Reading mode: Light Dark

Would Like to See Sigma Make Gap Filling Lenses

Go to last post
4

4thnebula

Senior Member
Messages
2,421
Reaction score
440
Location
US
Sigma has really set the bar high in the last few years for lens making. I would like to see lenses from Sigma fill gaps that Olympus and Panasonic are not filling. Examples would be:

1. A MFT 200mm f2.8 or f4

2. A MFT 300mm f4 (f4 to keep it smaller)

Sigma has shown that incredible quality lenses can be made at fairly reasonable prices. So, unless others follow would like to see Sigma make lenses that Panasonic and Olympus are not making.

IMHO MFT will really take off in the next few years if the lenses exist.
 
I agree, some bright long primes would be welcome by me.
 
Those lenses are a little long for most M4/3, most of us want to keep the size of the kit down.
 
no text
 
After getting my G1, I used almost exclusively adapted lenses with no IS. I could hand hold up to 300mm with reasonable results. A native 300 with the addition of IS should be a cinch. Here is a shot with a Canon SSC FD 300/5.6 on the G1, hand held.





Yellow-belly sapsucker
Yellow-belly sapsucker



--
The wood is clear between the knots.
 
Agree

There are a few gaps that need to be closed. Long and fast tele lenses is one of them. The importance is that the lenses are substantially smaller than the FF/APSC equivalence. Anyone have any idea how big and heavy a really fast 300 (600 equiv) or 400 tele lens would be for the mft system?

BR

Marcus
4thnebula said:
4thnebula wrote:

Sigma has really set the bar high in the last few years for lens making. I would like to see lenses from Sigma fill gaps that Olympus and Panasonic are not filling. Examples would be:

1. A MFT 200mm f2.8 or f4

2. A MFT 300mm f4 (f4 to keep it smaller)

Sigma has shown that incredible quality lenses can be made at fairly reasonable prices. So, unless others follow would like to see Sigma make lenses that Panasonic and Olympus are not making.

IMHO MFT will really take off in the next few years if the lenses exist.
Click to expand...
 
MrScorpio said:
MrScorpio wrote:

There are a few gaps that need to be closed. Long and fast tele lenses is one of them. The importance is that the lenses are substantially smaller than the FF/APSC equivalence. Anyone have any idea how big and heavy a really fast 300 (600 equiv) or 400 tele lens would be for the mft system?
Click to expand...
The old Oly Four Thirds 300/2.8 would give you a clue as to how big a fast 300mm needs to be. I doubt there would be any savings in size and weight because of a redesign to M4/3.

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/products/dslr/lenses/300_28/ at 3.29 kg, hmm, defeats the small and light nature of the system.

Regards..... Guy
 
In my view, with admittedly limited knowledge there should be a substantial difference given the huge reduction in size between many other 43/m43 lenses. Why shouldn't this be true for also long telephoto lenses?
Guy Parsons said:
Guy Parsons wrote:
Guy Parsons said:
MrScorpio wrote:

There are a few gaps that need to be closed. Long and fast tele lenses is one of them. The importance is that the lenses are substantially smaller than the FF/APSC equivalence. Anyone have any idea how big and heavy a really fast 300 (600 equiv) or 400 tele lens would be for the mft system?
Click to expand...
The old Oly Four Thirds 300/2.8 would give you a clue as to how big a fast 300mm needs to be. I doubt there would be any savings in size and weight because of a redesign to M4/3.

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/products/dslr/lenses/300_28/ at 3.29 kg, hmm, defeats the small and light nature of the system.

Regards..... Guy
Click to expand...
 
MrScorpio said:
MrScorpio wrote:

In my view, with admittedly limited knowledge there should be a substantial difference given the huge reduction in size between many other 43/m43 lenses. Why shouldn't this be true for also long telephoto lenses?
MrScorpio said:
Guy Parsons wrote:
MrScorpio said:
MrScorpio wrote:

There are a few gaps that need to be closed. Long and fast tele lenses is one of them. The importance is that the lenses are substantially smaller than the FF/APSC equivalence. Anyone have any idea how big and heavy a really fast 300 (600 equiv) or 400 tele lens would be for the mft system?
Click to expand...
The old Oly Four Thirds 300/2.8 would give you a clue as to how big a fast 300mm needs to be. I doubt there would be any savings in size and weight because of a redesign to M4/3.

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/products/dslr/lenses/300_28/ at 3.29 kg, hmm, defeats the small and light nature of the system.

Regards..... Guy
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
MrScorpio said:
MrScorpio wrote:

In my view, with admittedly limited knowledge there should be a substantial difference given the huge reduction in size between many other 43/m43 lenses. Why shouldn't this be true for also long telephoto lenses?
Click to expand...
Other lenses gain on the size from because of the shorter register distance between four thirds and micro four thirds. Once you're beyond that into the telephoto range, the focal length itself is the determining factor in conjunction with the aperture.
 
Pretty much any 300mm f/2.8 is going to ring up at 2.5 kg or heavier, and with a ~110-mm front element diameter. That's just how they are.
 
MrScorpio said:
MrScorpio wrote:

Agree

There are a few gaps that need to be closed. Long and fast tele lenses is one of them. The importance is that the lenses are substantially smaller than the FF/APSC equivalence. Anyone have any idea how big and heavy a really fast 300 (600 equiv) or 400 tele lens would be for the mft system?

BR

Marcus
Click to expand...
The same size as it is for the 4/3 system....

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/single.html#i_300mm_f028_olympus

Same size as the Canon 300 F2.8 roughly.

Unless you consider F/4.5 - F/5.6 fast, I don't with a 300mm.

Danny.

--
http://www.birdsinaction.com
 
Last edited:
Definitely, Sigma is looking very good these days and decent long teles is something M4/3 sorely needs.

I'd love to see a 300 F4 for m4/3, or a 400 F/5.6. Preferably with a 1.4x TC too.
 
Think about gaps in the Sony lineup...

Sigma will make APC-C lenses and adapt them to m43, but they aren't likely to design a lens for m43 exclusively.
 
I would by one in a heartbeat. :)
 
[No message]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top