New Sigma has always targeted "a missing lens" niche. First it was a good crop portrait lens (50/1.4) missing in Nikon lineup at the time. Then it was the 85/1.4, perpetually missing from Canon lineup for vague japanese political reasons. Every one of their new lenses gives you a top-notch quality in a niche that is vacant at the moment. "light and compact high-res wideangle primes"? There's no such thing in Nikon lineup.
There will be people who will find this lens useful. Wedding photogs (who frequently don't have that hipster's luxury of zooming with their feet) loved the 18-35/1.8, and they will probably love its full frame cousin that replaces all those "wide-angle primes", be it bulky & expensive f/1.4 ones or non-existing cheap f/2 - f/4 compacts.
a lot is said about cropping 24mm to get 35, but, rather mysteriously, cropping fanboys wouldn't want to crop this lens at 35mm to get some reach. you can only crop images from those 24mm primes, right?
Rawmeister: Who needs it ? - I mean seriously.It's just another attempted wallet emptying exercise - hohum.
if you ever took your gear through a dense thicket, you'd be surprised to find all those stains and scratches on your filter at the end of the day. yay for harder materials. the prices are from space, though. sapphire is one thing, but reinforced glass is cheap to produce and should empty no wallets...
Digitalis32: With these filters being made of such hard material that is cut so thin, it doesn't take much to imagine what would happen if one of these shattered - which can happen if they are struck hard, from the right angle. Sapphire would tear up the front element of any lens like it was made of wet tissue paper and the thin glass will cut your fingers to shreds should you carelessly attempt to remove it.
Also, 30 layers of optical coatings, that would be 15 layers per side which raises a question... Fuji EBC coatings which are the undisputed best in the industry have only 13 layers, and 99.8% overall transmittance (I can post citations on this). Since when did Korea optics manufacturers have this kind of technology?
modern korean lenses seem to be more than capable wrt coatingssee numbers @ http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?art=129 (there is a graph for a Samyang lens in the end)
KL Matt: Would love to know what the color transmission of this and other Samyang lenses is like. Weak reds? Purple or greenish hue? Odd dips in the spectral curve? Too warm like old Sigmas?
thanks for the tip @ lens tipI've read their excellent article on lens coatings(it also says that samyang's coatings are already beyond awesome)
comments basically boil down to:camp one: "I don't need shallow DoF. My 50-150 (or 35-100) is awesome."camp two: "I need shallow DoF, so I shoot 70-200/2.8 on FF"camp three: "canon 70-200/4 is awesome lens, because I have it."
there's no camp four "I love my 50-150/2.0" because apparently we are not worthy of having a 50-150/2.0
which is of course the one lens we really need.
DSLRs are the new MF, a specialised tool for the quality-concerned.
I never cease to wonder how in the world people even see the "color of lenses" in photos that by definition have who knows what "white balance" (color channel shifts) applied to them to be viewable.
never seen anyone stick a lense on a spectrophotometer...
I'd just use dropbox if you like clouds and syncthing if you don't.
all of these "half backup, half sync" cloud solutions are bottlenecked by bandwidth anyway, so nothing a smart startup can possibly come up with can provide you with _better_ experience.
only $40 to have your camera break when you drop it, instead of just the mount.well done!
an "enthusiast" in dpreview lingo is someone who is still learning their basics. anything less than aps-c takes "DOF control" out of photography, for all practical purposes. so for beginners, aps-c kind of offers maximum ROI. and when you're past that "enthusiast" stage, you'll know what sensor size you need.
Peter Gurdes: why not f11? there is hardly anything sharp in this image.and i hope you will test with some better glass too.
to judge image quality of the camera BODY you should eliminate the influence of mediocre glass.
who cares about glass on camera test shots, really? I thought we were watching out for color rendition, practical DR and extreme contrast handling and noise. y'know, things that matter.
hahahahaha yesssssssworld doesn't need more do-nothing copyright trolls
TL;DR: "cheap drones are useless for photography"
eyedo: Thru the years,Apple has really killed off a lot of features and programs that people liked and would get use out of.Many were never replaced...
Open source software is getting my attention more these days.
Too bad nothing exists that I know of for post processing other than GIMP.
try Darktable or Raw Therapee
good to see proven 3rd party manufactureres finally getting recognised and included in the discourse. however while you mention the Mitrios+, why not make a review of the whole Phottix's innovative flash triggering system that's better than fragmented solutions most of us use? (instead of presenting the regualr Mitros as a cheaper aftermarket alternative).
babalu: I simply don't understand it . Since built-in EVF's started to get larger and better - latest examples are E-M1 ,Alpha 7R, and X-T1 , there is a clear message in it: the future will be mirrorless.There is no valid excuse for Nikon to still hold on to the overlived concept of a mirror box in a camera, no matter what sensor size we're talking about. And there is no excuse for not making adequate bodies with the control elements at the right places and an ergonomic grip to hold the camera.And lenses designed for mirrorless, meaning smaller bulk. If Nikon does not get on this wagon pretty soon, there'll be no sitting places in it for them.
there is valid excuse to hold on to OVF: Demand. Nothing invalidates OVF. People like OVF. EVF is just cheaper to make.
Still that's no excuse for Nikon to make crappy mirrorles and sell it for insane prices.
Lenses don't get smaller being designed for mirrorless (as sony's new 70-200/4 shows quite well). It eems to be the sensor size thing. A fast 70-200 is big no matter what, 50-140 is smaller and 35-100 is yet smaller.
dervish_candela: - will there be a successor to D300s?- our comment is no comment
- will you do any missimg DX lenses?- no comment
- where's roadmap?- who cares, just buy our carp
- name one reason I should not go fuji - they haven't figured the phase AF yet, phew
- will you ever answer a question with something that is not a piece of useless blah-blah?- we can definitely promise you big innovation in ways we deliver our noncommittal commentary of no comment
I'm dying to try X-E2/X-T1 with their 50-140/2.8, but I doubt that current-gen OSPDAF can live up to that magic and lightning-fast 3D-tracking AF I've had with D300s. Seriously, now that 56/1.2 is out, my Nikon glass investment and their tracking AF are the only 2 things still keeping me with Nikon.
- will there be a successor to D300s?- our comment is no comment
so the 35-100/2.8 wasn't "serious" enoughblack won't doit has to be white
hahawhat a joke competing with D7100, 70D and K-3 ? most of people who would consider those expensive high end mirrorless cameras are COMING from those "enthusiast" D7000's and 50D's and even 5DmkII's.
and we are buying into high-end mirrorles INSTEAD of our "upgrade path".
so it seems to me, that X-T1 and E-M1 really compete against D800 and 5DmkIII.
to hell with magnesium alloy bricks!