[Klaus]

Development announcements only it seems:

https://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/sigma-1...dg-dn-art/
https://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/sigma-4...temporary/
https://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/sigma-3...temporary/


I'm a little puzzled that the 35mm f/1.2 is a Contemporary lens
The price of the 45mm is also a little steep for a Contemporary lens

---

Albeit there is an "A" printed on the 35mm f/1.2. I reckon Sigma UK didn't get that one right.

[JJ_SO]

Again.

Two threads within days for just the same products. You want us to loose track of what we posted?

Anyway, have it your way.

The 35/1.2 is an Art lens. Some dumb idiot at Sigma just copypasted the names and now they have a problem. There's a little A-badge on the lens

At photorumors is a picture of the lens and it might be a real one:

[Klaus]

What is your problem? Rumors vs announcement.

1090g for the 35mm f/1.2 ...

[JJ_SO]

My problem is simply that it's all about the same products and that I'm sick of scrolling though all threads. And you're generating just more threads but not more real content. Redundant blurb is one of internet's phenomenon. And who reads them anyway?

I can understand a new thread when OL starts to test a lens which was announced months or years ago, but here it's the same news and a double thread is stupid in my eyes.

---

...

1090g for the 35mm f/1.2 ...

So?

28/1.4 Art: 865 gr.
40/1.4 Art: 1200 gr.
Panasonic 50/1.4: 955 gr.

What is your problem? Wanna lightweight? Don't gonna FF...

---

With the new Sigma fp-camera the 45/2.8 makes some sense - as this is FF in compact:

[Klaus]

The Samyang 35m f/1.4 AF FE weights 645g ...

[JJ_SO]

And the Canon 85/1.2 1195 gr. 

Plus, the Samyangs are throw-away glass in case something went wrong in manufacturing/assembling.

Anybody with a need or just a emotionally based desire for f/1.2 has to be punished. How can he dare to raise his head above average?

[Rover]

F/1.2 also gives some serious bragging rights, so other considerations like weight and size kinda go out of the window.

By the way, isn't it the first f/1.2 lens for Sigma? And the first f/1.2 AF lens available for any full frame mirrorless mount except Canon RF (where they have the ultrafast 50 and 85 but not the 35).

[wim]

My problem is simply that it's all about the same products and that I'm sick of scrolling though all threads. And you're generating just more threads but not more real content. Redundant blurb is one of internet's phenomenon. And who reads them anyway?

I can understand a new thread when OL starts to test a lens which was announced months or years ago, but here it's the same news and a double thread is stupid in my eyes.

---

...

1090g for the 35mm f/1.2 ...

So?

28/1.4 Art: 865 gr.
40/1.4 Art: 1200 gr.
Panasonic 50/1.4: 955 gr.

What is your problem? Wanna lightweight? Don't gonna FF...

---

With the new Sigma fp-camera the 45/2.8 makes some sense - as this is FF in compact:

Now tell us, what side of the bed did you get out of?



Wim

[JJ_SO]

Now tell us, what side of the bed did you get out of?



Wim

The usual side.

Thanks for not asking "how".

[Klaus]

Seriously - even if you have to add some extra volume/weight for FF - it is not inevitable.

The Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM has a weight of merely 445g - and because of that, it received enthusiastic feedback.
So why just accept 1kg+ as something given in this class?