tkpenalty: Sigma needs to basically release a full set of lenses for the NEX line... just because Sony isn't.
Well, Sony has:16/2.820/2.824/1.830/3.535/1.850/1.8And an 85mm prime scheduled for launch this year. That would practically cover a FF equivalent 24mm to 135mm.
Then add Zeiss (12/2.8, 32/1.8 and 50/2.8), Sigma (19/2.8, 30/2.8 and 60/2.8) and Samyang lenses (which is also expected to announce AF lenses for E-mount this year).
Zooms: 10-18, 16-50, 18-55, 55-200, 18-200.
peevee1: Olympus, Fuji and Samsung already have slow 60 mm primes, all macro to add. A product manager of Sigma who decided to make the FL for mirrorless should be fired.All the systems lack cheap f/2.8 and faster ZOOMs though. m43 has a pair, but they are too expensive, others have nothing.
I picked up Sigma 70mm f/2.8 macro for $350. It is an excellent lens, however, for more serious macro, I would rather get 90mm+ focal length.
In that regard, this Sigma 60/2.8 is appealing as a portrait lens. For NEX, it will have to compete with a very good 50mm/1.8, however. The price on the Sigma is great. And if the optical qualities match the 19mm and 30mm lenses, we're looking at perhaps the best trio for value and quality.
Stacey_K: I find it comical when a camera system has a slew of amazing zooms, people complain "where are the primes? All I want are prime lenses." So them a camera system comes out with a bunch of nice primes and people bitch "We want zooms" lol
As I grow into photography, I'm appreciating primes more. As a novice, I did favor zoom lenses more although they also make more sense to those with limited budget. However, this trio (19, 30 and 60) from Sigma is very impressive, more so for the relatively low price tag on all of them.
ZhanMInG12: No aperture ring and dof scale on the e-mount version. AF simply isn't necessary for something with an 18mm FOV, you can zone focus wide open and after f5.6 it's just point and shoot.
But, zone focusing isn't about accurate focus either, it is about acceptable focus. Far more accurate focusing can be achieved via Focus Peaking (and since Sony E-mount system allows Live DOF, you will see "the zone" highlighted).
peevee1: So no stabilization on either?
1/20s is possible under very low, indoor light. But then, with only 12mm for focal length, that isn't an issue at all.
HBowman: Touit is about the dumbest name I’ve ever heard for a lens line. Why not tweet or trout ... wtf ??!!
That is because you don't know what it means. Your name has a meaning and can be distorted as well.
wayfarers: No DOF scale for zone focusing? The first ever in a prime lens in this price bracket?
Use Focus Peaking for the purpose.
DotCom Editor: Call me a skeptic, but I don't believe this for a second.
The parcel's camera always seems to have a perfectly unobstructed view. The camera is never facing down. The box is never in the middle of a stack of other boxes. The lighting is always perfect. The parcel is never in the dark. The white balance is always perfect regardless of whether the parcel is in a warehouse, in a truck (lorry), or outside in the sunshine. The direction of motion is always in the direction toward which the lens is pointing -- moving forward. And on and on...
"The timer circuit was set to make a 3 second video every minute and make longer videos while the box was moving"
Plenty of video is edited out. There're a few instances where you can see that, and there would be no point in showing "nothing".
yabokkie: I have a problem with the word "super-fast". it isn't. this lens is an equivalent of 24.6-53.7mm f/2.8 on Nikon and Sony APS-Cs. it's just as fast as an f/2.8 zoom on 35mm format.
p.s., it's a 25.8-56.4mm f/2.9 on Canon APS-Cs. the real range and f-number may be different that we will likely have a slightly narrower range and less fast zoom.
yabokkie's last straw is that he/she wants to ignore ISO as affecting exposure.
> we are talking about shutter speed when taking photographs
You "were", until your ideas turned out to be mere assumptions.
> so you get that fast speed at lower image quality?
At least now you're getting over "exposure" issues to IQ issues. But, APS-C and FF aren't that far apart in those terms, especially when you're willing to compromise IQ on FF just so that you can match the exposure with APS-C.
>I would like to comfirm that since same ISO doesn't get same image quality on different format
You're making the same excuse that another person did below. By assuming you can bump up the ISO on FF, what you're really acknowledging a flaw in your assumptions. You're bumping exposure and then claiming that as long as we ignore the ISO used, we've established "equivalence".
yabokkie, what exactly is exposure based on? Let us start there.
>it's physically impossible.
An APS-C camera at 18mm f/1.8 will be about a stop faster than a FF at 28mm f/2.8 at same ISO. The DOF and FOV will match, however.
Also consider a FF with 200mm f/2.8. Assume ISO 100, spot metering and a shutter speed of 1/1000s. Next, if the camera allows an APS-C crop mode, do you think the shutter speed will drop? After all, in crop mode, the FOV and DOF will match that of 300mm f/4 on FF.
Fast for exposure.
Lift Off: While it is true that, if you stop to think, this is comparable to making a constant f/2.7 lens for FF, one has to applaud Sigma's effort and will to push the envelope.
I think Sigma deserves credit for delivering something the big guns have either not thought about or have been counting beans.
That being said, I'm not sure if its cost and 2x zoom will be at play. Now, if it does offer excellent performance at f/2, if not f/1.8, some of it may be overcome.
mpgxsvcd: The dpreview comments make it sound like this lens will act like an F2.8 lens for light gathering. It will act just like an F1.8 lens for light gathering.
We're not talking IQ, but exposure. If you've to increase the ISO on FF, you're trying to match the exposure rather than not having to do so (the idea behind equivalence... as in DOF).
Which means nothing when it comes to exposure. It is an f/1.8 lens for exposure, an f/2.8 lens for DOF.
falconeyes: There is so much more to an EVF which can rival an OVF, e.g., closer to 3 MP (iPad) rather than 1.2 MP, closer to 70 Hz rather than 40 Hz refresh rate, a true contrast ratio of closer to 15 stops with dimmed, still readable GUI. A lack of lag (i.e., less than 20 ms). And not to forget, combined to an AF which can actually track fast action.
So, does DPR need to report every and any minuscule progress in the field?
Because it matters.