NEWS: Sigma releases a crapload of new lenses

sumadaz wrote in post #7441875
Why can't the 18-50mm be constant f/2.8 with OS? That lens would absolutely KILL.

Probably OS is very cheap to make ... cheaper than designing a constant f/2.8!
this lens needs to fight the cheap Canon 18-55IS kit lens.

The 10-20 f3.5 looks very interesting. But I'll stick with the 11-16 f2.8 thank you.

hk300 wrote in post #7442556
Probably OS is very cheap to make ... cheaper than designing a constant f/2.8!
this lens needs to fight the cheap Canon 18-55IS kit lens.

Kind of agree. But a 18-50 constant max f2.8 with HSM , would compete directly with the overpriced Canon 17-55 IS. THey could probably charge $600 for it and make a killing.

This new 18-50 actually competes directly with their own current lenses as much as Canon's 18-55 IS. I am guessing with the specs, it will be $300-ish. So now which Sigma do you get? 18-125, 18-50 f2.8, this new one, the 17-70, the 24-70, the 18-200 OS. So it seems strange that Sigma wants so much overlap.

The new 50-200 HSM looks like great competition for the Canon 55-250 IS, though.

they should have tried alittle harder and made 10-20 a 2.8
that would have been a good 5d 16-35 alternative

kahren wrote in post #7442929
they should have tried alittle harder and made 10-20 a 2.8
that would have been a good 5d 16-35 alternative

Nah, it's a DC lens, so it wouldn't work properly on a 5D anyway. Edit: Unless you meant an alternative to a 5D + 16-35 combo.

perryge wrote in post #7442938
Nah, it's a DC lens, so it wouldn't work properly on a 5D anyway. Edit: Unless you meant an alternative to a 5D + 16-35 combo.

It would also be much more complex to make ...and since Sigma already has so many QC issues ... Not recommended!

perryge wrote in post #7442938
Nah, it's a DC lens, so it wouldn't work properly on a 5D anyway. Edit: Unless you meant an alternative to a 5D + 16-35 combo.

i meant it as a 5d+16-35 alternative yes

hk300 wrote in post #7443025
It would also be much more complex to make ...and since Sigma already has so many QC issues ... Not recommended!

much more complex to make a 3.5 lens into a 2.8? i dont think so, maybe a little bigger to let some more light thru, they probably just didnt want to as that is scheduled for a next year, or year after next, they need to milk you for your pennies slowly or they would all be out of jobs long ago

I want an OS version of the 17-70 but that would be too I guess

Hmmm......The new Sigma 10-20mm that they have announced is very interesting. Especially since I was looking at getting the old version in the spring. Perhaps I'll see what they are going to sell this new one for, and if it is with in reason, get it instead. I like the fact that it now has a constant aperture.

From what I've read, it's not really "HSM", just a quieter micromotor that Sigma stuck in the lens so it could focus on the Nikon D40/60 bodies.

dingelingyi wrote in post #7442164
http://www.sigmaphoto.​com …s.asp?id=3328&n​avigator=6

this one is constant 2.8 with hsm but no os

Whats the pricing and release dates of these lenses?

Did anyone actually compare the 10-20 w/ the Canon's 10-22?
I see an ugly yellow shift that cast the sky w/ a slight warm color (blue sky and warm color don't mix very well)

I don't think I will buy a Sigma product again unless they change their coating formula.

Might of traded in my old 10-20 if it was 2.8.. Don't think its worth it for 3.5 unfortunately. Looking alot at the existing sigma primes.. hopefully something new there in the next year or so..

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/uwatest

mahoro wrote in post #7444732
Did anyone actually compare the 10-20 w/ the Canon's 10-22?
I see an ugly yellow shift that cast the sky w/ a slight warm color (blue sky and warm color don't mix very well)

I don't think I will buy a Sigma product again unless they change their coating formula.