[shoplink 41514 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Sony A7 camera owners will soon get an extraordinary lens (if they use it with a Canon EF to E-mount adapter). Tomorrow morning (October 16) Sigma will announce the world’s widest f/1.4 Full Frame lens you can get: The 20mm f/1.4 ART lens! And unlike the new Otus 28mm lens you will not have to get bankrupt to buy it. Current [shoplink 41514 ebay]Sigma ART f/1.4 lenses do sell for just under $1.000 (see list on eBay).
And those are the full lens specs (google translated from Japanese):
– Lens construction: 15 sheets group 11
– Large-diameter aspherical lens
– Two FLD lens, adopted five SLD lens. Correction of magnification chromatic aberration to the limit
– AF motor HSM. Adopted a new full-time manual mechanism
– Total length: 129.8mm
– Maximum diameter: 90.7mm
– Weight: 950g
– The diaphragm blades: 9 sheets and (circular aperture)
– Maximum magnification of 1: 7.1
– Thorough the flare and ghost measures
– Design distortion is very small
– The consideration of the sagittal coma flare
– Mounts for Canon, Nikon, for sigma
– Suggested retail price of ¥ 162,000 (over-the-counter price of around ¥ 120,000 in the lowest)
via Digicameinfo, via Mirrorlessrumors.
157 Responses
Somehow the management of Sigma is strange.
Not because I am a Sony FE user – I mean the sales of A7 cameras should be reason enough to jump onto the FE lens horse. What are they waiting for?
Awesome lense btw, if it keeps what the “Art” line is promising in advance.
Many (including myself uses both Canon/Nikon -and- Sony gear). I’d buy the EF version before a FE version anytime since I can then use it on all my bodies.
I’d love to know how you can use EF lenses on a Nikon camera.
If you had said you would buy the F-mount version and use it on all your bodies, I might have believed you.
He meants using either Canon or Nikon, and E mount camera, not both Canon and Nikon, and in his case it’s Canon and Sony so he want EF mount lens. There is no way to have AF in 3 systems.
No, that’s your assumption. He clearly said “on all my bodies”.
Also, I never said there was a way to have AF on all three systems.
Agreed. For AF lenses, the Metabones is fantastic but still not as good as native. And, adaptors cause weather sealing vulnerability.
plus they make big clunky lenses bigger and clunkier. sort of the opposite of the ethos behind mirrorless systems. I have so many adapters I’m picking out of my hair.
What you say would also apply to native FE mount versions of the Sigma Art lenses. They are designed for SLR’s and the added bulk (length) would be the same as using a Metabones adapter.
So, the solution would be lenses specifically and exclusively designed for FE-mount. That is exactly what every 3rd party manufacturer (except Zeiss) is trying to avoid.
I suspect that it’s a lot harder to make a functional E-mount lens than one for legacy mounts. Something about OSPDAF is much more demanding of lenses especially in terms of focus control than legacy PDAF systems. For example, A-mount lenses transfer a maximum of 45 bytes total from the “ROM” (which actually isn’t entirely read-only, it contains aperture status and a few other fields). E-mount lenses transfer a 109 byte packet and a 30 byte packet at 60 Hz, plus 150-200+ bytes of additional data when the lens first initializes at power-on.
Look at Sigma’s current trio of E-mount lenses – center AF only.
That’s exactly what I thought. Big thanks to Sony for making the (AF)FE mount so complicated, that no 3rd party manufacturer (except Zeiss) wants to participate. 🙁
but I think Sony designed the electrical part of Zeiss (AF) FE lenses, so actually they’re alone
Well, I think it HAS to be complicated to support OSPDAF – otherwise, we’d just have the large legacy SLTs.
In theory a fully electronic mount should be superior thanks to Moore’s law – it’s easier to replace mechanical complexity with electronic complexity, and as time marches on this becomes even easier.
The problem is that when Sony first announced E-mount they indicated they’d be opening up the spec to third-party lens and adapter manufacturers. The reality has been that with the exception of very close partnerships (Tamron 18-200 sold as a Sony lens, Zeiss lenses), it seems like either what Sony offered as part of this program was insufficient or the requirements for signing up for it weren’t worth the effort for companies.
Sony indicates that http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/www/e_mount/en/detail.html is intended for use by mount adapter developers – yet not a single third party mount adapter manufacturer is part of this program. (Metabones explicitly states they received no documentation from Sony.)
Yep. It’s a shame.
Because Sigma can only get decent lenses with huge optics. A material war. FE users probably look for the best compromise between size and IQ. That’s more the playground of Zeiss, Voigtlander, Leica, Olympus, Fuji and Sony.
you have numbers.. facts i mean…. how many a7 cameras sony has sold?
so we can compare that to the nikon and canon mount userbase…..
It only has to resolve 4 mp for professional Jpegs. All Canon EF UWAs can do this, no need for a 1kg behemoth.
All Canons UWAs have problems with coma. Especially the EF 24mm F1.4. Given the new Sigma is sharp (bet it is) and has no/little coma it is an astrophotographers wet dream 🙂
No coma at 4mp
And sharpness doesnt matter. Every lens is sharp if you know how to use it.
Some people would eventually disagree 😉
Those people are not pros.
That’s more Confusedious than Confucius. And bollocks.
You will get eaten alive for writing that, but I’ll have to agree. Especially when looking at how overblown it is nowadays.
Mr. Rockwell, is it you?
Haha…Nice one!
BTW, your nickname is epic!
I don’t really know that much about lenses, why is this one that much more significant? Can anyone explain this to me? Doesn’t Zeiss already make a FE mount 35/1.4 which is already considered wide?
20mm vs 35mm is a huge difference
https://tjphototips.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/focal_length_diagram_river01.jpg
That’s an awesome diagram, Snikt. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks a lot I appreciate it. So it will be the WIDEST aperture focal length lens for full frame cameras on the market.
No, just the fastest really wide one. The new absolute widest will be the Voigtlander 10mm coming out in 2016.
No, it’s the wides focal length with f/1.4 aperture 😉
(focal length defines the point of view angle (how wide is the image) and aperture defines how collimated the light is (how much light enters the sensor and how much depth of field (sharp area) you get)
This would be a dream astro lens
Might be very soft in the corners at 1.4
Also most likely vignetting heaps. but I guess that can be fixed up in post. I can see people using this lens for Events, Crowd shots with no flash.
What’s that craze with fast lenses? Sensors get better and better, and we get faster and faster lenses.
“Aesthetic Look.” It’s got nothing to do with speed, once you get past the fact that its a faster optic. It’s got everything to do with the visual emotion the lens portrays….. (that’s as soppy-artsy as I get without a beer).
Crazy, right. Who needs DOF with a wide angle anyways? I shoot my 21mm with f/11 all the time. In critical situations I get down to f/5.6. I rather would like smaller lenses but these monsters. But that’s just me …
wow..that’s fast for such a wide focal length
Damn you Sigma for abandoning AMount. I have ART 50, 35, 24-105. Spectacular lenses. But I cannot complete the lineup and get completely away from Sony psychopaths.
Come one Siggy, the 24, 20, and 120-300 would sell good for AMount. Get em’ out man! Buyer waiting here.
Here we go! Sigma is beating Zeiss in every aspect imo. Will definitely buy that beast.
where is a Sony version btw? hope they will make it for e-mount though
Lol cant wait to attach my nex to it. Its gonna look like frogs mating.
I tried canon 200/1.8 on nex 5t just for fun 🙂 even have a photo of that “thing” somewhere 🙂
They don’t make any ART for E-Mount, so it might be awhile
Well, they made 3 art lenses for e mount, and they are awesome.
Ok full frame I should mention, this is a full frame lens mentioned above so APS-C doesn’t mean much here
I know what you meant. I wanted to say that, if they already had a cooperation in the past, why not in the future too?
Oh I hope they do, and Tamron as well. Tired of the only >$1000 lenses
Exactly. I am staying with nex7 and sigmas dn until cheaper optics are available in ff. Ok, i will probably buy fe55, for too long i dream about it to quit now.
I have the Loxia 50 and it’s amazing, just want some cheaper options as well
if you plan to stick with a nex-7 just get the 50mm 1.8. The 55 is better but not that much better when you compare the price.
No, no, i will buy it when i buy ff camera ofcourse. As of 50mm, i tried it, liked sigma 60mm art more, although its a stop slower. I guess i dont need both 50 and 60 focal lengths.
Well, who knows? I’d say it’s about time to start making them 🙂
Dude, just admit you made a mistake. This weasel reply makes you sound like a politician.
Your reply really just makes you look like a troll, stellar replies to other people as well. Shoo!
I suspect you think you’re saving face. You’re not.
they are sharp, and af is a bonus, but the rendering, is, IMO, sterile and boring. I’ll take Zeiss any day.
‘Rendering’ doesn’t really explain exactly what you mean. Please, can you explain what you are talking about more precisely?
it’s personal – I’d say I liked bokeh of my sigma art 35/1.4 (was creamy smooth etc) the same as for my distagon and sigma was way sharper.
It matters in astro photography. You get more dynamic range with lower ISO’s. So being able to do f1.4 will allow you more latitude in editing and bringing out shadows, especially when shooting both land and sky in the same frame.
I understand that fast lenses are needed in some cases, don’t worry; my point is that all we see is fast lenses nowadays. Of how many modern 20mm f4, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f2.8, 50mm f3.5 macro, 85 f2.8, 85mm f4, 135 f2.8, 135 f4, 180 f4 etc. do you know? These are not just some numbers I came up with, all of these combinations have existed during the film era for reasons that are still valid today – compactness and low price (or both).
Ah yes, the huge crowd of astro photographers! Right above the wildlife shooters. Both tremendous important groups no company can afford to loose.
Sony owners will be very excited when these are available in native FE mount..thanx!
Sony FE owners are not interested. They have a Zeiss Loxia 21mm/2.8. Of course it’s slower and more expensive, but, it’s a Zeiss.
That means:
It has the Zeiss POP
It has the Zeiss colors
It has the Zeiss built quality
It has the Zeiss badge
No need for an FE Sigma.
I like anyone else love zeiss glass, but the sigma lineup has been quite impressive.
Please put your sarcasm reading glasses on.
#4 alone worth a lot! 🙂
You really don’t like Zeiss do you? You don’t have to buy it you know
OK, for all who did not understand the joke, in all seriousness:
1. I like Zeiss. They make wonderful lenses.
2. I’m not making fun of Zeiss.
3. I have only one serious criticism about Zeiss: mostly bad price/performance ratio
4. I love making fun of people talking about the Zeiss POP
5. I love making fun of people talking about the Zeiss colors
PS: All five points apply to Leica as well. To be honest, I think the bullsh*t of Zeiss POP and colors is just copied from the Leica world. Again: I love products from Leica (used them a long time) and Zeiss!
Admin: Why did you delete the Nissin flash post from last night?
1200 EUR for a 20mm/1.4. That’s awesome! Are you listening Zeiss?
Well, considering that similarly priced Zeiss FE AF lenses are designed by Tamron…. Yo, Zeiss, 1951 called, it wants it focus system back!
*Yawns*
Sony/Tamron involvement in the Batis design process would not surprise me, but this claim remains unproven. Remember that Sony owns part of Tamron.
Originally I thought the Batis lenses were designed together with the FE 55/1.8 (by Sony/Tamron), and Sony decided there was more money to be made with pure Zeiss branding.
But now that I own both Batii, I’ve noticed that the IQ is much, much higher than the 55/1.8.
[citation needed]
Interesting. When can we expect the Tamron 1.8 version?
1. Even the best sensors (A7S) degrade image quality above base ISO. So, fast lenses are not that important as in the folm days, but they offer still a serious benefit.
2. Shallow depth of field.
Hmmm.. that was simple, right?
Your patronizing attitude is getting tedious.
I wonder if it’s actually any wider than the Leica’s 21/1.4.
at least it’s autofocus, it’s 1/6 the Leica price, and it has the prestige of Art series
Why?
Well it can’t be 20.00mm, not even 20.10mm I’d say. We’d be lucky if it were within 21mm, like 20.80mm, but if it goes over the 21mm mark then who knows.
You mean, that their claim that they launch the world’s widest f/1.4 AF lens isn’t true technically? (regardless of AF/MF) If that’s the case, who cares?
I mean, it wouldn’t change a single bit of the awesomeness of this lens announcement.
If it is really not the “first”, it is at least the first that is actually accessible to most customers, if you know what I mean.
Oh yeah, I didn’t notice the “AF” part, but that’s what I meant.
Very nice lense. Lets hope we all get stuff like that for FE-Mount soon 🙂 But since the voigtlander anouncment a few days ago, i am just looking forward for the incredible 10mm lense of them. TEN MM 😀
950g? No thanks. A 20/2 or 1.8 that’s much smaller would have been more practical.
No problem, buy something else.
Don’t really see the point of complaining about the weight of this lens, or any of these f/1.4 Art lenses. They are designed to give the best optical bang for the buck. There are plenty of slower, lighter lenses available.
With awful bokeh. These lenses are sharp, but the bokeh stinks. IMO.
Like quite a lot of Leica lenses I have used.
Summilux 50mm/1.4 ASPH lovely bokeh
Summicron 35mm/2.0 stinky bokeh
Funny thing is, the Summicron is called the king of bokeh. LOL
Interesting that you are prepared to comment on the bokeh of this lens before it’s released.
Please, keep ’em coming.
LOL, good one! Haha…
LMAO! Hahaha (Maybe he is a Sigma beta-tester gathering some inputs here at the comments)
Based on the 24, 35 and 50 Art’s, Sigma has a look that’s really sharp, with no punch and harsh bokeh with busy backgrounds. I expect the same thing from this one. It would be nice if that weren’t the case, but I doubt it. It’s the Sigma look, just like Zeiss has a signature look, Leica has a signature look, and so on. If you can’t see it, well I don’t care.
I think that’s more likely a reportage lens, rather than a lens for posed photography, so bokeh is irrelevant. You wouldn’t normally shoot a posed portrait with a 20mm lens anyway.
I’ve never found a manufacturer that has similar bokeh across the entire range of their lenses. Please, tell me which one does?
See Walter Mandler designs for Leica. Geez, do I have to draw you a map? If you can’t discern a familial similarity in the way the lenses draw, there’s nothing else I can do. Cheers.
That’s a BS answer. You can’t name a manufacturer that has similar bokeh across their whole range, can you?
I guess everyone can see you’re full of **** now.
I never said anyone had it across their whole range, I singled out the Sigma Art primes. Leica and Zeiss have lenses that do have similar bokeh but you seem to have difficulty identifying those characteristics. Look at Sonnars or Distagons – similar rendering and bokeh on lenses spanning decades. If you can’t see similarities that’s your problem, I relly don’t care what any random internet strangers think of me. This is silly, I’m exiting this conversation. Cheers.
My point, which other people seem to get (judging by the upvotes), is that your assumption this will have bad bokeh is fallacious.
Yes, Leica and Zeiss may have lenses with similar bokeh, but not across their entire range. That would be a very difficult thing to achieve across various focal lengths and designs.
The Sigma lenses are sharp but the rendering is sterile and boring.
Thank you Professor Dynamo.
Your proclamation upon a lens that you’ve never used has been noted.
???
All what I saw from the f1.4 Art lenses and the little 30mm/2.8 (APS-C) is wonderful sharpness, lifelike 3D POP and beautiful colors. Can you explain what you mean by sterile and boring?
35mm f/1.4 Art renders on par with Canon and Nikon, but not nearly as good as Zeiss or Leica. Even the tiny Loxia blows it out of the water rendering wise.
Every time a discussion circles around abstract characteristics like “rendering” or “POP” or “boring”, any sane argument gets punched to dead. Make a double blind test. Look at the actual pictures NOT knowing what lens was used for.
Jeeez…. I fu*king love my Leica lenses, but these unique-Leica-rendering bullsh*t talk is really beyond me.
To deny “rendering”, or any such terms, is to deny that different lenses have different bokeh characteristics.
“Bokeh characteristics” may have many parameters, but they are at least some kind of specific.
“Rendering” is totally abstract. Of course there are differences in the rendering of every lens. But what means better rendering?
Again: Doing blind tests, then we may talk about rendering. Otherwise most discussions about it turn out pointless. That’s at least my experience.
You are spot on the reason that those shooting Leica etc have to go down the road of discussing area that are not measurable are simple you have to justify paying up to 5x more for the Leica 35mm F1.4 . If you cannot do this by any quantitative measure {and they can’t}
you have to start clutching at straws
Here is Zeiss aficionado Lloyd Chambers’ conclusion about the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art:
The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM must be considered one of the finest 35mm DSLR
lenses available today. The sharpness and contrast, bokeh, and
correction of color errors is first rate. The resulting images have a
terrific “3D” look to them.
http://diglloyd.com/prem/s/DAP/Sigma35f1_4/conclusions.html
Exactly. This lens has exactly what gear wh*res call “Leica-3D-POP” or “Leica-Rendering”. If you look at the pictures, not knowing what lens was used, it plays in the same ballpark as a Summilux or Distagon.
Get Trioplan. 🙂
Haha….
Fun fact: The Trioplan is more expensive than the Sigma.
Pop is expensive 🙂
Ever tried one? Or do you based your informed opion solely on some web images? I got the 35A in Canon mount and it creates stunning pictures – the bokeh is very nice. And it works very well with A7R II and MB adapter (I use it on both my Canon and Sony bodies).
Interesting, but the Sigma 24mm Art isn’t particularly great compared to the 35 and 50 versions.
Considering that lens’ soft edges and borders wide open, it will be interesting to see if Sigma can do a better job with the 20mm and therefore compete with the Zeiss Loxia 21mm.
Really? Never tried the 24mm. Sad to hear.
I’ve seen this kind of lenses used in reportage, when you shoot wide open in a crowd, and your subject (in the centre) is, for instance, a protester being dragged away by police or something like that. Borders are out of focus anyway. Reportages like that are very immersive, like you’re standing right there (with 24mm f/1.4) I wonder if they’d be even more so with 20mm?
Well
to be fair as the focal length gets wider and wider designing is more of a
challenge. The Sigma 24mm is a very decent performer certainly better than my
Nikon 24mm. As for being soft at the edges wide open I have my doubts that any
other 24mm is that clever at the edges at F/1.4
That’s true, but then who really needs a 24/20mm lens that can do f/1.4? Certainly not landscapers. Astrophotographers, yes, but soft at the edges rules out using it at f/1.4.
Most of what this all boils down to is whether Sigma is making pro level optics or not. You do get what you pay for in this regard and that reflects on price. However, poorly performing pro gear is much less acceptable than mediocre enthusiast grade glass. We buy what we think we need. You can make great pictures with any ‘good’ lens – new, legacy, native or third party.
Again so much BS in this article…
– This lens is not targeted at A7 owners at all.
– This lens has nothing to do with the 28mm Otus. More similar focal lengths are already available in the Art series (e.g. 24mm, 35mm). And as an A7 owner you can already get the mini version of the 28mm Otus, namely the 25mm Batis.
Admin needs to keep posting to drive traffic into SAR.
Comments (of any kind) are good for Google Analytics 😉
Can you please tell us what’s wrong with that? What would you do if you were running a website that is free for everyone? Not posting?
BTW: I’m quite thankful for Sigma Art lens news.
I might agree or not with the growing opinion of some users that this site is posting more and more about things not directly related to Sony cameras or even to Sony rumors. But personatly I don’t care (yet). In this case I am just pointing out to the person above, why there might be some articles “not targeted at A7 owners at all”, as he presumes. Like many of us, I don’t only own Sony, so I am happy with this kinds of nes too. 🙂
Thats what i meant. I think the first thing on such a site is keep posting. There can’t be rumors every day. But you need posts every day. Otherwise it gets boring. I totally understand this. I still think, compared to SAR, the other rumor sites are much less fun.
It’s really unfortunate that they don’t make lenses for FE. They’d be much cheaper than Zeiss and equally good or better. I still cling to my D810 just so I can use my Sigma 35mm f1.4 ART, for which there is just no match in Sony’s ecosystem.
Ever hear of the Sony Zeiss 35mm 1.4? Highly doubt the sigma is as good.
It’s not. I’ve used both and the Sony Zeiss has better color, plus focuses quicker, and has a sturdier build.
Well
the Sony is double the price it is also longer [the joys of mirrorless} and the
very fact that you are going down the “better colours” road says it all. The
Sigma has higher resolution, lower distortion, lower Chr. Aberration. As for AF
speed to use the Sigma on Sony mirrorless you need an adapter so there is no surprise
that a native mount lens will do better.
Thanks for telling me which of my two 35mm lenses is better. I couldn’t tell by looking at all of my own pictures. Now I feel much better. BTW, the Sigma focusing sucked balls on my a99 – it was way slow. Once you get past MTF curves, quality is fairly subjective, and while I thought the Sigma was a terrific lens optically, there’s no doubt (again, based on my own pictures) that the Sony Zeiss is even better.
Had to correct some things. Will go online soon again!
Sigma 50 mm F1.4 Art has been biggest positive surprises for me lately. Superb value! I’m using it on my a99. Looking forward to get hands on 20 mm Art.
But dynamic range decreases pretty quickly with ISO, though.
Also, wide angle lenses aren’t necessarily for “fitting it all in,” they are also for getting really close. So shooting at f/11, as someone said seems kind of asinine.
Since nobody else did, I’ll state the obvious: no A-mount version.
i fucking need this lens
Not coming to A-Mount, not coming to FE.
No cool and affordable Sigma / Tamron offerings for Sony, only MF and crappy adapters.
Guess who is accountable for that.
Blame Sony for that, not Sigma or Tamron.
Naturally. Sigma won’t make A-Mount lenses, since Sony isn’t willing to develop the system, and nobody cares for FE (would require a re-design of the lens).
sony menus are even worse than my website
“sony a7 users will be able to use (if they use adapter). what a bunch of bs. give me some native lenses for fuks sake
Well I hope the performance is stellar
stellar? Wait…I heard that term before. Let me think…
Noooooooooooooo!
Steve Hufflepuff go home, I am the OG of cam reviews!
Well, you are drifting “slightly” off-topic. 😉
But seriously, your comments are funny, I like them, but trying to sound more ridiculous than KR itself is doomed to failure. It is something impossible. Errm…. Mission Impossible. You know what I mean.
Got it, gotta tone it down. But accusing me of being an impostor, I won’t let that slip so easy birdman
I would never do that. Keep it up. I ain’t say nothin.
I love Birdman. Great movie!
Very nice concept, but I don’t like the brick-like weight of this puppy. The importance of a wide aperture at wide angle lenses is limited. Why does sigma aim for elephant sized lenses? Are they mimicking the Otii, which are rightfully tanker-sized because of their out-of-this-universe performance…?
Did you ever hold an Otus lens in your hand? They are way bigger than the Sigma’s.
For astrophoto weight is almost irrelevant. Sharpess, light transmission and coma is not. Hate to break it to you but not all lenses are designed for you taste alone 🙂
And yes hopefully Sigma IS mimicking the Otus series – for a lot less AND with AF!
I love the plural of Otus inflected the Latin way (which is correct, mind you, but in the internet era is fun) 🙂
I don’t understand with all the Sony FF models out there why Sigma doesn’t just make FE mount lenses?
Because they got the sales number, and they know Canon and Nikon users give them more money than Sony users. You have numbers? I’m quite sure Sigma got numbers. And that’s why they’re sticking out with DSLRs even if Sony releases a plethora of camera bodies each year.
I’m perfectly happy to go bankrupt, thank you very much.