Back in May I reported how Sigma would announce a new 24mm f/1.4 ART lens at Photokina and a 85mm f/1.4 ART lens in 2015. As you knwo Sigma already launched the 50mm A-mount lens can be preordered in USA Amazon (Click here) at BHphoto (Click here) and Adorama (Click here). In Europe at WexUK (Click here) and WexDe (Click here).
Well Photorumors got some tidbits about the next Sigma announcement. The 24mm f/1.4 lens will cost $1,099 and the 14-24mm f/4.0 will cost $1,199. The latter will have a 82mm filter.
Those are really two exciting lenses and I hope this time Sigma will not let us wait a year before these will be available in their A-mount version 🙁
———
Message to sources: You can send me more info anonymously by using the contact form you see on the very right of your browser. You can also contact me directly at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com.
For readers: Subscribe the RSS feed (Click here) and Twitter (Click here) stream and the Facebook fan page (Click here) in order to not miss any news!
——–
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
0 Responses
I am desperat after a good 14-24 mm. But my joy then fall apart. f.4,0 is to small. I was hoping that it could be f.2,8 or better
Yes an 14-24 f/2.8 for A-Mount would be a dream come true.
So far only Nikon has such kind of a lens…
For me that’d be fine. DOF difference between f/4 and f/2.8 would be insignificant at that focal length anyway. I’m willing to sacrifice one extra stop of light if it’ll be significantly smaller.
Let’s not forget the ability to actually use filters and the OS, of the lenses in that Focal range none of them take filters natively.
Though my Nikon 14-24mm doesn’t take filters natively there are a number of solutions. Being a bit of a tinkerer I made my own though to be honest you are quite limited in what filters are truly effective at 14mm on FF. The most obvious choice for landscapers like myself the polariser simply do not give even coverage across the 14mm , especially with regard to skies
I must admit that if there had been an F4 lens with as good optical quality, I would have chosen it I seldom shoot at F2.8 . Image stabilization on a lens as wide as 14mm is of debatable value
Yeah, they can be done through some pretty expensive and large adapters, but that’s why I said natively. And no, most don’t need OS, but is can be useful for video and for handheld work.
I am not familiar with Sony A mount stabilization how well does it work for video ? I know some other in camera image stabilization types have some issues. As for large and expensive the bought ones are both I adapted an old Cokin xpro and a bit of work with a Dremel , pretty cheap { free actually as I already had the filter holder lurking about} . As mentioned above polarisers do not work too well with such UWA lenses but ND etc work just fine.
Yes it does.
I am more talking the off the shelf solutions that are $400+ for a filter holder.
14-24 mm f4 makes sense easier to design, cheaper, small filter size and also much lighter than a f2.8 lens. I hope they raise the bar again.
For handheld pictures in low light. f.4,0 is not good enough. If you want it small and cheap. Why dont then f.example Sigma makes it wit f.8.
F4 OS vs f2.8 I will take the f4 every time. In an UWA that is.
Assuming you are only ever shooting static subjects as OS offers no help with moving subjects. OS,IS, VR or OIS are possibly the most hyped technology around its only real utility is in low light static subjects { when you are not using any camera support }or at very long telephoto when shooting lower than the reciprocal
With it’s slowish aperture It’s aimed at landscape people so the OS is helpful actually helpful. You aren’t going to shoot low light events or whatever at f4 anyways. Better use the 2.8 versions which exists in any mount.
Arguably nearly all serious landscape shooting is done on a tripod. And you are again into shooting very low light static landscapes as a it is possible to handhold 14mm lenses at pretty slow shutter speeds already. I am not saying it has no utility just it is far from a deal breaker.
Uhm ok, I was going to put a snarky comment about unless you are shooting portraits at 14mm like a moron… but I figured no one would make this dumb argument, until now. People moving with UWAs is hardly an issue, anything moving in fact. Handheld low light interiors would be the one place where f2.8 is handy and guess what!? OS is more useful there.
But nobody was talking about portraits. I like to do handheld photography of urban scenes at night.
Although I agree with you that f/4 + OS is preferable to f/2.8 without OS. But I’d choose a 24 f/1.4 prime over either, and on A-mount you have IBIS already
Yes, but that’s why they are bringing out two different lenses, including a 24mm f1.4, you don’t buy a 14-24mm if you need a 24mm f1.4…
Portraits has only been mentioned inside your head . I specifically mentioned moving subjects .You may not have noticed but there are lots o situations where objects move in low light situations. As for low light interiors as I mentioned above if you are not allowed any kind of camera support then OS/VR etc will indeed be of some utility. Though considering how slow a shutter speed you can handhold a 14mm at ,you will need to be shooting in near total darkness .
Exactly, you can use much lower SS on an UWA, so what is your point? Tell me, to stop motion blur of a subject moving shooting a) at 14mm or b) at 135mm, both on a tripod, which is going to need the higher shutter speed to freeze the subject?
If you’re “desperate” then there’s the Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8 at $1,999. You give up a smidgen on the wide end but it is more versatile. The big advantage for most folks is you’ll likely be able to pick up the Sigma for around $800 given their normal discount model because I assume the $1,199 is their MSRP.
Im consider this one. Im gonna get my self a A7s, but im not shure if its gonna be a Zeiss. Canon or a Nikon Wide angel zoom lens to that camera
If you wanna use it with an A7s why bother with this one. For 12mp most UWAs except for the worst will be good enough. There’s a bunch of Canon people trying to get rid of their old 16-35 2.8 for the new f4 one so now is a good time to just buy one of those 16-35 2.8s.
Given Sigma’s recent offers, it’s quite obvious that their target will again be sharpness over everything. With this lens you’ll end up wasting money on features that your camera body will be incapable to take advantage of.
@Admin
Full Frame or APS-C?
The 24mm will definitely be full frame. Traditionally their 12-24 is full frame, so I doubt there’ll be any changes there…
12-24mm on a APS-C I can still compromise, 14-24mm will not be wide enough if it’s on APS-C.
Unless you’re looking for a jack of all trades lens that goes from 10-200mm, you’re going to face the “problem” having the right lens for the right job… god fobid 😉 So why not get the 8-16 Sigma and call it a day? Which body do you use right now?
I just got myself a77II and I still own my a57 and a200. 18-35mm f/1.8 from Sigma is really nice for video. I’ve Sigma’s 10-20mm f/3.5 but it’s not fast enough. So I’m hoping something fast from sigma to cover the ultra wide range.
So are the shots you’re missing worth the wait?
Why not make a FE version of this lens instead? The E mount is the future. Time to forget the A mount. It is an antiquated mount that will slowly but surely lose support as time passes until its ultimate demise and discontinuance. All of Sony’s innovation is placed in the full frame E mounts. It is the only arena where they have the competitive advantage.
Because Sigma is in the business of turning a profit? Just a guess.
The huge money is in supporting Canikon DSLRs. Adding an a-mount to that mix is an easy mod. E-mount market share in comparison? Pffffffft.
I’m relieved to see that there are still places in the Internet that are connected to reality.
Exactly. You can’t mod dslr designs to FE, short of building an adapter into the lens (like samyang does). There’s only 1 ff mirrorless system at the moment (Leica aside) so the odds of them making enough money from sales to justify the R&D and production costs are slim, especially when you bear in mind that a-mount and Pentax are 2nd class citizens as is…
My guess is they’re waiting to see what happens in the long term before making a move. Ultimately, it’s Sony’s lens lineup that will shape perceptions of the system. It has the potential to cater for all markets, but at the moment it’s nothing more than potential…
I think you’re exactly right.
E mount has shorter register and needs different optical design. Sigma makes traditional lenses for full frame so I wouldn’t expect an FE lens any time soon.
Fair enough, but I wouldn’t think it’d be that hard to adapt. Just increase the register on the optics to accommodate the E mount’s shorter flange. Ok, so maybe its not that simple but it shouldn’t be too out of reach either.
I don’t believe this is true, virtually any lens can be mounted and used on an A7 for instance, using an adapter. The adapter compensates for the short mount to sensor distance by adding length to the lens, not optical compensation is necessary. So Sigma could adapt an existing DSLR lens just by configuring a proper mount/spacer without any change in the optics.
Then buy A-mount version and use the flippin adapter instead of whining.
Sony has put innovation and gained a great competitive advantage in A-Mount in the form of their SLT technology. Their FE cameras have no competition whatsoever (the only mirrorless FF), so it’s in A-Mount where a lot of effort is needed to realise that advantage. Sigma is helping with that, compensating somewhat for the slow development of new A-Mount lenses by Sony. And with new AF system (no more non-Sigma-friendly A99 OSPDAF), that could turn out great.
Having no competition is the E mount’s advantage! It is the one of the few clear advantages in the whole industry at the moment. Sony doesn’t need to invest more in the A mount, where they are lacking, they need to divest in it!
Good for Sony, bad for Sigma. Sigma’s business model is to apply 1 design to multiple mounts, which spreads the R&D costs. Sony/Pentax customers win as we get lenses that would be uneconomical to design for a single mount (eg the 18-35). That option isn’t there for fe-mount and the market is still very small. It’s also in Sony’s interests to have horses in both races…
Good comment.
SLT was a major screw up for A mount ,since its introduction Sony’s share of the DSLR market has nosedived. And please fanboys no posting of the slide that shows the WHOLE camera market projection not Sony’s as a claim how well the A7711 is doing { the A99 doesn’t even register }
Reality:
Japan: A7711 not even in the top 80
http://dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking&view=all
USA { Where the DSLR rules supreme lol} it makes it number 40 in the DSLR chart
http://www.amazon.com/Digital-SLRs-Cameras-Photo/b/ref=amb_link_358884302_21?ie=UTF8&node=3017941&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-leftnav&pf_rd_r=0PME6DBHJAXQ46GQXR6C&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1869000242&pf_rd_i=502394
UK not in the top 40
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/14335821/ref=pd_ts_zgc_ce_14335821_morl?pf_rd_p=428021747&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-right-4&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=14335821&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=0F57Q52M3XA341PW5TCW
Same old story wherever you look
Except the A77II sales have healthy/hefty margins. Canon has to sell about ten rebels to earn the profit Sony does off a single A77II sale. Plus the cheap to build A5000, and A6000 are gobbling up all of the sub $500.00 sales
Did I mention that Sony dominates lens sales for its platform, by alienating Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina. As opposed to letting third party manufacturers gobble up after market sales.
The Mac Book Pro isn’t in the top 40 either, and Apple is the third largest manufacturer is the US.
If you compared Sony’s actual profit from DSLR and Lens/Accessory sales instead of the body count you’ll realize that Sony is making a massive amount of profit from their 7% of the market.
Nikon, and Canon, are like Dell, and they push out loads of cheap junk (Rebels) hoping they’ll make a profit, and the strategy isn’t working. Their both barely profiting. Yet the Sony’s A-Mount, and the Pentax K-Mount are making loads of cash.
Sony is positioning itself as a premium brand like Apple, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Rolex etc.Canon and Nikon are more like Cheverolet, Kia or even Pentax.
Pentax operates the same way, which is why you can’t by their products at Walmart either.
If I hadn’t gone to business school I’d actually believe that BS.
When did a5000 and a6000 become A mount? 😛
You obviously miss read the post
The person you replied to was talking about the A mount.
But I agree… Sony is more like bmw and audi… but with better reliability than bmw and less pretentiousness than audi. And yes, still they’re no mercedes.
Sorry I don’t see the E-Mount or A-Mount as separate systems. I see them as the Alpha system, which is why I own, and operate all three Alpha systems (SLT, CSC, and DSLR) simultaneously.
The original post wasnt about you. It was about A mount. And no… they’re not all the same. E mount takes A mount lenses as it also takes Canon EF mount with support for AF, stabilisation and EXIF data… and it supports pretty much everything else too. That’s not a very exclusive connection E mount has with A mount.
And ever tried putting an E lens on an A body?
Whoopee ding dong the mount is different. I didn’t notice. Thank you tips.
To a Professional Alpha user the A7 feels like a compact A850, and the menus, and dials are pretty well in the sames location. The adjustment time was less than 5 minutes.
And wow is it small. I like putting my 35mm Zeiss on it and heading out and taking photos. You should try it someday. Its what people do when they’re not trolling SAR.
He doesn’t know what he’s talking about LU_CID. He hasn’t made the connection between the user interface, and hardware.
DSLR, SLT or CSC. If you know how to use one you can use all of them.
It no different than owning a Mac Pro, and a Power Mac G5. Their hardware is radically different, but the underlying interface is what the end user interfaces with.
“Just another Gear Head” He probably owns a Dell.
LOL… needs 1:1 mapping or nothing and he happens to be a mac user! Sorry, can’t explain human intelligence to those who don’t have it. You just made this a whole lot funnier.
Do you think people find it difficult to adjust to the menus when switching between digital and film cameras? 😉
People even switch between right hand drive and left hand drive when they travel.
According to you, pro photographers are some of the lowest functioning humans ever 😀
Your posts have been flagged, and will hopefully be removed. Have a good night.
I flagged them as well, as they are clearly inappropriate.
Lol crying mommy when you can’t discuss like grown ups, are you?
Please, Ignore the troll
Wow do you actually take pictures or do you spend your days trolling. The Alpha system is really the interface. The technical stuff is gibberish for gear-heads, which you most definitely are.
I doubt you are a professional.
The lens mount is irrelevant, The stabilization system is irrelevant. The ability to transition between the DSLR, SLT, and A7 is what makes the Alpha system so effective.
Any A700, A850, A900, A77, and A99 user can quickly adapt to A7, and vice versa.
Except for you because its obvious you aren’t a legacy user.
Well well… the brain-deadness that you got yourself ridiculed (likely by me) in the past is bringing you back to double or nothing today.
Your response is not even remotely connected to the topic being discussed. Learn to read.
Sony’s camera division is already larger than Nikon’s.
Sony’s Imaging division, actually earned (164.6 billion sales), and 17.4 profit billion yen last quarter which is 170 million USD in profit. They are projected to grow to (710 Billion Yen sales) 38 Billion Yen profit which is 371 million USD in profit.
30% of that profit is attributed to the A-Mount 50.1 million USD in profit, and growing 111.671 million USD in profit
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/07/31/finally-some-good-news-sony-and-fujifilm-report-rising-revenue-from-camera
http://nikonrumors.com/2014/08/09/nikon-cuts-yearly-forecasts-after-reporting-lower-sales-and-income-in-first-quarter.aspx/
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-07-24/news/51982326_1_operating-profit-biggest-camera-maker-365-billion-yen
The A-Mount has less than 8% of the DSLR market sales (camera bodies) actually earned over 15.1% of the profit. Which is why Sony bought it originally, cause it really is a golden goose. Sony generates 2x the profit per camera sale than its competitors. Pentax is about the same.
Nikon owns a huge share of DSLR sales, but is barely able generate any significant profit. They earned 187.5 billion, but generated only 14.5 billion in profit which is only 141 million USD.
Sony’s actual camera & lens business has been losing money not making profit so your 15.1% figure is wrong. Just as with Olympus , Sony has other far more profitable sectors in its domain that compensate for such losses. Olympus if they were only a camera company would have died off years ago.
Nikon’s problem is that they are in essence a true camera lens company with other interests only making up a small part of their business and in a contracting market that is a major issue. I am surprised to see how much that CSC sell fot Nikon.
I clicked the links he posted and there are many more expensive FF cameras and higher end APS way out selling the A772, in all the markets.It is ludicrous to suggest that Sony makes huge profits on cameras.
https://fstoppers.com/gear/sony-imaging-posts-loss-third-straight-fiscal-year-9349
Pentax died and have been bought over by Ricoh just like Minolta it is only a matter of time before the brand name disappears , the Ricoh name is already creeping on to their bodies
That was a really idiotic thing to say. CSC technologies will never dominate the interchangeable camera lens market, they’re essentially a niche product for those of us with a fetish for tiny things.
Its more than obvious that SLT is the way forward. When the 36mp, 12fps, A99II is launched the entire DSLR industry is going to be shaken. Its faster than a $6999.99 Canon 1DX or Nikon 4DS for $4000.00 cheaper, and every talented Sports, and Wildlife Professional worth a damn will paying close attention to this camera.
Unlike you I own an A7, and use it along side an A77II, and A99 every day. My little A77II makes it look silly, with its better ergonomics, better button lay out (WTF is up with the record button), its incredible burst rate with more usable hits than a 1DX. Its IQ is outstanding for an APS-C, and it is light as a feather. Did I forget to mention the AF speed.
However my A7 is perfect on those occasions when I don’t need the A77II/A99 or f/2.8 zoom lenses, and my subject is either still or very slow.
If mirror-less is Sony’s future were all doomed, but for all of us adults who are paying attention to Sony its their SLT that is the really money maker and has the most potential, because its revenues are almost higher, and its performance is outstanding.
Thanks, but you can prise my 24/2 out of my cold, dead hands…
The f/4 on the 14-24 is a good call. It’ll very likely be better than the Nikon… and I’ve never come across anyone say they use the Nikon one at f/2.8 anyway. AF is overrated at these focal lengths.
The comment thread on the Photo Rumors site has an owner of the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 who’s considering buying the Sigma. Obviously, it’s big, heavy, and can’t take a filter. We all knew that. He says it’s an amazing interior lens but has flare issues in the field. Go figure on something that wide…
The main issue is the Nikon is ~$2,000 and well… it’s all good if you’re a Nikon owner or don’t mind the adapter kluge – yeah, I know real photogs don’t use no stink’n AF. The Sigma should hit the street at less than 1/2 that. Sigma’s Art series has raised the bar my only concern is their alleged nagging quality control issues.
Sigma’s reputation of bad QC is still from many years back… lately they’ve upped their game with the global line, etc. Might be worth looking in to the fine print on what after sales action they will take if there’s an issue. Also, so many people use sigma lenses even though they don’t openly talk about it.
Just curious why you feel that way? I actually use manual focusing a lot more now since the advent of focus peaking; I love it, because I *know* when I have those eyes in focus, etc.
The other poster was hinting that it’s elitist to not use AF and use focus peaking. I was just saying it’s harder to do MF through an OVF than with focus peaking.
Ah, I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying. (and I agree)
The Nikon is the best UWA zoom ever made by anybody competing well with even the best primes in its focal range. I agree that I do not use F2.8 very often but there are always some situations where the faster shutter speed the F2.8 allows is an advantage.
By F4 the Nikon is excellent corner to corner at all focal lengths so I doubt the Sigm will be betetr , what it will hopefully be is smaller lighter and cheaper
Sure.. if they made it f/1.4 people might still say there are some situations where that’s useful. The benefits of making it a f/4 outweigh the f/2.8. For one people are fairly satisfied with the Nikon… Why replicate when it can be bested in image quality is what I say.
Also as sharp as the Nikon 14-24 is at f/4, a lens with a smaller max aperture can be made to perform better. The only exception might be the vignetting… can’t get around that without making the lens bigger.
Image quality might be hard or impossible to beat, but weight, size, price and the possibility of filters might be a game-changer. Or even just not so absurd looking. Usability is no less important than image quality if you ask me.
Actually, I know plenty of people that use and love the Nikon at 2.8. It’s great for astrophotography.
Astrophotography rofl
People take a long exposure of the sky and they’re suddenly astrophotographers. That’s why there are “plenty” of them.
Nikon won’t stop making their 14-24. They have nothing to worry. But seriously… the 14-24 is rubbish for serious astrophotography.
Well, “astrophotography”, or just “pretty pictures of the night sky” – whatever you want to call it – the 14-24 does a pretty good job at it, IMO. We’re probably just talking semantics here, whether or not I used the right term. 🙂
Available in a-mount in 2018…
Just in time for the a99II. ;^)
I don’t care about a native e-mount version, but Sigma PLEASE leave the OS in in the A-Mount version.
You can achieve the same result by putting A-mount lens on LA-EA, and when needed you can unmount it and use it on A-mount body.
The only major difference could be, a type of AF motor.
If it doesn’t say Zeiss it doesn’t exist to me.
Problem solved: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ZEISS-OPTIC-VINYL-STICKER-DECAL-4-HUNTING-RIFLE-SCOPE-GUN-BINOCULAR-FREE-SHIPIN-/251276872917
Now you can buy any lens. 😉
+1 🙂
If any Alpha user bought this lens they should have their camera confiscated, and immediately flogged.
The 16-35mm f/2.8 Zeiss is obvious, and only real choice for the A-Mount. If I needed a f/4 wide-angle zoom i’d get if for my a7.
Hope Sigma will update his 24-70 2.8 to ART lens soon. 😛
They are rumored to be working on a 24-70 2.0 If that were an ART lens it would be killer! I desperately need that extra stop for events, where I am already at 3200 ISO on the 2.8 wide open.
I believe that rumor is not correct.
It is impossible to have a Full Frame Zoom Lens with constant aperture F2.0 at that size. It should be a F2.8 lens.
Anyway, I hope Sigma can proof me wrong 😛
Until they start supporting my Sony FE mount cameras, Sigma can go stuff themselves.
It requires new lens designs. They have a lot on their plate right now. And Sony is only barely supporting their FE cameras.
All the more reason for Sigma to offer lenses, don’t wait for Sony to have a full lineup, strike now whole there are people desperate for lenses?
That’s a good point, but wouldn’t it be more lucrative for Sigma to produce one new lens design and have it be compatible with a huge installbase of DSLR users across every platform? (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax).
Once we see some more full-frame mirrorless cameras (and know the registration distance of each), then we’ll start seeing some lenses designed by Sigma that can be sold across different makes (with different mounts, obviously).
Maybe. But say they plan to make an 85mm lens for a camera, they could build one for FE and (at least for a while) have a captive audience with a high attachment rate, or they could build it for SLRS (all brand) and have a wider spread with relatively low attachment rate where they are also competing with OEMS. Then you have all the people who will only buy Canon lenses for their Canon’s etc. How many FE owners, as a percentage would buy a $600 85mm f1.8 (quite high margin for this type of lens) for FE cameras? They can also sell it as APS-C and m43’s and EOS-M and NX etc. They would sell pretty darn well indeed one would think?
Sony’s going to launch a 85mm in the near future leaving Sigma zero chance of recouping, any of the money they’d have to spend on developing this lens. Plus the last thing I want to see attached to my A7 is a Sigma lens. I’d rather pay the extra $400.00 to get a smaller weather sealed Zeiss that is 100% compatible.
It was an example, I just chose a FL that wasn’t already covered. And I am willing to bet there are more crop users that would prefer a cheaper 85mm than a $1000-1300 Zeiss.
I’ll ask the man himself next week, cause I’m heading off to a video products launch presentation in Toronto, Canada on the 26th.
The Head of Sony Canada Imaging Division will be there, and because its so low key (BBQ, but no beer) maybe I can grill him for more lens information for both mounts, and complain about the SAL70200G2 not receiving a weather sealing.
However I can firmly say Sony intends to equip all A-Mount Sony Carl Zeiss lenses with weather sealed housings, and Super Sonic Motors.
Of which I have no doubt. I have already grilled Sony execs on it, but can we please have at least a LA-EA4 upgrade with new PDAF system from at least A77 II?
Plus you are not their audience as you would stick with OEM lenses anyway, regardless of brand. Who is to say that the Zeiss will be smaller anyway?
Not true .As sigma arnt building it for sony their building it for everyone .That like saying sony will make no cash out of the 24mp APSC as the pentax sales are low .The sigma lense will likely be superior anyway
Boo-Ho baby
SLR lenses are not designed for CDAF (and don’t think that PDAF assist points are PDAF). It is not just a case of making the register longer, Samyang can get away with it because their lenses are manual focus. Ever tried AF on an LA-EA1 or 3? Or Canon EF lenses in live view or on an A7… THAT is what you can expect with a built in adapter lens.
Of course they will make it first for Canon then Nikon and then Sony and Pentax.
Canon shooters they get the first of everything 🙁
Except sensors 😉
Umm Dual Pixel AF? Dual ISO? Sensors that can do video that are actually used by professionals? 😉
Haha better stick to your knitting if you think Canon holds anything at all over Sony in video. Dual pixel AF is interesting, pity that the much maligned SLT performs just as well, but with better sensors…
Dual ISO, funny, Fuji have been doing that long before Canon implemented it… I mean hackers implemented it that is.
Another one who doesn’t know how to use Google lol
SLT is the primary AF system of the camera but DualPixel AF is secondary and is detuned for video. What’s so funny with you SLT fanboys is that when Sony sprinkles a few OSPDAF pixels that have to be masked out, they think it’s the greatest thing ever… but when Canon makes the whole sensor do it with the only real compromise being manufacturing costs, it’s no biggie LOL
Also Fuji didn’t have different variable ISOs between photosites in their Super CCD HR sensors. There’s a thing called reading… try it sometime.
Oh wow you use Google, you must be a genius! I’m so humbled by your presence lord Google. So it has a secondary AF system? That’s really great, in that it still performs worse than SLT, but it’s ‘secondary’ so that makes it ‘great’? Couldn’t give a toss about a few scattered PDAF points, nor about dual pixel AF if they are inferior… so um, what was your point again? Oh right, Canon have an inferior technology, but they are the only ones with it, so that’s awesome?
The topic was sensor tech. Sony are making sensors better but Canon are making newer kinds of sensors… let me put that in to an example you might get your pre-internet business school mind around… it’s like breeding the best horses on the planet vs. inventing the automobile.
So we should have buildings built out of paper, even though they fall down now one day we might get ones that stay up, so best to start investing in buildings that fall down now?
I did say dual pixel AF was interesting, but interesting is not the same as good. Your statement about no compromise other than manufacturing is completely unsubstantiated. By all accounts, the ‘compromise’ is higher than SLT mirrors, but the advantage is nought.
So it’s interesting like any freak show, cool to go “Wow it can do that”, but that’s all.
Don’t waste your time with this fuc*ing troll
Yes well the one point that he seems to have stuck with was dual pixel AF, everything else he knows was nonsense. Best argument he has for dual pixel AF is that it ‘has it’ and others don’t.
He’s just trying to masturbate his ego. He’s not even a photographer. Just an advance amateur with zero professional credentials (in photography). Don’t take him too seriously, he just rambles UFI (useless fuc*ing information) just to irritate us.
lol… you haven’t even figured out how to register a username and you talk about information.
“buildings built out of paper”? Wow…
Again… you need to look up the difference between innovation and good engineering.
As do you. So they have tech that doesn’t work as well as existing tech, you can be as ‘innovative’ as you like, if it doesn’t work that we’ll it doesn’t work that well. Maybe in a few generations time… but it’s already behind, existing tech won’t stand still in that time that it takes to catch up.
Read the thread again. The context is new sensor technologies _making it_ to mainstream products.
What made you think it meant what you’re saying?
Like EXR sensors? You dismissed those to ‘prove’ your point. If you can read, rather than just write, the thread is about LENSES. Yes they had dual pixel first, yay Canon… happy? but they didn’t have first:
Dual sensitivity sensors (nor do they still in a mainstream product)
Video sensors that professionals use (and barely do now)
On sensor PDAF (of which dual pixel is one form of)
But it’s nice to see you a) backtracking and b) making up the ‘rules’ of what the thread is supposed to be about.
Oh and Fuji EXR does have dual sensitivities between photosites.
As good as it may have been, it’s point and shoot tech… are we to also talk about mobile phone sensors and film? 🙂
Hahaha you got nothing.
So am I right about your having been to business school?
So I am right about you being a handitard?
What a funny way to say yes.
Sony is the leader in professional video cameras for broadcast and has been at the forefront of video replacing motion picture film for cinema and filmmaking since the beginning. Canon has only ever been in the prosumer space and only recently has tried to into the mid-tier pro video market.
As for dual pixel tech, can a videographer use the viewfinder while recording video (as SLT allows)?
Is this a broadcast video rumors forum, Christopher?
And yes… it’s called a EVF. Look it up Mr. Broadcast.
The 70d is listed as having an optical pentaprism:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_70d#Specifications
So, can it display the video stream to the viewfinder? My experience with the 1dx, 5d3 & 5d2 is that the viewfinder is black (blocked by the mirror) when shooting video or using live view. This is not an insignificant limitation.
Broadcast video cameras also do not have an OVF… not sure if you know.
Yes, broadcast video cameras have an EVF like the Sony SLT cameras (though often not as good quality) making them more ideal than Canon OVF cameras for video work.
My question remains, does the Canon 70D camera with the superior dual pixel tech black out the viewfinder in video / live view mode like the other canon cameras or does dual pixel supply a steady feed as does SLT?
You have missed the point entirely. Go back and find out the context.
Uh huh
bet this is going to be heavy and A-mount will not be available after a year of the announcement…
Please be a 600mm f/4.
Want e-mount versions for the A7 family