Anyone excited about the new Sigma 105mm f1.4 ?

On crop it will be very close to the 200f2 aprox (165mm f2)

Moncho wrote in post #18574931
On crop it will be very close to the 200f2 aprox (165mm f2)

My thoughts exactly..

plus a TC will make it a 140 f/2 or 210 f/2.8.....if it will take them

The 85 f1.2 becomes a 135mm f2 on crop, the 135f2 becomes a 200f2.8 , this will be a 160mm f2, (or about) so even in a crop body it will be tough to beat, and actually the images might be even close enough in look to the 200f2 to make them hard to distinguish.

Can't wait to see that comparison!

Will never compare to the 200... especially at shutter speeds of 1/30 handheld

ok the DPreview hands on images this thing is massive for it's length lol

I'm a size queen... maybe I do want it.

do I need it?... no... but it's ridiculously large

Talley wrote in post #18575500
but it's ridiculously large

I would expect a 105mm f1.4 to be about as large as the Canon 70-200 f2.8 with I.S., in overall volume and weight ......shorter, of course, but thicker - so that the overall volume is quite similar.

Is this Sigma really bigger than that reasonable expectation?


.

105mm front filter thread

I was excited at first, but seeing it's 1.7kg and 135 filter thread, I'll stick with the 135 1.8Art

level5photog wrote in post #18575582
I was excited at first, but seeing it's 1.7kg and 135 filter thread, I'll stick with the 135 1.8Art

135 1.8 and 105 1.4 produce IDENTICAL blur capabilities.... There will be some differences but if you have 50' of subject to background distance or larger they will be identical other than perspective which the 135 will yield creamier results.

The biggest thing the 105 1.4 has going for itself is the "pop" factor when shooting full subjects. You'll have more subject in focus and then a huge dramatic blur effect... not gradual. Thats why I like shooting 85 1.4 is I feel it gives a better 3D pop. The 135/200 are awesome but they just blow out the background.

Never shot a 105 before. I'd feel weird doing so lol... with a lens like this.

Personally, I want one. The thing looks ridiculous, and I'm fond of ridiculous gear.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18575527
I would expect a 105mm f1.4 to be about as large as the Canon 70-200 f2.8 with I.S., in overall volume and weight ......shorter, of course, but thicker - so that the overall volume is quite similar.

Is this Sigma really bigger than that reasonable expectation?

.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED Lens: 82mm filter thread, 985g. That's a massive difference.

No OS so thumbs down for me. Sad because Sigma is stepping up to the plate in optics and even as much pain and suffering as I have delt with in the past I would still give them a shot if they developed a fast OS lens in the 85 - 135 focal length. Add OS to the Sigma 85 and 135 Art lenses and I would have dumped my 85LII and 135L. Now a new Art lens that once again falls short in my books. Hoping Canon hurries up with the 135L IS.

Absolutely excited, yes.

I'm having some second thoughts here...

...this lens actually intrigues me and excites me.

I'd really like to compare it vs the 200/2.

I will be the first in line when it is become available for preorder, if the price is about the same as the Nikon version then Yes, but if it is more than that, then minus well to go with the Nikon.

I managed to handheld the Nikon 200mm f2 VR II all day without a problem, so this one is just piece of cake for me.