Pro accounts don't mean Pro photographers
rfsIII: Nice pix, as always; but in terms of lens-autofocus system interaction, it looks to me like the pairing of camera and lens isn't quite nailing it when it comes to getting the eyes in perfect focus. All the people pictures look like they're focused on the eyelashes or somewhere other than the surface of the eye. Like in the marquee photo, you can see the photographer reflected in the woman's eye, but he's fuzzy when he should be sharp as a razor. Which flavor of autofocus was being used? Single point or multipoint?I wonder are we seeing a problem with the lens? Or the camera? Or a little of both?
need to mount on Sony mirrorless camera for accurate focus.
Joed700: Okay, this lens is heavier and longer than my 24-70mm f2.8, and it covers only up to 35mm instead of 70mm, not to mention it's not weather sealed. The photos showed no advantage in terms of flare compared to mine. What was Sigma thinking?
Journalists need to get in front of other journalists, in order to get clean view of subjects. Long portrait lenses are too long. 24-35mm f2 is perfect for that situation.
King of Song: Firstly I dislike and (almost) never buy zoom lenses, simply because they are inherently inferior to primes. I think that you can usually take a step forward or back. That being said, a wide-angle zoom changes my prior statement much more than a (normal or tele-zoom.)
I personally feel a wide-angle zoom is more useful than a tele-zoom, because taking a few steps backwards with wide-angle lens is often impossible when photographing a building, whereas a steps forward while shooting a model with a telephoto lens is usually no problem.
I think Sigma has been making brilliant moves lately. This very modest focal length zoom, is quite amazing. It must be understood that every zoom lens is a compromise from a prime lens. This zoom has minimized the compromises, while maintaining the advantages of a zoom. It virtually replaces 3 lenses, a 24, 28, and 35. It is certainly much more convenient than juggling and carrying 3 lenses. Although it itself, is neither small or light.
what about shooting bears or some other animals, "steps forward" can be dangerous.
JaimitoFrog: I don't buy Japanese cameras not made in Japan. One of the reasons I avoided Nikon when I started shooting dSLR more than 10 yrs ago. Nikon's entry and enthusiast level bodies were not from Japan, but Canon was.
Most parts are made by robots. Humans just put parts together.
mike emerson: What a pig ugly camera. Looks like a Zenit product!
Agree. wish it looked more like GH2.
RedDog Steve: "... our factory in Japan" ?These cameras are made in China !
"Made in China" means good quality. They are really experienced in making things.
Suntan: $1K and only 7 blades...?
I know, about $143 per blade.
only 480 grams for such a lens. I like it.
Valen305: That continuous eye-AF is amazing! I tend to miss focus on about 20% of shots with the a99 + 85mm CZ.
It's hard to know which is better without side-by-side comparison.
PerL: So would this system enable Sony cameras to shot a low light indoor sports game with a 200 2.0 lens wide open at 10 fps with a higher number of keepers than a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4s, or is it just nerd stuff?
4K video, then grab still pictures. Probably more keeps than Canon or Nikon.
mpgxsvcd: I think Dpreview raised their standards for the “Gold” award because they knew cameras like this one were just around the corner. It is almost in a class all by itself.
Chilloutbuddy: guys thinks are very simple:
Fuji has a camera in the market that sold X units. Sometime after the launch Fuji learned a new trick that can make this camera better.
Fuji has the following options:
a) Launch a new model with the new tech and call it an "upgrade"b) Wait until the next planned release to incorporate the new techc) Give a FW for free
Lets just say I like the choice that Fuji made and call it a day.
It's not only about "Give FW for free". They can sell more cameras to new buyers with new FW. Fuji is small volume manufacture, it is actually expensive to introduce another new model.
Marty4650: Would you buy a lens from a company that can't get their website to work?
Just sayin'.... this is pretty basic marketing. You issue a press release with a website listed. Then the website doesn't work. This doesn't bode well.
The website is working. May be not compatible with your system.
mosc: I would have asked, "When are we going to see APS-C BSI? APS-C Stacked sensors? "
I would have asked about alpha mount cameras or if they're giving up on it.
alpha mount cameras are in rear mirror.
Rawmeister: I already have a 24-70 F2.8. So why would I want a 24-35 F2 exactly?And please don't say for the extra stop of speed.With Image stabalization and clean 1000 ISO these days, my shutter speed is plenty fast enough?Seems ridiculous to me.
not ridiculous, just not for you.
Jun2: The pictures don't have the Leica look.
added in post processing. Check it more carefully. +50, +100 on clarity (something like that).
clarity +54. Wonder how it look like at 0.
The clarity is kind of lacking. Not sure how good the lens is. $4200 is still a lot of money. The camera can only use one lens, that lens has to be extremely good.