300/5.6 zooms, one L and the other non-L.

 

Dang, the Photokina thread I attempted to start went belly up for some reason - can't even be opened so I can delete it. 

[JJ_SO]

Oh, good, so it's not only me who couldn't access it. Well, maybe some of this massive amount of "new lenses" we will discuss more extensively and others won't create loud echoes.

 

There are interesting differences between the two types. Amazing, Sigma does let us choice if we want to pay more for more glass, for more Fluoride elements, for better sealing. But a friend commented the extension of the tube and that "you will slam it against something else when extended.

 

I don't have contemporary experience with this - do you, as general question? Is it such a risk? Or should I take the chances, as I don't need such a lens very often, but if I need it, I don't want to think "I won't be happy with the result" before I push the trigger.

[popo]

Do they extend? It isn't obvious to me from the pictures either way.

 

Even if it extends with zooming, the changes of hitting anything aren't significant. Chances are if you need 600mm, the subject isn't exactly an arms length away. If you hit anything closer to you, that's just being clumsy and would be a risk with any lens.

 

I think almost all longer focal length zooms extend on zooming. Anyone know of another 4x zoom (lets say, maximum focal length at least 200mm) that does not extend? I suspect the ones that don't extend are short zoom ratio or are shorter focal length (e.g. 24-105L, 200-400L).

 

The only case I would be concerned about hitting things is on a macro lens. I had the old Tamron 90mm in the past, and that extends a lot on focus with not a lot of working distance to start with, so I did end up pushing the subject many with that!

[Klaus]

Ok, Ok, I will test them along with the Tammy.

[Klaus]

Do they extend? It isn't obvious to me from the pictures either way.

 

 

Very likely.

[balacau]

Sigma is also releasing an 18-300mm for aps-c users.  Personally I would have preferred to have seen a direct competitor to Tamron's new creation but I for one will be very interested to hear any reviews on the new Sigma lenses when they start pouring in.