# Sigma 50mm F/1.4 Art listed in Belarus for $790



## ahsanford (Mar 19, 2014)

Put another random rumor in the Sigma 50 art blender:

http://www.slrlounge.com/new-sigma-50mm-f1-4-790-according-official-dealer

http://petapixel.com/2014/03/18/sigmas-official-dealer-belarus-says-50mm-art-lens-will-cost-790/

http://www.canonwatch.com/price-sigma-50mm-f1-4-ex-dg-art-lens-790/

- A


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 19, 2014)

I know Sigma is a 2nd tier brand... but if the lens is really that good, they would be giving it away at $800. Especially when their main competition is the Otus which is $4000. Is Ford really going charge $10,000 for a mid-size sedan because Honda is selling their's at $20,000?

Not to mention, the 50 art would come in at a lower price than the 35 art?


----------



## MLfan3 (Mar 19, 2014)

this lens and some other high quality Sigma Zeiss lenses are the reasons why I just sold all my Nikon gear.
you may not be able to use some of the best Sigmas and Zeiss primes on Nikon any more, Nikon tries very very hard to just restrict use of third party lenses.

I think it will hurt Nikon since this will really narrow F mount ecosystem.
anyway, I briefly tried it at CP+ event in Yokohama this feb , it is big but not as big as my Zeiss 135mm f2 APO or 100mm f2.
it is about the same size as the Canon 135mm f2L , the Sigma is a bit shorter in length , though.
it felt about as heavy as my 100L macro lens or my Nikon 85mm f1.4G, I could not use my SD card in my 6D at the time , so I do not really know how sharp it really is, but it seemed very very sharp and well corrected.
I think if it is really this cheap , I would get 2 of these.
but what I really want to see from Sigma is a new Art line of 85mm f1.4 lens.
I like the 85mm L I had it but it was just too fat to hold and kind of awkward in real life use.
I also had Zeiss 85mmf1.4ZF2 but it was not a sharp lens at f1.4, and I sold it.
I am also interested in a great AF 135mm f2 prime but I think it is extremely tough to beat the Zeiss 135mm f2 APO,which is the sharpest lens I have ever used(sharper than the Leica 125mm f2.5 S mount lens).


----------



## tianxiaozhang (Mar 19, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> I know Sigma is a 2nd tier brand... but if the lens is really that good, they would be giving it away at $800. Especially when their main competition is the Otus which is $4000. Is Ford really going charge $10,000 for a mid-size sedan because Honda is selling their's at $20,000?
> 
> Not to mention, the 50 art would come in at a lower price than the 35 art?



Makes sense but how great would it be if it's really 790... I'll order one the day it comes out..


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 19, 2014)

dilbert said:


> This will kill sales of Canon's 50/1.2L - even at its current rebate price of $1,469.00. The Sigma is almost half the price of the "L".



Dunno about that. I just met a guy who recently bought a 35L and loves it, and he happily paid almost double the price of the superior Sigma 35A.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 19, 2014)

If this is true and Sigma actually don't sell the lens for more than $790, then it won't matter how good it is optically, or if it autofocuses adequately. It will be slammed by all the Canonnites on here. If they would charge $1200 or more, it would be taken more seriously (assuming it actually is optically good). Plain and simple, to appeal to a Cannonite, you have to evoke enough snob appeal. Certainly the 35 Art is still slammed for its autofocus performance.


----------



## Grumbaki (Mar 19, 2014)

How much is VAT in Belaruss? That might be the tax free price which puts it close to 1K in most western EU countries. Just saying.


----------



## infared (Mar 19, 2014)

CarlTN said:


> If this is true and Sigma actually don't sell the lens for more than $790, then it won't matter how good it is optically, or if it autofocuses adequately. It will be slammed by all the Canonnites on here. If they would charge $1200 or more, it would be taken more seriously (assuming it actually is optically good). Plain and simple, to appeal to a Cannonite, you have to evoke enough snob appeal. Certainly the 35 Art is still slammed for its autofocus performance.



I have to agree with you. I own the new Sigma 35mm Art and it is a lens that just WOWS me every time I upload images from a card that has been in the same camera that the lens is attached to. (I own the original Sigma 50mm and although I like the lens a lot, especially compared to its competition it is not a WOW lens). I also own some incredible "L" glass and Zeiss, so I am in no way attached to one manufacturer, but I do look for the what I consider to be the best I can buy when I purchase a lens that covers a certain range of needs.
Now we are all in here talking about a lens that we know very little about, but that some of us have great expectations for (with good reason as all preliminary indicators are very positive), and this pricing info has me very excited about this upcoming lens offering...heck... this is a 50mm with 13 elements in it riding a wave of new lenses from a company that clearly has had a turnaround in its business ethic, but there will be those few in here that will vehemently deny this reality...I have to admit that somehow this fact will cause me great glee each time I snap the bayonet of my new art 50mm onto my 5DIII! . If this pricing info is correct, it will be like icing on the cake. This is the one lens that I am excited about this year and it is about time that FF has a reasonable priced, great performing "normal" lens. Why has this taken so long? You will not see this possibility from Canon..... and Nikon just offered their own overpriced embarrassment (the new 58mm f/1.4), in this basic lens segment (?????), rendering...smendering LOL! It costs too much money and it is mediocre at best for a 2014 lens. So, if Sigma delivers in this price range I believe there will be a lot of smiling image makers in the upcoming months. This is getting exciting!


----------



## infared (Mar 19, 2014)

dilbert said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true and Sigma actually don't sell the lens for more than $790, then it won't matter how good it is optically, or if it autofocuses adequately. It will be slammed by all the Canonnites on here. If they would charge $1200 or more, it would be taken more seriously (assuming it actually is optically good). Plain and simple, to appeal to a Cannonite, you have to evoke enough snob appeal. Certainly the 35 Art is still slammed for its autofocus performance.
> ...



Truth be known...Sigma has a tainted past...but I repeatedly see a new leaf turned in the last two years. Let's live in the present.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 19, 2014)

If you take $790 and consider what that must pay for, it becomes a bit difficult to believe that this lens can compete with the Otus in any way. 

(If memory serves me right) 10 lens elements, of which 3 are SLD and one aspherical, a fast reliable AF system, housing, hoods and caps and casing and profit ... I fail to see how it is possible to produce a high quality product, with tolerances to compete with L-series, Otus and others, for that money, no matter how efficient you are or how cheap your labor is.

I'd be delighted if they prove me wrong. That would make this lens a significant game changer!


----------



## Grumbaki (Mar 19, 2014)

infared said:


> Sigma has a tainted past...



That's why I believe they can be inclined to hit a big one while renouncing part of the margin. 35 art was the trial and the initiation of the new move, this can be the reputation changer and the step into the "big"league (they'll still be 3rd party and not Zeiss  ).

790 USD, even tax free, is still a bit low...now make that 790 EUR + taxes and you get above the 35L but still under the competition to score that big hit. (why the hell would a belarus list in either currency don't ask me!)


----------



## drjlo (Mar 19, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > This will kill sales of Canon's 50/1.2L - even at its current rebate price of $1,469.00. The Sigma is almost half the price of the "L".
> ...



Although I hope and pray the Sigma 50 ART turns out to be a great lens, with perfect AF and no third-party issues, my own needs revolve more around the overall "look and feel" and color than sheer sharpness. This is why 35L fits my own needs better than Sigma 35 ART, so I understand that "guy" who loves his 35L. 

I truly hope the Sigma 50 ART can bring lively colors and subject separation/"pop" from wonderful background bokeh, then I will replace my 50L with it.


----------



## infared (Mar 19, 2014)

drjlo said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Please watch this...I feel the same way as this very responsible reviewer. He pretty much covers everything. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuN1ywuufg

"my own needs revolve more around the overall "look and feel" and color than sheer sharpness." Can you elaborate on this statement....it is kind of nebulous.


----------



## Lightmaster (Mar 19, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > This will kill sales of Canon's 50/1.2L - even at its current rebate price of $1,469.00. The Sigma is almost half the price of the "L".
> ...



a red ring junkie?

my father has the 35L so i know it pretty well... but i prefer my sigma 35mm f1.4.


----------



## Lightmaster (Mar 19, 2014)

> Dunno about that. I just met a guy who recently bought a 35L and loves it, and he happily paid almost double the price of the superior Sigma 35A.



a red ring junkie?

my father has the 35L so i know it pretty well... but i prefer my sigma 35mm f1.4.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 19, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> > Dunno about that. I just met a guy who recently bought a 35L and loves it, and he happily paid almost double the price of the superior Sigma 35A.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Didn't seem like an L junkie. There are many possible reasons- some people don't like to consider 3rd party products, some people like the 'look' of a particular lens. Similarly I'm sure the 50L will have its loyalists.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 19, 2014)

infared said:


> drjlo said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...



I also saw that video, and while I'd prefer the 35A to the 35L, the video looks biased from the beginning.
The minute he talks about liberal use of plastic in the Canon and how that still didn't help keep the price down it was clear which one he preferred.
Reviews should be objective, leaving the viewer to draw his conclusions based on the data provided.


----------



## Radiating (Mar 19, 2014)

Eldar said:


> If you take $790 and consider what that must pay for, it becomes a bit difficult to believe that this lens can compete with the Otus in any way.



You do realize that Canon pays around *$300* to manufacture a $2400 MSRP lens right? The manufacturing is not what costs a lot, it's the initial set up and the R&D and marketing and prototyping. Canon has huge overhead from millions of dollars poured into research, design and manufacturing facilities.




> (If memory serves me right) 10 lens elements, of which 3 are SLD and one aspherical, a fast reliable AF system, housing, hoods and caps and casing and profit ... I fail to see how it is possible to produce a high quality product, with tolerances to compete with L-series, Otus and others, for that money, no matter how efficient you are or how cheap your labor is.
> 
> I'd be delighted if they prove me wrong. That would make this lens a significant game changer!



It doesn't matter what you think. This lens has ALREADY been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be twice as good as anything else with autofocus period. We have raw data, we have prototypes that have been proven to match the raw data, we have the lens' design data that has been verified as capable of providing the performance etc etc.

This lens makes anything else you can buy in it's class that has autofocus completely obsolete from a performance standpoint. We're talking the same difference as Tamron 18-270mm vs 24-70mm f/2.8 L II. It's also set to have amazing bokeh, being designed to mimic the 50L f/1.2 and low color fringing and hazing so overall it should be better in every way than competitors.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 19, 2014)

Radiating said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > If you take $790 and consider what that must pay for, it becomes a bit difficult to believe that this lens can compete with the Otus in any way.
> ...


I´m glad for your enthusiasm and I really hope you will be satisfied. Yes, I have read the Sigma ambition and yes, I have seen images from what I assume to be carefully selected copies and it looks very promising. But I need to see a lot more before I am convinced. I will most likely buy one to check it out. I have the 35 Art and apart from a drifting AF system, it is optically and mechanically a very impressive lens for the price.

But no, unlike you, I do not have detailed insight into neither Sigma´s nor Canon´s production processes or sub contracting arrangements. I do not know their cost break down structure or how they develop their business cases. But the required glass quality and production tolerances required to deliver consistent quality at the level they claim with this lens, at a RRP of $790, with a sustainable profit ... does not sound realistic to me.

But, as I said, if they deliver, it will be a major game changer, where we as customers will be the winners.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 19, 2014)

Why is it soo difficult for the 35 Art fanboys to accept that people can like the 35 L better?


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 19, 2014)

Viggo said:


> Why is it soo difficult for the 35 Art fanboys to accept that people can like the 35 L better?



Dunno I'm a fan of the sigma 35 and 85 the current 50 not so much
My personal feeling when testing the sigma 85 vs 85L side by side was while i felt the 85 was marginally better
in sharpness and had a little nicer bokeh was it worth TRIPLE the money to me? HELL NO so i got the sigma and have been super happy with it.

I almost bought the 35L the day sigma announced the 35 Art so i held off until i could try both, again in Australia the 35L was $1800 the Sigma on release was $900, I bought the Sigma and with the change bought a 2 year old used 135L for $700 still had $200 change... I felt there was absolutely nothing wrong with the L it was fantastic but for such a massive difference in cost it was no way worth it to me.

I think when people compare absolutes or just optical sharpness and neglect other factors such as cost or how the lens relates to their situation you know its more about the gear or the image they present of themselves using the gear than the images they make with the gear  then you have people who just need to buy the most expensive of everything....

But I don't honestly know too any people that money is really no object for. I am certainly not one.

The Simple fact that these new sigmas are being compared to such fine L glass or the otus is great news for us consumers. But if someone has owned some of this great L glass for years and has been producing great images with that lens Just because the competition releases something which will equal or exceed it in a particular metric does that make that lens suddenly unable to produce the fine images its been producing for so long? I don't think so. Generally people on the internet do get a little hung up on specs, scores, etc... we all do i guess to one degree or another hence we all congregate here. Just have to keep it all in perspective


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 20, 2014)

Eldar said:


> If you take $790 and consider what that must pay for, it becomes a bit difficult to believe that this lens can compete with the Otus in any way.
> 
> (If memory serves me right) 10 lens elements, of which 3 are SLD and one aspherical, a fast reliable AF system, housing, hoods and caps and casing and profit ... I fail to see how it is possible to produce a high quality product, with tolerances to compete with L-series, Otus and others, for that money, no matter how efficient you are or how cheap your labor is.
> 
> I'd be delighted if they prove me wrong. That would make this lens a significant game changer!



I doubt this lens be made in Japan. It's more likely be made in China.

We all know the labor cost in China


----------



## kaihp (Mar 20, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> I doubt this lens be made in Japan. It's more likely be made in China.
> 
> We all know the labor cost in China



Yup, skyrocketing with 10%+ salary increases per year. 

There's a reason why an increasing number of companies are looking to move out of China. Heck, there are even Chinese companies will take your order and outsource the manufacturing to lower cost countries in South East Asia.


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 20, 2014)

kaihp said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt this lens be made in Japan. It's more likely be made in China.
> ...



I know we are just kidding... but it seems as though Americans are constantly sucking at the teet of slave labor. While the Chinese wouldn't exactly qualify... they are pretty close. It is a touch depressing, although I don't ever think about it when I'm shooting.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Mar 20, 2014)

Viggo said:


> Why is it soo difficult for the 35 Art fanboys to accept that people can like the 35 L better?



Because I am not professional but hobbyist, money matters sometimes. I tried the 35 f1.4L, 35 f2IS and 35 Art and I ellected the 35 f2IS because I got at a very good price below $500, while the 35L and 35 Art offer faster aperture to stop action, I rather preffered how the 'IS' works for low light situations with sharp pictures at 1/5 sec handhold.

In regards to the new 50mm Art, if the results are like these tests I will probably get one. I owned the 50L and I was very pleased, however I needed some cash and sold it. I was never satisfied with the Canon 50mm f1.4 and I also sold it.

I will be waiting for the results of the actual prefessional reviews and user reviews of the 50 'Art' to decide if I get a new 'fifty' at half cost of the 50L. Also, I hope Canon release a 'stabilized' 50mm this year.


----------



## cliffwang (Mar 20, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > If you take $790 and consider what that must pay for, it becomes a bit difficult to believe that this lens can compete with the Otus in any way.
> ...



The current $400 50mm F/1.4 is made in Japan. I don't see why Sigma moves its art production line to China.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 20, 2014)

That's yet another thing I don't get, buying brand new lenses. I always compare used prices when it comes to price differences. So a used 5 year old 35 L isn't much more money than a brand new used 35 Art, which makes the money argument less valid, although it is still more money for the 35 L. And I'm not going to beat the very dead horse and say the 35 Art AF is the reason I don't own one, I actually tried a third 35 art the other day and the AF was stable and okay, NOTHING like the one I bought, so it is possible. 

I can't wait to try the Sigma 50 Art, that's for sure.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 20, 2014)

Viggo said:


> That's yet another thing I don't get, buying brand new lenses. I always compare used prices when it comes to price differences. So a used 5 year old 35 L isn't much more money than a brand new used 35 Art, which makes the money argument less valid, although it is still more money for the 35 L. And I'm not going to beat the very dead horse and say the 35 Art AF is the reason I don't own one, I actually tried a third 35 art the other day and the AF was stable and okay, NOTHING like the one I bought, so it is possible.
> 
> I can't wait to try the Sigma 50 Art, that's for sure.



My 35 Art AF is perfect, can't fault it, I couldn't really notice much in it when i tested side by side with the 35L
the 85 Siggy AF is good but its not so great in servo wide open tracking moving subjects but then neither is the slower AF of the 85L


----------



## Viggo (Mar 20, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > That's yet another thing I don't get, buying brand new lenses. I always compare used prices when it comes to price differences. So a used 5 year old 35 L isn't much more money than a brand new used 35 Art, which makes the money argument less valid, although it is still more money for the 35 L. And I'm not going to beat the very dead horse and say the 35 Art AF is the reason I don't own one, I actually tried a third 35 art the other day and the AF was stable and okay, NOTHING like the one I bought, so it is possible.
> ...



Always had some problems with the 85 L AF, but it has always been VERY consistent. And on a 1-series it's much faster than on a 5d and I find the new 1dx firmware to do great things with the 85, it's highly useable for tracking my running kids indoors now. To me I would much rather have a AF lens being consistent but slow than impossible to get ten shots In a row equally sharp.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 20, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> I doubt this lens be made in Japan. It's more likely be made in China.
> 
> We all know the labor cost in China



If you really think that, you don't know Sigma!


----------



## infared (Mar 20, 2014)

[/quote]

Please watch this...I feel the same way as this very responsible reviewer. He pretty much covers everything. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuN1ywuufg

"my own needs revolve more around the overall "look and feel" and color than sheer sharpness." Can you elaborate on this statement....it is kind of nebulous.
[/quote]

I also saw that video, and while I'd prefer the 35A to the 35L, the video looks biased from the beginning.
The minute he talks about liberal use of plastic in the Canon and how that still didn't help keep the price down it was clear which one he preferred.
Reviews should be objective, leaving the viewer to draw his conclusions based on the data provided.
[/quote]


Well...I think that the reviewer brings up a lot of valid points. No lens is prefect...but the reviewer was very detail oriented, but not outright "scientific" (thank God). It's possible that he was biased but some of what he presents is difficult to ignore, I think....anyway...I have been extremely happy with my 35mm Art as most are who own it and I have not had any issues with the focus and it seems that just guys with red-line fever (not that there is anything wrong with "L" glass in general), have some imaginary data on this "drifting focus" problem that I have not experienced. Has anyone that owns the lens had an issue with focusing?????? Its certainly possible.
At any rate I think that SOON we should see some real tests on the new 50mm and really know what the price is. (I wish that Sigma had not said that they are aiming at the Otus...it just sets them up for target practice....LOL!).


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 20, 2014)

distant.star said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt this lens be made in Japan. It's more likely be made in China.
> ...



Indeed I don't...do I really need to know Sigma when my lenses are *L*?


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 20, 2014)

dilbert said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Have you ever work with CM in China before?


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 20, 2014)

Please watch this...I feel the same way as this very responsible reviewer. He pretty much covers everything. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuN1ywuufg

"my own needs revolve more around the overall "look and feel" and color than sheer sharpness." Can you elaborate on this statement....it is kind of nebulous.
[/quote]

I also saw that video, and while I'd prefer the 35A to the 35L, the video looks biased from the beginning.
The minute he talks about liberal use of plastic in the Canon and how that still didn't help keep the price down it was clear which one he preferred.
Reviews should be objective, leaving the viewer to draw his conclusions based on the data provided.
[/quote]


Well...I think that the reviewer brings up a lot of valid points. No lens is prefect...but the reviewer was very detail oriented, but not outright "scientific" (thank God). It's possible that he was biased but some of what he presents is difficult to ignore, I think....anyway...I have been extremely happy with my 35mm Art as most are who own it and I have not had any issues with the focus and it seems that just guys with red-line fever (not that there is anything wrong with "L" glass in general), have some imaginary data on this "drifting focus" problem that I have not experienced. Has anyone that owns the lens had an issue with focusing?????? Its certainly possible.
At any rate I think that SOON we should see some real tests on the new 50mm and really know what the price is. (I wish that Sigma had not said that they are aiming at the Otus...it just sets them up for target practice....LOL!).
[/quote]

I think Eldar mentioned it in his post, maybe he can elaborate? Not that Canon lenses don't have issues, of course.
The proof is in the pudding, if Sigma comes up with something really good, they will sell them well. Who cares what people say, it's where they put their money.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 20, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> ...I have been extremely happy with my 35mm Art as most are who own it and I have not had any issues with the focus and it seems that just guys with red-line fever (not that there is anything wrong with "L" glass in general), have some imaginary data on this "drifting focus" problem that I have not experienced. Has anyone that owns the lens had an issue with focusing?????? Its certainly possible.
> At any rate I think that SOON we should see some real tests on the new 50mm and really know what the price is. (I wish that Sigma had not said that they are aiming at the Otus...it just sets them up for target practice....LOL!).



I think Eldar mentioned it in his post, maybe he can elaborate? Not that Canon lenses don't have issues, of course.
The proof is in the pudding, if Sigma comes up with something really good, they will sell them well. Who cares what people say, it's where they put their money.
[/quote]
[/quote]
I bought the 35A just a few weeks after it was released. I did an AFMA through Focal, which gave just a couple of steps adjustment on both 1DX and 5DIII. I was very impressed with the lens´sharpness, contrast, CA and color. Bokeh is not its strong side and it has some vignetting, but probably not more than should be expected. 

After a couple of months I started to get more and more images out of focus and around Christmas it was useless shot wide open. I did another AFMA and I had to adjust 7 steps compared to the old setting on both bodies. I have used it a little less since then, but it seems to have stayed stable since AFMA no.2.

The Otus is a phenomenal lens and I am really enjoying it. But as soon as things start to move I miss AF. So as I have said before, this Sigma 50A is something I am really looking forward to try. But I doubt we will see it for $790, at least not for a while. Sigma is not unlike any other company. They´re only in it for the money.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 20, 2014)

Eldar said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...



Plus, I think bringing out a great lens for marginal or no profits will keep Sigma pegged as the bargain option. Bringing it out for its true market value will set them up as long-time competitors to Nikon and Canon. Remember, they cannot thrive on marginal profits forever. They also need to answer their shareholders.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 20, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> Plus, I think bringing out a great lens for marginal or no profits will keep Sigma pegged as the bargain option. Bringing it out for its true market value will set them up as long-time competitors to Nikon and Canon. Remember, they cannot thrive on marginal profits forever. They also need to answer their shareholders.



Sigma is a privately owned company -- no shareholders to satisfy, only the family.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 20, 2014)

distant.star said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > Plus, I think bringing out a great lens for marginal or no profits will keep Sigma pegged as the bargain option. Bringing it out for its true market value will set them up as long-time competitors to Nikon and Canon. Remember, they cannot thrive on marginal profits forever. They also need to answer their shareholders.
> ...


True, but still a profit organization, not a charity organization


----------



## dcm (Mar 20, 2014)

Many privately held companies still have shares, the shares just aren't publicly traded. So there are still shareholders.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 20, 2014)

distant.star said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > Plus, I think bringing out a great lens for marginal or no profits will keep Sigma pegged as the bargain option. Bringing it out for its true market value will set them up as long-time competitors to Nikon and Canon. Remember, they cannot thrive on marginal profits forever. They also need to answer their shareholders.
> ...





dcm said:


> Many privately held companies still have shares, the shares just aren't publicly traded. So there are still shareholders.



+1

Where are you going with this? Are you implying Sigma is going to under-price the 50/1.4 Art because they are filled with the milk of human kindness and don't care for profit?
Let's see how it is priced, and then let's see how it performs. Meanwhile, you can fill pages and pages with speculation, but that won't affect the eventual sales. It will be a good pastime for your coffee breaks, though


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 20, 2014)

Companies can engage in loss leaders. What better way to introduce sigma to a new demographic and re introduce themselves to a demographic that has since moved on from sigma die to their past issues.



sagittariansrock said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...


----------



## preppyak (Mar 20, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> Where are you going with this? Are you implying Sigma is going to under-price the 50/1.4 Art because they are filled with the milk of human kindness and don't care for profit?





jdramirez said:


> Companies can engage in loss leaders. What better way to introduce sigma to a new demographic and re introduce themselves to a demographic that has since moved on from sigma die to their past issues.


I think Sigma sold the 35mm as a loss-leader, or close to it, because they wanted the good press of being 60-70% the price of the Canon and Nikon lenses while being sharper, etc. Kind of the same way Tamron priced their 150-600 pretty low relative to what they could have charged.


But remember, Sigma doesnt have a massive point and shoot segment that they put a lot of R&D into that is now hemorrhaging sales. They don't have a mirrorless market that they put R&D into and then abandoned. And as far as I know, they weren't set back a whole year in lens production by the floods. Canon was on all those fronts. So Canon has to recoup money to maintain profitability, and they do it by jacking up lens prices, cause they know the lenses will sell. Sigma doesnt have to do that, they can charge a price they think will sustain for 2-3yrs, unlike Canon who has charged a 30-50% premium and then dropped it off in 6 months


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 21, 2014)

preppyak said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > Where are you going with this? Are you implying Sigma is going to under-price the 50/1.4 Art because they are filled with the milk of human kindness and don't care for profit?
> ...



I think you are right both companies had bad reps that were going to prove very hard to overcome, the approach they have taken is quite smart make these stunning new generation lenses at amazing prices. it really draws a line under all that went before and gets the new lenses into circulation to rebuild new reputations. of coarse there will always be people who cant get over he past... I for one swore black and blue i would never buy a tamron lens again but i'm super happy with the 150-600... :-[


----------



## PVS (Mar 21, 2014)

I was working as a designer for clothing company and we send most of our final designs to China.. At one point my boss, the company owner, asked me if I'd like to move to China for QC reasons. So I didn't and I moved to another job.
If you really think Sigma would move their production lines to China for this Magical 50mm you should read the interview with Sigma representative at DPR. No way, Hose.
My Smegma 35/1.4 was built in Japan and so was my 24/1.8. The progression is quite noticeable. I could've bought the 35L, but I didn't after I tried the new 35Art from Sigma. The last cultural frontier in optical industry, that Sigma.


----------



## infared (Mar 21, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...


Well now you know that your 35mm is soft, has tons of CA and a whole world of vignetting compared to the Sigma...you do have that plastic & a red ring that you paid an extra $500 for, tho.


----------



## infared (Mar 21, 2014)

Eldar said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > ...I have been extremely happy with my 35mm Art as most are who own it and I have not had any issues with the focus and it seems that just guys with red-line fever (not that there is anything wrong with "L" glass in general), have some imaginary data on this "drifting focus" problem that I have not experienced. Has anyone that owns the lens had an issue with focusing?????? Its certainly possible.
> ...


[/quote]
I bought the 35A just a few weeks after it was released. I did an AFMA through Focal, which gave just a couple of steps adjustment on both 1DX and 5DIII. I was very impressed with the lens´sharpness, contrast, CA and color. Bokeh is not its strong side and it has some vignetting, but probably not more than should be expected. 

After a couple of months I started to get more and more images out of focus and around Christmas it was useless shot wide open. I did another AFMA and I had to adjust 7 steps compared to the old setting on both bodies. I have used it a little less since then, but it seems to have stayed stable since AFMA no.2.

The Otus is a phenomenal lens and I am really enjoying it. But as soon as things start to move I miss AF. So as I have said before, this Sigma 50A is something I am really looking forward to try. But I doubt we will see it for $790, at least not for a while. Sigma is not unlike any other company. They´re only in it for the money.
[/quote]

Thanks for the input about the focusing. I have the 35mm Art and if I get the 50mm I think I will pick up the Sigma lens module, (USB Lens Dock I think it is called).


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > sagittariansrock said:
> ...


I bought the 35A just a few weeks after it was released. I did an AFMA through Focal, which gave just a couple of steps adjustment on both 1DX and 5DIII. I was very impressed with the lens´sharpness, contrast, CA and color. Bokeh is not its strong side and it has some vignetting, but probably not more than should be expected. 

After a couple of months I started to get more and more images out of focus and around Christmas it was useless shot wide open. I did another AFMA and I had to adjust 7 steps compared to the old setting on both bodies. I have used it a little less since then, but it seems to have stayed stable since AFMA no.2.

The Otus is a phenomenal lens and I am really enjoying it. But as soon as things start to move I miss AF. So as I have said before, this Sigma 50A is something I am really looking forward to try. But I doubt we will see it for $790, at least not for a while. Sigma is not unlike any other company. They´re only in it for the money.
[/quote]

Thanks for the input about the focusing. I have the 35mm Art and if I get the 50mm I think I will pick up the Sigma lens module. 
[/quote]

I wish that was the type of thing we could share. Have one communal module. Mail it like it was inter library loan.


----------



## Phenix205 (Mar 21, 2014)

I sold my Canon 50 1.4 immediately after Sigma announced the 50 Art. Before this, I had never thought about buying a third party lens. Can't wait for it to arrive in the US market.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true and Sigma actually don't sell the lens for more than $790, then it won't matter how good it is optically, or if it autofocuses adequately. It will be slammed by all the Canonnites on here. If they would charge $1200 or more, it would be taken more seriously (assuming it actually is optically good). Plain and simple, to appeal to a Cannonite, you have to evoke enough snob appeal. Certainly the 35 Art is still slammed for its autofocus performance.
> ...



Are you also a Nikon boy? Sounds like you might have used the new Nikon lens...


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 21, 2014)

dilbert said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If this is true and Sigma actually don't sell the lens for more than $790, then it won't matter how good it is optically, or if it autofocuses adequately. It will be slammed by all the Canonnites on here. If they would charge $1200 or more, it would be taken more seriously (assuming it actually is optically good). Plain and simple, to appeal to a Cannonite, you have to evoke enough snob appeal. Certainly the 35 Art is still slammed for its autofocus performance.
> ...



Haha, perhaps. However, the only technically bad experiences I've heard of Sigma lenses that aren't painted with black paint (i.e. a decade or more old)...is with their current 50mm f/1.4. 

I really like my Voigtlander, even though it's a Nikon mount lens, and it's all manual. It just does not have beautiful bokeh at the background transition zone.


----------



## infared (Mar 21, 2014)

@jdramirez
[/quote]

I wish that was the type of thing we could share. Have one communal module. Mail it like it was inter library loan. 
[/quote]

Good idea! Well..the dock costs only $59 @ B&H...so it makes sense to own if you have a couple of lenses that it can be useful on.


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



Do you see any 35mm in my signature? 

Wonder how many "Wow" Sigma lenses out there? : 1 maybe 2


----------



## Viggo (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



Since when did the 35 Art have LESS vignetting than the 35 L ??


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> @jdramirez



I wish that was the type of thing we could share. Have one communal module. Mail it like it was inter library loan. 
[/quote]

Good idea! Well..the dock costs only $59 @ B&H...so it makes sense to own if you have a couple of lenses that it can be useful on.
[/quote]

I'm going to do it. I'll buy one and offer a rental option for $20 where people give me 60 as a deposit and get 40 upon its return.


----------



## infared (Mar 21, 2014)

Viggo said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Since the Sigma 35mm Art Lens arrived on the market? 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuN1ywuufg


----------



## infared (Mar 21, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



You have a point! ...but they are moving in the right direction. Perhaps they will have two WOW after the new 50mm is released.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...



That's funny.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=121&Camera=9&LensComp=829


----------



## lintoni (Mar 21, 2014)

sigma-rumors has an image from the Byelorussian site that now shows the price will be announced after 11th April, and an announcement from Sigma that the $790 price is incorrect. Sorry, I can't give the link, I've not worked out how to use the clipboard on this tablet, yet. :-[


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 21, 2014)

lintoni said:


> sigma-rumors has an image from the Byelorussian site that now shows the price will be announced after 11th April, and an announcement from Sigma that the $790 price is incorrect. Sorry, I can't give the link, I've not worked out how to use the clipboard on this tablet, yet. :-[



Wow... so it could be even less.


----------



## infared (Mar 21, 2014)

Viggo said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



Viggo...I think that there is something wrong with that comparison at The Digital Picture (which I regard as a very reliable source)....so..when you click over on the sigma arrow..notice that the WHOLE frame gets a least a stop darker...not just the edges. There is something amiss there. If the centers do not stay at the same brightness for each lens the comparison in no good. Clearly there is a problem there. I only have the sigma or I would compare them myself...but I am only noticing (slight) vignetting when the lens is wide open...not really bothersome..certainly nothing like the portrayal there. hmmmm....this warrants further investigation...I will look for a third source.
Mathew at Light & Matter (the U-Tube video I referenced) seems like a very responsible guy), he is slightly Sigma biased (maybe) or he is just reporting the facts fairly.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 21, 2014)

infared said:


> Viggo...I think that there is something wrong with that comparison at The Digital Picture (which I regard as a very reliable source)....so..when you click over on the sigma arrow..notice that the WHOLE frame gets a least a stop darker...not just the edges. There is something amiss there. If the centers do not stay at the same brightness for each lens the comparison in no good. Clearly there is a problem there. I only have the sigma or I would compare them myself...but I am only noticing (slight) vignetting when the lens is wide open...not really bothersome..certainly nothing like the portrayal there. hmmmm....this warrants further investigation...I will look for a third source.
> Mathew at Light & Matter (the U-Tube video I referenced) seems like a very responsible guy), he is slightly Sigma biased (maybe) or he is just reporting the facts fairly.


I agree, there is something not right here. TDP is my favorite review site by the way. I find Bryan´s tests to be very thorough, objective and informative.

I got the 35 Art before that test was published. From my use I could see some vignetting wide open, but it was not bothering me at all. Having read Bryan´s review, I was very surprised to see how much vignetting he measured. So I did as good a verification as I could on my own. It is of course highly subjective, but I don´t believe I could see much more than 2 stops in the corners. Definitely not as much as Bryan measured. 

I actually posted a question on one of the threads, asking if there could be individual differences. I don´t believe there could be though. Nobody replied, so if someone with more knowledge on the subject reads this, I can repeat the question.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 21, 2014)

It's probably because the Sigma isn't really 1.4 and both set to manual exposure shows that. ;D :


----------



## lintoni (Mar 21, 2014)

sigma-rumors.com is now carrying a story stating that the Australian rrp is AUS$1099. They seem fairly confident on this one...


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 22, 2014)

lintoni said:


> sigma-rumors.com is now carrying a story stating that the Australian rrp is AUS$1099. They seem fairly confident on this one...



So what is the conversion rate?


----------



## Steve (Mar 22, 2014)

^^^google currency calculator puts it at about $1000 USD



Dylan777 said:


> Wonder how many "Wow" Sigma lenses out there? : 1 maybe 2



Depends on if you include price in the wow factor. "A 300mm f2.8 lens that's 99% as good as the Canon for half the price? I can do sports photography _and_ pay the mortgage? Wow!" I'd say they have a lot more than 1 or 2 ;D

Its kind of funny how similar camera gear forums discussions can be to beginner level physics classes except instead of talking about frictionless inclined planes in a vacuum, we talk about pixel peeping in a world without capitalism.


----------



## lintoni (Apr 5, 2014)

There's a review of a production sample of this lens at

slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1677/cat/30


----------



## Viggo (Apr 5, 2014)

I'm excited!


----------



## lintoni (Apr 5, 2014)

Viggo said:


> I'm excited!



I'll wait for pricing before getting excited, but I'm definitely interested!


----------

