New Sigma 50-100mm f1.8

[CanonMik]

New Sigma 50-100mm f1.8 announced not long ago and we should be able to get in April/May.

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/23/sigmas-50-100mm-f1-8-art-lens-first-telephoto-zoom-constant-f1-8/

Michael

[spootz01]

she looks perty...

As someone who shoots APS-C this is a really good alternative to a 70-200 2.8 just for the shallower depth of field. personally I would have liked to see it go to 150mm on the long end but then that would have made it even bigger and more expensive so I guess beggars cant be choosers.

Cheers,

S.

[swifty]

Some thoughts.
Great for crop sensor users if you want a versatile portrait zoom.
You can essentially get the equivalent images to a FF and 70-200mm f2.8 zoom combo but there's very little weight saving if any and you give up lens stabilisation and some reach.
I can only speculate whether the addition of stabilisation may affect the lens design to adversely affect the bokeh characteristics. Ironically the only mounts that this lens is currently offered in doesn't have sensor based stabilisation.

On the up side, the combo should come in much cheaper than the FF counterparts. You also get close to complete AF frame coverage on crop sensors and the f1.8 aperture will enable the AF to work longer as you approach the lower limits of the AF EV working range.
It also remains to be seen what the actual image circle produced covers. The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is almost usable at 35mm on a FF sensors. Its possible that the 50-100/1.8 could be quite usable at some of its focal lengths with a modest crop or change of aspect ratio and not just a 1.5X crop.
Which raises the question, could one consider this crop zoom lens for a FF camera?
The D810 already has a very usable 16MP in DX crop and its successor might well have over 50MP producing a 20+MP DX crops, equalling the Nikon D500. So if much of the lens work with an APS-H crop for example, you could have something similar to a 65-130 f2.3 on FF.
Lots of questions to be answered.
But well done, Sigma.

[spootz01]

Swifty you make some very good points.

Personally, after doing some more research, I don't think you could justify this over a 70-200 f2.8. Take Sigma's offering, it is a fantastic lens by all accounts and in the US it is only $49 more than this. The only things you lose out on is the wider aperture and the shorter wide end. and for those sacrifices you have gained an extra 100mm reach and you have future proofed your kit should you ever want to upgrade to full frame.

I know some people will find it initially attractive, people such as myself, but I know if I had made an impulse purchase I would end up regretting it later on.

Cheers,

S.

[swifty]

I think the jury's still out pending how the lens actually performs. The 18-35/1.8 is getting some pretty high praises.
Also street price should eventually stabilize to a wider gap to the 70-200 Sigma offering but time will tell.
But you may be right. Overall the 70-200/2.8 will seem more logical and better justified for most ppl and better for more genres of photography. But if you're picking up the 50-100/1.8 mainly for portraiture there might be a good case for it over a 70-200/2.8.

[arthurking83]

.....
It also remains to be seen what the actual image circle produced covers. The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is almost usable at 35mm on a FF sensors. Its possible that the 50-100/1.8 could be quite usable at some of its focal lengths with a modest crop or change of aspect ratio and not just a 1.5X crop.
Which raises the question, could one consider this crop zoom lens for a FF camera?
....

... So if much of the lens work with an APS-H crop for example, you could have something similar to a 65-130 f2.3 on FF.
Lots of questions to be answered.
But well done, Sigma.

It's strange that Sigma introduces both this lens and the new APS-H sensor camera at the same time, yet they have no dedicated APS-H capable lenses at this time.
I guess that they expect customers to use 135 format lenses.

Sigma should create a table of (all) compatible lenses for their new camera .. ala Pentax has done for the new K-1) listing any of their DC(APS-C format) lenses that may work reasonably well with the new Quattro H camera.

Sigma's only reference to lenses for this new camera is this(on the Quattro H web page):


.... The Sigma sd Quattro is manufactured to use the Sigma Global Vision lenses, renowned for their super IQ and performance.

I think a little vague and possibly worriesome!
Worriesome in that, if someone has any old non global vision lenses in their collection, do they not work with the new camera? :confused013
Sigma's lens engineers all seem to be on the ball(for the past few years) .. yet the cardbard cutouts masquerading as marketing execs still haven't come back from their holidays! :p

[swifty]

Good point on the new APS-H Sigma camera intro.
Now to go back to the 50-100/1.8 material to see if they specifically mention for APS-C or just for 'cropped' sensors, which could include APS-H.
Looking at the 18-35/1.8 image circles on FF (dpreview has some test shots) I can just about eyeball a full APS-H sensor in there.
Was Sigma planning a APS-H revival all along?
But of course if Sigma never planned this, the peripheral areas outside the APS-C circle could be complete rubbish.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope.. They specifically state for APS-C. So anything more is only a bonus.

[William W]

I think that two APS-C Camera Bodies and the Sigma 18 to 35/1.8 on one and the Sigma 50 to 100/1.8 on the other would be considered ideal by many Social & Events Photographers - and others too.

The APS-C kit would be lighter (weight) than many (two) 2 X 135 Format Cameras with a 24 to 70/2.8 and 70 to 200/2.8 lenses loaded, one on each of them.

For any same framing: the shallow DoF of each of those kits is "equivalent".

For the ability to arrest Subject Motion in Low-light: the APS-C kit wins by 1 and a third stops of Shutter Speed at any given ISO when all the lenses are used wide open.

The APS-C kit is a bit shy at both the narrow and wide FoV and there is a little gap 36 to 49, but the gap for many is certainly not insurmountable, neither is the lack of reach and lack of wide an annoyance for many.

***

The development of these very fast Zooms certainly implies to me that Sigma is of the view that APS-C Format is a "worthwhile" format - what I mean is they're of the belief that one doesn't need to "upgrade to full frame" as is often heard in forums and chat rooms etc.

WW

[arthurking83]

I think that two APS-C Camera Bodies and the Sigma 18 to 35/1.8 on one and the Sigma 50 to 100/1.8 on the other would be considered ideal by many Social & Events Photographers - and others too.

The APS-C kit would be lighter (weight) than many (two) 2 X 135 Format Cameras with a 24 to 70/2.8 and 70 to 200/2.8 lenses loaded, one on each of them.

.....

Sorry William .... have to disagree a little (to a lot) here.

1/. you can get 135 format camera bodies with similar to same performance levels where the size weight differences isn't all that different
(in Nikon circles of recent history was the D300/D700 twins. Basically the came camera with a few different tweaks, same build, same performance .. APS-C/135 format)

2/. as for those two lenses you mentioned:
18-35/1.8 vs Sigma's 24-70/2.8
18-35's only advantage in these spec terms is in in diameter size - 10mm less in diameter compared to the 24-70. 10mm in diameter is barely noticeable on a largeish lens anyhow!
24-70 is shorter in length(although it does extend when zooming, where the 18-35 doesn't!) and is lighter by the narrowest margin of .. (whatever 0.7oz means to anyone! :p)

As for the (Sigma)70-200/2.8 compared to the 50-100/1.8 .. again:
70-200/2.8 is definitely a lot longer physically, as you would expect considering it's 2x the focal length! .. and it has optical stabilisation(OS).
50-100/1.8 is wider by an insignificant margin of about 18mm or so .. no big deal again, and the 50-100 is also heavier .. which is very strange considering that it has no OS, is shorter in physical dimension and has one fewer glass elements!

I think the reason for this discrepancy in size weight, which counters the assertions you've made is almost 100% likely to be a design decision that Sigma have made here.
And that is the lens needs to perform better than the equivalent 135 format lens, and not for any other reason that to fulfil a self inflating marketing strategy for the lens .. and for the 18-35/1.8 too.
That is, if the lens outperforms the equivalent 135 format lenses in terms of sharpness and other qualities, then the resultant internet chatter will become a more powerful marketing force than Siogma could ever dream of internally!
And it'll be free(of charge) for Sigma to watch it unfold as well.

I think the issue is that Sigma intentionally made these lenses larger than they otherwise (physically) had to be. The larger the lens elements, the better the resultant quality(for a given time in technology).
They did the same thing with the 50/1.4 Art lens which is significantly larger than Nikon's and Canon's versions .. but (not coincidentally!!) similarly sized to Zeiss's 55/1.4 Otus lens.
Those two larger 50's need not (physically) be that large, other than to allow for greater quality results in the images.
I think the same design principles have been used for both those two fast Sigma zooms.

So, what I reckon may happen(and hope that this will happen) is that other lens manufacturers may take up the challenge Sigma has laid out, and follow suit in one way or another.
That is, create similarly specced lenses that are smaller and lighter, or maintain the size weight and spec them higher up(either faster aperture, or more focal length range .. or whatever).

[William W]

Arthur,

The commentary was not precise enough.

The comparison/contrast which was being made was between the two Sigma Lenses mentioned and the primary manufacturer's lenses which are available (i.e specifically Nikon's and Canon's 24 to 70/2.8 and 70 to 200/2.8).

Specifically I was making that contrast/comparison because Nikon/Canon seem to have not made TR&D towards similar very fast APS-C Zoom lenses and that's where I think Sigma is taking advantage - as third party lens manufacturer with a unique product.

WW

[William W]

. . . So, what I reckon may happen [ . . ] is that other lens manufacturers may take up the challenge Sigma has laid out . . .

Yes.

One point of the commentary was that Nikon and Canon may see this as a challenge to their Lens TR&D.

WW