Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
New Sigmas are coming ...
Chief Editor -

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
60-600/4.5-6.3  Cry wow Blush . Sports and with Arca foot. 70-200 also with Arca foot, well learnt, Sigma.

Loads of f/1.4, cool, but I don't get the 40 mm with Ø 82 filter. The 56/1.4 for APS C is sort of direct attack of Fuji?
56mm is 85mm for 1.5 crop APS-C, so it's a popular focal length. In any case, Sigma lenses are not available on Fuji XF Mount (unfortunately).
56mm f1.4 look tempting on my Sony...
60-600 should be sweet, I am on the verge of getting Tamron 150-600G2 maybe I should reconsider
Oddly enough, the 56mm f1.4 is pictured on a MFT Olympus. Makes a bit less sense there. ~112mm f2.8 FF equiv.
Nothing against Sigma but they are like a big mac menu these days ... super-sizing every lens.
Chief Editor -

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
I think, the mission is: 

If they have to have heavy bags to stabilize tripods, you can use either sand or better looking lenses.


Go an cover all FL with a f/1.4 version, make it big, black and heavy. "All FL ever made?" "Yes". (I'm already looking forward to 75/1.4, 90/1.4, 21/1.4, 45/1.4... and I'm sure, I missed half a dozen.


Preparing the world for a 18-120/1.4 superzoom. All these primes are at least as heavy as that one would be. And no one would buy it, because in general Sigma doesn't take back all the already sold primes...


Make a counterpart to all the featherlight sneakers and trainers this forum is exclusively flooded with. No other forum ever appears to be that attractive to this kind of brainless spammers. Are you guys supporting some poor Chinese who wanna make an extra buck?

More seriously: The 70-200 is about normal size, the 28 basically as well (for a f/1.4), the 56 about the size of the two Fujinons, just without the stupid retro aperture ring. The 10× zoom 60-600 is based on the design of the 4× zoom, will possibly weight a tad more than only the 2.86 kg, but hey, you get also a 60/4.5 at only 3 kg for it, so worth the effort (someone failed again in being "seriously"). The only super awkward and very weird surprise is this 40 mm no one ever asked for, but at least some commenter on Photorumors already is happy about and makes his personal winning team a 20 - 40 - 75 (why no 80??) - 105 (why no 120? or 160?)
Another super tele-zoom appears in the mix......60-600mm at F4.5-6.3...10X! .....F4.5 is possible at the shorter FL..I wonder how heavy it is and whether it uses a 95mm filter thread?

Sigma are trying to cover all bases in the tele-zoom world all by themselves.....not long ago there were just the old Sigmas going to 500mm...

There's a good choice out there now!
Dave's clichés
The filter size for the 60-600 is 105mm. Confused
The 82mm for the 70-200 is a first but all the modern 16-35/24-70 lenses already have this size anyway, so it makes sense to have a common filter size - only 82mm instead of 77mm. Smile
The sumo fighter
vs lighter and faster voigtlander 40mm 1.2

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)