kimchiflower: It's a shame these Sigma lenses are unnecessarily large on a m43 body as the image circle will cover the larger APS-C sensor of Sony's NEX.
On the plus side, I assume this translates into better corner sharpness for m43 as the corners of the image circle will be further from the edge of the frame.
But they are designed for APS-C sensor, so they have to be necessarily larger. For smaller sensor (MFT), the same FOV and DOF would require a 45mm f/2 design.
Van Boxtel: Will there be a Fuji X mount in future?
Sigma should seriously consider X-mount as Fuji's lenses are priced high and offering low cost solution will be excellent marketing in the brand. OTOH, with Sony, this 60/2.8 will meet 50/1.8 OSS which is only about $50 more, has OSS, and is 1+ stop faster for low light photography, and is an excellent lens.
roy5051: What on Earth is DN Art?
DN: Sigma designation for mirror-less lenses.Art: Sigma lenses type ("Contemporary", "Art" and "Sports")
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
While I won't mind f/2.8 zoom, I think faster primes are a better option, especially at 35mm and 50mm. So, instead of a 16-50/2.8 (which I have and can use on NEX, I would rather carry 20/2.8 (pancake), 35/1.8 (tiny) and 50mm/1.8 (could be smaller) and have a 1+ stop advantage at Focal Lengths where it matters.
cprevost: They will sell tons of these. Nothing else like it close to this price range. Hoping it goes down just a bit in price when it actually hits the street. If it's as good optically as the other two they'll have a hit. For many of us 60mm on micro four thirds is a focal length that doesn't get a ton of use so paying hefty prices for one doesn't make sense. Hoping it makes a fine portrait lens.
I love the depth of field and subject isolation I can get on my oly 45mm. How would this lens compare? I know it doesn't open as wide but would the focal length make up the difference?
DOF on APS-C with 60/2.8 will be practically the same as 45/1.8 on MFT (within an inch at about 8 ft).
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.
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.