Am I the only one who wants to see a full frame GR?
I'd want something like the sony RX1 but with the ergonomics of the Ricoh GR and much more compact f2.8 lens. It was possible with the film GRs of old so why not digital?
It's probably a test to see if people are willing to pay for lightroom on a subscription basis. Hopefully no one will.
Photographer Jonathan: I can't wait to hear how it performs, I am hoping it's super sharp with amazing contrast, and it gives the Otus a run for it's money, I am also hoping that the price is similar to the old Sigma 50 witch I own, they should advertise it as the Canon L killer because i'm sure it will be better than the 50 L witch is over priced and under performs, The Canon 50 1.4 is nice just because of it's small size and weight, I wish Sony could make a 50 1.4 the same size for there A7/A7r, I also want to see a new Sigma 24/70 f2.8 IS, or f2, the only thing I wish is that Sigma was making there new lenses weather sealed, that is the only place that Canon has an edge, but image quality is first priority, I love my Sigma 35 f1.4 Art lens, and I also love my Sigma 85 f1.4 that I bought for 1/3 the price of the Canon 85 L, and for me it wasn't about the money, I would of bought the Canon if I thought it was better, but I couldn't deal with the slow focusing, anyway, go Sigma, and lookout Canon and Nikon
The 120-300 "sport" is weather sealed, so they do have the technology. There's no reason why a sigma 24-70 2.8 os couldn't also be weather sealed.
Alexander Tolchinskiy: Read the news. I use lenses firm Canon, the last few years. I am sure that Sigma can not create something completely new, it would be able to competitors with Canon ef 50 f.14, both in price and in quality. I wonder how this lens will cost?Canon ef 50/ f.14 - my favorite lens
@zaakiraThe canon easily outperforms the existing sigma across the frame when stopped down to f4 and beyond. The sigma might be good in the centre but has very poor corners and borders at all apertures. Hopefully the new lens will be greatly improved in this regard.
Photographer Jonathan: I can't wait for this lens, I have a 5Dlll, and I already own the Sigma 35 f1.4 art lens, and I love it, and I also own the Sigma 50 and 85 f1.4, and I also love them, but the 85 I had to try three of them at different stores before I found the sweet one that I bought, and the 50 I sent back to Sigma for an adjustment and now it is real nice, but I have still been hoping for this new Sigma 50 f1.4 art lens, and have really high hopes for it's image quality, and i think Sigma has gotten way better with there quality control now, I would love it if Sigma advertised it as the L killer, because I would bet anything that it will have better image quality than the over priced Canon 50 f1.2 L lens, and it will probably be very close to the image quality of the manual focus Zeiss Otus, and personally I wouldn't buy a manual focus only lens, Now I am hoping for a Sigma 135 f1.8 art, and a 24/70 that is less than f2.8 with IS or a 2.8 lens with a longer focal distance, like a 24/105 f2.8 IS
I have no doubt that this will indeed be an L killer but it's extremely bad advertising to make such a statement as you're automatically setting yourself up as the inferior brand. This is the opposite of what Sigma are trying to achieve with their new art line.
I've noticed on the sigma website, the weight has gone from 470g to 'TBD'. I thought 470g was too light for a lens of this size.
peevee1: "Designed with a focus on sophisticated optical performance and abundant expressive power"
But will it focus on the subject, or Nikon and Canon will break compatibility again with the next firmware?
That's no longer a problem with the USB dock and the user updatable firmware.
eaa: Min. aperture F16?That is not normal for an FF lens, where F22 or 32 are the norm.Why a min aperture even below the diffraction limit?Must be a typo (like the initially wrong weight (85 gr), now corrected to 470 gr.
470g still seems light for a lens that looks considerably larger than the old version. Would be great if it's correct though.
Hmm.. no profile for new sigma 24-105 but there is one for the tamron 150-600 which isn't even out yet.
This new model is quite a bit heavier than the old model, although it does extend higher. It's more in line with the 055 series and should have been named as such IMO.
This is a sure sign that I've just purchased the old model.
Oh well, at least amazon have a good returns policy.
danijel973: This is not really impressive as I duplicated this result with a simple "sharpen" command in Gimp. Also, you can't get more information than you put in, meaning that you can't create detail from blur. You can clarify detail that's already there, but I would always prefer to do it optically to the maximum possible extent, and only then use software to try to go even further. Intentionally designing bad lenses and relying on software to make them mediocre is not a good idea.
You need to read up on the theory here as it's pretty in depth and complicated. Even though the original image is blurred, ALL of the information is still contained within the image. It's recovering this information that is the problem. The best we can do is to make approximations. Generally speaking, better the approximation, the more computational power that is required.You can think of the sharpening filter as a very crude approximation.
HelloToe: For comparison, here's the same shot with a simple unsharp mask filter applied to it: http://i.imgur.com/8IrZrnP.jpg
From a detail and sharpness perspective, I'd say the USM wins handily, with a much more natural-looking result.
What the deconvolved image gets you is chromatic aberration correction. A lot of the twigs in the image have pretty severe red or blue bands at the edges. The USM doesn't correct that at all, but the deconvo does a pretty good job of fixing it up.
Really? To my eyes the test image looks way better than your USM image in every department. And FYI, unsharp mask is a very simple type of deconvolution.
zorgon: I find that my sigma 35mm on my canon 5diii front focuses quite badly when using 61 point AF mode yet focuses perfectly when using single point AF. Maybe I'll see if this update fixes things.
UPDATE: I've just installed the new firmware (1.02) on the 35 1.4 and no improvement on the issue mentioned above. It's probably a camera specific issue as it also happens with my canon 85mm 1.8. I guess I'll just stick with single pt AF.
@photomanI know it's front focusing as I can go into dpp to view the active focus point(s) in the final images and none of them are in focus. Do you actually own this lens and camera combination yourself?
I find that my sigma 35mm on my canon 5diii front focuses quite badly when using 61 point AF mode yet focuses perfectly when using single point AF. Maybe I'll see if this update fixes things.
peevee1: The $800 kit with 11-27.5 can be easily replaced by $300 Oly TG-2 or Pentax WG-3 GPS (f/2 at the short end compensates for smaller sensor in low light). But the cameras also have image stabilization and significantly more compact (can be actually put into a pocket of your swimming trunks) and their zoom ranges are wider. With add-on lenses for TG-2 and its close-focusing capability, it is so much more capable than this Nikon it is not even funny.
"Roll back ISO 2 stops as the lens allows you and you will see differently."
No you won't. If you look through sample images of the TG-2 at different apertures and focal lengths, nothing even comes close to nikon 1 quality.
" but 25mm-equal is very useful (which AW1 does not get even with 10mm/2.8)."
I couldn't care less if it goes a bit wider if the image quality is that poor.
"See also the numbers above." These numbers have very little to do with lens sharpness or resolving power. Something which is non-existent on the TG-2
You're deluding yourself if you think that a mediocre performing 1/2.3" sensor camera can come close to a decent performing 1" sensor camera. You might as well be comparing a canon 1dx to an iphone.
It may have similar low light ability, but If you've read any of the reviews of the TG-2, you'll know that the image quality is just awful and won't even be remotely comparable to this.
Matt1645f4: call me a pessimist but it just sounds like something else to go wrong within a camera. Don't get me wrong it is an exciting and ground breaking development. i just keep thinking of all those old cars we see with hardly any electronics and the newer modern cars that are continually developing problems in their electrics.
I agree entirely with this statement. One more thing to go wrong, more complexity within the optical path to degrade image quality, one more menu setting or switch on the camera to confuse you.In the old days, you could pick up just about any film SLR and you would automatically know how to use it, you would know exactly what every lever and knob does. Camera manufacturers should concentrate on simplifying and making the controls more intuitive rather than piling on more features and settings.
Just my opinion.
Since when did dpreview start posting rumours?