I think 24-600 F2.8 to F5.6 will be alot more interesting...
Now I just want an EF mount camera with this dual pixel tech paired with an electronic view finder. Clearly, current mainstream PDAD just CANNOT deliver consistent accurate results...
I think DPR is being really unfair on the focus issue about this lens.
This Canon 19-point AF module(used in 7D and 70D) is not really known for its extreme accuracy. The same can be said for the rest of the Canon APS-C AF modules. Lensrentals did a excellent test on Canon bodies, and it can be read here:http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-camerasIn the test, they are using the 28mm f/2.8 IS, which is less demanding then this sigma, and still get very inconsistent AF results.
I highly suggest DPR do the same AF "evaluation" with a fast prime on the same body and tell us how consistent the result is. I suspect that those fast primes are so soft at F1.8 that it's hard tell slight focus consistency.
The reality is that current PDAF sensors simply does not have resolution to satisfy ever higher pixel count main sensor. With CDAF, this lens will be sensational.
Can DPR do a formal comparison between ACR and Iridient on X-Trans. ACR does not seem to do Xtrans justice, no matter your sharpneing work flow. This is especially try for foliage and low contrast details.
See example here:http://www.thevisualexperience.org/web/processing-x100s-raw-with-iridient-developer-part-2/
hey the reviews are free, and you don't have to read them, and let's face it, some of them are pretty damn funny...review of the 200-500 F2.8 on amazon came to mind...
only if it can shoot raw...
woooow nice, can you tell me where did you take this picture?
Yay time to get a discounted RX100 Mark1!!
First serious review here:http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1609
Sigma has done the impossible again!!
If they glue this lens on a DP body, let Leica place their red dot on it, it would be bargain selling at $11799 (at least relative to the F3.5 to F6.4 Leica just released at 3K...)
This Tammy and the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II wereannounced around the same time. Yet the Canon still outsold the Tammy by 2.6:1 according to number of reviews on BHphoto.
I guess the $1000 price difference and image stabilization are still not enough to overcome brand association...
Based on the current US internet infrastructure, there is no way you can run such a data and processing intensive software on the cloud. A 6-8 image pano tiff from my D3200 can easily go pass 100MB. That will take like 10 mins to upload with my 50 dollar/month internet collection. Loading the software live to the local computer is not much better either.
My guess is that the "bulk" of the software will still be entirely offline, and only a periodic validation is required. This kind of online validation has already been defeated on Microsoft Windows.
So in the end, more people will move to pirated versions, since it does not require a periodic internet collection =).
As a newbie photographer, Lightroom already does more than enough for me, and it's priced fairly. I guess CS5 will be my last CS...
Way to GO SIGMA!!! Their recent releases had all been top notch, and this one takes it to the next level. Finally, we see some real optical break through!With this, we are one step closer to the eventual 8-400mm F1.8!!
DonSantos: What aperture is the mtf measured?
It seems to me it's still less sharp than the NEX7 on the dpreview comparison widget... You'll wonder if Nikon really did left the filter out.
Well it looks like it's still less sharp than the NEX7 based on the dpreview comparison tool...
Base on Dpreview's studio comparison, the D7100 is still less sharp than NEX7
Based on this comparison, from a pure pixel peeping stand point(noise and ressolution), it's not any better than my $400 D3200. Of course, these two camera are in totally different class outside of pure sensor quality.
I think C1 looks sharper simply because C1 apply higher default sharpening and saturation. It would be better to compare the "tweak" settings across softwares. Comparing default settings in raw converters are like comparing OOC JPG across cameras, not very meaningful.
Let's put it this way:Your 35mm F1.4 L is usable/dreamy at best at F1.4, and pin sharp across at F4My Sigma superzoom is "usable" at 250mm, and excellent at 28mm.
See the pattern? Every lens has it's degree of freedom. High end primes and zoom give you flexibility in aperture, superzoom like this give you flexibility in FoV. All lens perform bad at their extremes, like the example given above.
Some ppl use their camera to create art, some use it document things. These superzooms are great choices when are you trying to document things on the go.