Sigma Announces 85mm ART, 12-24 F4 ART and 500mm F4 OS SPORT!

johnf3f wrote in post #18133372
That sounds nice and light - 1400 grams less than my current long lens (though a bit shorter).

I always fancied the Sigma 500 F4.5 until it's price went silly. The F4.5 (no AF with 2 x extender) and slow AF put me off. If this new lens is priced sensibly and delivers the goods then it may be very interesting. We will have to wait and see.............

Suggested price for the 500 is $5999

Pretty cool,

Been waiting to see the 85 ART.

But it's quite exciting to finally see some big primes too. That 500 is very exciting to help put some competition out there.

Would love to see Tamron & Sigma throw some telephoto primes out there to compete with Canon. We all win with competition. But a good used 500 F4 Sport sounds amazing to me, compared to the price of a used 500L. Time will tell!

Very best,

Talley wrote in post #18133351
Ya like 3100 grams eek.

That's lighter than the 120-300 (3390g) so definitely handholdable

johnf3f wrote in post #18133372
...

I always fancied the Sigma 500 F4.5 until it's price went silly. ..............

They really did. The leaps and bounds that the prices on the SIGMA lenses went up was unreal.

I got a NEW 300-800mm for $2,200.00 a decade ago, I paid about $300.00 for the original 12-24mm.

smythie wrote in post #18133430
That's lighter than the 120-300 (3390g) so definitely handholdable

Yes it's 3310 according to sigma. So the weight is slightly heavier than the 120-300 non sport or slightly lighter than the 120-300 sport. Either way yes no problems hand holding this lens which is why I'm selling it and keeping the much lighter canon version.

The Sig85 has been my favourite lens to use. And I remember the anticipation when first announced, first reviewed... and then ordered..

I'm about to relive all of that...

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18133456
They really did. The leaps and bounds that the prices on the SIGMA lenses went up was unreal.

I got a NEW 300-800mm for $2,200.00 a decade ago, I paid about $300.00 for the original 12-24mm.

R&D cost more?

What sucks for me is the fact 1200 for the 85 art is only about 200 cheaper than the 85 1.2 II. A part of me wants to nail a coffin to sigma and just move back to Canon but a part of me really wants to see what this Sigma can do.

For me... I'll let the weight determine it... or be the main factor. The Canon is basically 36oz. The 85mm OTUS that the sigma resembles size/filter wise and the OTUS is 43oz..... crazy heavy imho. I complain enough of the 15-30 weight.

Well I don't know, I had the 35 Art and it's the best price/quality 35mm, but sold it as the 24-70L is more useful for the 24mm.
But I like primes so I bought the 50 Art, sharper than the 50L and the best 50mm up to date.

I have the 85 1.2L, just did a shoot with it last weekend at f1.2 (narrow dof yes, but for frontshots or fullbody at further distance it's the best), I don't see the need to go for the 85 Art.
With the other Sigma 85 the bokeh was less nice if I remember good, and f1.2 is still a tad faster and legendary

About the 12-24 f4 Art, it's an f4... just like my Canon 16-35 f4L IS that I sold recently.
I sold it to buy the Venus Optics 12 2.8 Zero Distortion prime, this lens is more wow that the Sigma.

Although i'm a big Sigma Art fan, I'm still considering each brand according to the quality, how tempting the Art's may feel
But this time Sigma misses an important factor of their previous successes against the competitors : price point...

CanonYouCan wrote in post #18133515
Well I don't know, I had 35 Art and it's the best 35mm, but sold it as 24-70L is more usefull.
But I like primes so I bought the 50 Art, which is sharper than the 50L and the best 50 up to date.

I have the 85 1.2L, just did a shoot with it last weekend at f1.2, and don't see the need to go for the Art.
With the other Sigma 85 the bokeh was less, and f1.2 is still legendary

About the 12-24 f4 Art, it's an f4... just like my Canon 16-35 f4L IS that I sold recently.
I sold it to buy the Venus Optics 12 2.8 Zero Distortion prime, this lens is more wow that the Sigma.

Although i'm a big Sigma Art fan, I'm still considering each brand according to the quality, how tempting the Art's may feel

IF money is no object then get the Canon 35 II. It is now the best but it's also twice the price easy of a sigma 35 A. My 35A was spot on after I adjusted it... never gave any issue at all ever.

The 85A has me wanting it but like you... the 85 1.2II has character and special bokeh that is the reason itself it's legendary. Even my Sigma 85 was sharper and focused faster. Heck I sold it for $550! One heck of a lens for that price. Good thing... they are still out there but never in massive numbers which means they must be good performers.

I want the ART version for it's build quality and it's dock compatible... I was thinking they would keep the same optical performance but update the coatings and body to match.... they did NOT do that... this thing is on steroids complete overhaul.

TDP has their info updated... still no weight but you an see size wise it's a massive increase.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=1085&Lens=7​56&Units=E

.3" larger around and 1.5" longer is a massive change in optical performance. Who knows... maybe this thing is on par with the OTUS. Their press release is all advertising about pleasing bokeh... maybe they found some special sauce to make it better than the Canon and provide perfect wide open performance. They MUST have a real performer and know it.... otherwise they wouldn't price it so high.

Quite disappointing to see no improvement on the minimum focusing distance. I highly doubt I would trade my current Sigma 85mm for this, especially with them hiding the weight.

Dlee13 wrote in post #18133536
Quite disappointing to see no improvement on the minimum focusing distance. I highly doubt I would trade my current Sigma 85mm for this, especially with them hiding the weight.

I noticed that too. While still better than the Canon which to me was painful it hasn't changed at all from the previous.

I think I may just go find another good copy of the current lens. I had two copies and both were stellar performers.

Talley wrote in post #18133540
I noticed that too. While still better than the Canon which to me was painful it hasn't changed at all from the previous.

I think I may just go find another good copy of the current lens. I had two copies and both were stellar performers.

I find it hard with this MFD purely because I'm used to the 100L and 35mm F2 IS which can focus very close. The amount of times I thought the focus was dead on my Sigma 85mm then realized I was just too close

My copy is really good, AF is spot on and just as good as native glass so I'd be scared to sell mine at the risk of getting a copy that's not as good. I find the EX lenses have a certain characteristic that the Art ones don't which I really like.

Well based on weight I'm still dialing in my new long term bag. My bag stayed the same for over a year without change then the 200 F2 messed it all up. Now I'm thinking this:

16-35 F4 IS
70-200 F4 IS
Rokinon 12mm 2.8 FE
24 ART
85 ART
200L F2
1.4x III

Even though I want alot more other glass... there is no reason this couldn't keep me happy at all for another year. No way I'm keeping the 50 along with the 85. Not going to happen. would never carry both. The only thing that would change this up is adding the 135 back into the bag when I don't feel like taking the 200L for space/weight travel reasons or if Tamron annouces the 115 1.4 VC then I will do that over the canon.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18133241
Corrected, and in my haste, it read "SPART" for a few seconds!

Heck, I read 12-24 FART.

YEEEEEEEEEEHHAAAAAAAAW​WW