# Sigma 135mm f/2 DG OS Art Coming? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 17, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=15230"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=15230">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>More Sigma Primes

</strong>We’re told that Sigma is working on a 135 f/2 DG OS Art series prime lens for release some time in 2014. Possibly around Photokina in September.</p>
<p>The source goes on to say that Sigma is going to be very aggressive next year and announce a lot of high performance glass.</p>
<p>The same source also says that Sigma may have a surprise camera announcement. There are a few details to be worked out, but there’s a possibility of a big DSLR announcement.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## sulla (Dec 17, 2013)

yea, that would be something, if it performed like their 35 A lens...


----------



## crasher8 (Dec 17, 2013)

This is great possible news. Unless of course you're blinded by brand loyalty.


----------



## distant.star (Dec 17, 2013)

. 
How do you improve on the 135L?


----------



## crasher8 (Dec 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



Is this one of those questions where you assume the product is to replace someone's Canon lens? Not everyone owns the 135L. I have one and have no use for a Sigma offering but it will be a great choice for others. Folks on the forum here seem to comment over and over on why a 3rd party would make something that Canon makes. Take the 24-105 for instance. What the hell is wrong with choices? Blind Loyalty comment above just for these reasons.


----------



## tianxiaozhang (Dec 17, 2013)

We love an aggressive Sigma when they make Art lenses.


----------



## distant.star (Dec 17, 2013)

.
Is this one of those posts that presumes to know my mind? You do not, and your insulting innuendo is unwelcome.

My question stands.




crasher8 said:


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


----------



## Artifex (Dec 17, 2013)

I would definitely love to see those new lens being Sigma Art 24mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/2. I might be over-optimistic, but this could be a new holy-trifecta of prime!


----------



## TommyLee (Dec 17, 2013)

love my 35 sig A

have 135L ...it is great

if Sig makes one with OS AND has similar performance as 135L...
and ...for like $1,000....well...hello Canon anyone in there?.... knock knock.....

will be nice to see what the 35L II looks like in performance.... now that they retreated and redesigned and MAY reissue... to combat sig 35 f1.4...............

this Canon/sigma 35 f1-4 saga.......
is part of the hint/equation for the 135 path...how this is all handled....

I love my Canon lenses..
but the sig 35 1.4 is so lovely... got my money back on the 35L f1.4.......

a 135 sigma f2 OS is JUST what I need....IFF it does the job right

TOm


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Dec 17, 2013)

Very good. The more competition and choices, better for the consumer.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 17, 2013)

I'm one of those waiting for a 135mm f2 with IS/OS. I have a nice Takumar SMC 135mm f2.5 (the good version) that suits my needs for the most part. It's quite sharp at 2.5. Dishing out another ~$800 over what the Takumar cost me seems like a waste if it's just for auto-focus (I don't mind focusing manually) and a half-stop worth of speed.


----------



## crasher8 (Dec 17, 2013)

*Oh the thin skin is showing*



distant.star said:


> .
> Is this one of those posts that presumes to know my mind? You do not, and your insulting innuendo is unwelcome.
> 
> My question stands.
> ...



Well if anything you're question is off topic. Gotta admit there is a huge feeling here that you can't top Canon and I for one think it's BS. So take your "How do you top the 135L" question to the proper forum subsection and I'll be glad to engage in both debate and agreement.


----------



## slclick (Dec 17, 2013)

Chiming in......Hi, I like the direction Sigma has taken over the past year and even though I do not have any experience with the Sports line lens or Contemporary, I have used the 35Art and find it a great addition to my glass collection. I have always wanted a 35L but it is out of my range so the Sigma 35 was very welcome. 
More of the same quality in classic FL's (such as trinity lengths) will be something to certainly save for. Question, how has the rumor rate on 3rd party items been compared to Canon at CR? 

Glad I found this site!


----------



## beckstoy (Dec 17, 2013)

RGomezPhotos said:


> Very good. The more competition and choices, better for the consumer.



+1

I'm surprised so many people here are slightly negative to another great lens entering the market. If it sucks, it sucks and people will go back to their 135L. If it amazes, like the Siggy 35mm 1.4, well...

...doesn't a rising tide lift all boats? Choice is good, and good for our craft.


----------



## candc (Dec 17, 2013)

Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat


----------



## ewg963 (Dec 17, 2013)

crasher8 said:


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


+1


----------



## tianxiaozhang (Dec 17, 2013)

candc said:


> Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat



That might be lethal after introducing Art class 24mm 50mm 85mm and 135mm priced lower than their Canon counterparts and then a full frame camera at $1500...


----------



## Artifex (Dec 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



I guess you do something like this : 
http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=388


----------



## eml58 (Dec 17, 2013)

Artifex said:


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



The Zeiss from all accounts is an amazing lens, what we have come to expect from Zeiss, they make few poor Lenses, but.

For Canon & Nikon, this particular 135f/2, though sublime, lacks auto focus, so it's all manual, which is Ok as well, but the Canon 135L is a pretty hard act to follow considering it's maybe 98% as good as the Zeiss 135f/2, and has auto focus, on a Canon body.

I haven't actually used the Zeiss 135f/2, but I do own the Canon 135f/2, and it's pretty good.

I own the Sigma Art 35f/1.4 as well as the Canon 35f/1.4 L, and both are excellent Lenses, the Sigma may have the sharper image, but the Canon has the better Bokah, it's all subjective to the individuals taste & preference, and wallet.

I think also "distant stars" original "How do you improve on the 135L" didn't need to inspire the "Canon Fan Boy" tirade that followed, this is an open forum, people are allowed to post their views, and within normal reasonable bounds, shouldn't expect to be hammered for them.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



F/1.8 and IS.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Dec 17, 2013)

I'd love to see a 24mm 1.4 from Sigma. I doubt it would be as sharp as the 35mm wide open but even if it comes close it would be great for night skies. Would be cheaper than the 24L for sure and HOPEFULLY a little sharper.


----------



## ejenner (Dec 17, 2013)

Artifex said:


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



Add AF and OS to that and I'd pay $2k for sure.

I do like the 135L though. If sig came out with something I'd probably keep both for a while (whatever the reviews) to see if I really did like the sig as much.

Of course I may be in the minority, but I'd like to see how good they could get a 135 at a price point of $1200-$1600. If it's not quite as good as the 135, but with IS for $800, then blah.


----------



## Artifex (Dec 17, 2013)

eml58 said:


> Artifex said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



I totally agree with you! You could also add that the Zeiss is more than twice the price of the Canon. I wasn't saying the Canon 135L is a bad lens, far from; it is exceptional, especially considering it's price. However, I was just pointing out that it can always be better. I am very curious of what Sigma can do with a 135mm, considering their latest products and the lack of choice in EF-mount for 135mm prime. Moreover, you can call me crazy, but I wouldn't even be disappointed if Sigma choses a different direction and produce an 135mm f/2.8 OS, which could be lighter, smaller and cheaper than a 135mm f/2 OS. I personally have difficulty believing such a lens is possible without being of size, weight and price similar to the EF 70-200 2.8L IS II.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 17, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


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



Lol. I feel like 98% of your posts are about a 135mm 1.8 OS


----------



## Etienne (Dec 17, 2013)

Sigma has my attention now. Stabilized 135 f/2 ... hell ya!
Please make it compatible with the Canon teleconverters.


----------



## sanj (Dec 17, 2013)

eml58 said:


> Artifex said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



I have the Zeiss 135. It is AMAZING. And besides stills, works great for video.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

Artifex said:


> Moreover, you can call me crazy, but I wouldn't even be disappointed if Sigma choses a different direction and produce an 135mm f/2.8 OS, which could be lighter, smaller and cheaper than a 135mm f/2 OS. I personally have difficulty believing such a lens is possible without being of size, weight and price similar to the EF 70-200 2.8L IS II.



Why? A 135 f2 OS could easily be made with a 72mm filter thread, the 70-200 f2.8 can't. When the EF 100 f2.8 Macro gained IS it put on just one ounce. The complexity of a high quality zoom is magnitudes above a simple prime, there is nothing complicated about a 135 f2 IS prime for the EF mount.


----------



## ksagomonyants (Dec 17, 2013)

That'd be great but not at a much higher price. Lots of people buy 135 f2 not only because it's great optically but also because it's one of the cheapest L lenses. I'd personally love if Canon could make it weather sealed.

I was asking this question before but got no answer. What's the experience of Sigma lens owners in terms of warranty and customer support? Is it as good as Canon's?



RLPhoto said:


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


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Dec 17, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that Sigma is working on a 135 f/2 DG OS Art series prime lens for release some time in 2014. Possibly around Photokina in September.
> The source goes on to say that Sigma is going to be very aggressive next year and announce a lot of high performance glass.
> The same source also says that Sigma may have a surprise camera announcement. There are a few details to be worked out, but there’s a possibility of a big DSLR announcement.


This is good news ... I still believe that if Sigma does come up with a decent full frame DSLR (even if it is as good as 6D), it would make a compelling option ... I would definitely be interested to buy one as Sigma already makes some decent lenses ... and, hopefully, those lenses would be free from AF issues, (due to "firmware upgrades" from Canon & Nikon), thus giving Sigma the opportunity to prove to the consumers that their lenses are just as good as the big boys if not better or they just aren't up to the mark. Either way, these are good times for the consumer.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Dec 17, 2013)

eml58 said:


> Artifex said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



Falling off my chair in suprise here...a reasoned discussion about lens brands and choice!
Your experiance pretty much mirrors my own 
The Canon 135 f2 L is a lovely lens, but it's a little dated in terms of modern design. If Canon imcrease the filter size to 77mm, they can easily make f1.8. They could easily add an IS unit, which would make this lens a low light performer. The min focus distance is a little long when compared to the 70-200 f2.8 II LIS and the aperture blades aren't very round (stop down to f2.8 and point at some highlights to see my point). Then there's the AF unit. It's good, but it's a little slower against the 70-200 cousins. It could benefit from the newer coatings and weather sealing...but all these thing do not detract from the superlative photos that the current version is capable of taking. It's a great lens, but could do with a few tweeks for a 2014 context.


----------



## Eldar (Dec 17, 2013)

I must admit I don´t use the 135/2 very much. I tend to go for either the 85/1.2 II or the 70-200/2.8 IS II. The IQ is excellent though and I probably should use it more often. 

To really tempt me, I think I would want f1.8 and IS. If I could get that at the same IQ and AF speed (always wants faster ..), I´d be first in line.


----------



## WoodyWindy (Dec 17, 2013)

Just one quick suggestion - whenever there's a new rumor for an upcoming Sigma lens, please PLEASE find some stock image other than the Jolly Green Giant to head it with, unless of course it is a replacement for that particular ultra fast telephoto...


----------



## fox40phil (Dec 17, 2013)

Hoping for weather sealed lenses..... :-X please...


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



Well, I'd love to get any or all of the following improvements:


100% more IS
10% better IQ 
50% less price


----------



## infared (Dec 17, 2013)

I would LOVE to see a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art lens in 2014. Should not be too difficult to best the Canon offerings...and being that the Otus is totally out of my reach...a guy can hope for something in between.


----------



## ScottyP (Dec 17, 2013)

candc said:


> Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat



Interesting, but they'd need to ditch the Foveon sensor and go regular. Too large a data file not to have any real improvement in resolution, at least not that ive read anywhere outside the Sigma website. Or maybe non-Bayer like Fuji's x-trans. That would be exciting indeed. 

What if Sigma made a Canon EF mount camera with a Sony sensor. So-sigma? Sig-ony? Sig-can-nony?

I'd rather see them to with the non-Bayer design though.


----------



## lol (Dec 17, 2013)

My 135L is a lens I'd like to update, but not even the Zeiss is quite there in performance/value ratio (I would go for an Otus level one if they ever do that!). My biggest beef with the L is the longitudinal colour is rather poorly corrected. Can we have a true APO or better design please?


----------



## Quasimodo (Dec 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



+ 100


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

lol said:


> My 135L is a lens I'd like to update, but not even the Zeiss is quite there in performance/value ratio (I would go for an Otus level one if they ever do that!). My biggest beef with the L is the longitudinal colour is rather poorly corrected. Can we have a true APO or better design please?



Wow, you are the first person I ever heard of complain about the longitudinal (axial) CA from a 135L, can you post some images of yours that demonstrate this? 

Of course as far as CA goes axial is the one to have as it is far simpler to correct for in post than lateral.


----------



## EOBeav (Dec 17, 2013)

Quasimodo said:


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



I'll go one further, how do you improve on the 135L and price it competitively? If you catch it at the right time, you can get one for <$1kUSD. They're going to have to work hard to build one to beat the priceerformance ratio without cutting some corners.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 17, 2013)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



I hope canon is listening to me screaming in my tiniest sliver of the Internets. The 135L is darn near the perfect general tele lens for my uses. With a bump in specs, I'd be willing to pay 85LII prices for it.


----------



## 7enderbender (Dec 17, 2013)

It's great if there are more choices. I'm happy with my 135L and don't want OS/IS. BUT if Sigma delivers something with similar optical qualities with better build quality/less plastic I'd be curious at least.

I've never been too thrilled with the cheap feel of the EF lenses (coming from Canon FD). So there is a market for things that feel more solid.


----------



## deleteme (Dec 17, 2013)

candc said:


> Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat



Some have speculated they may introduce a m4/3 camera with their Foveon sensor. It would add interest to the format but they need to play a lot of catch up to meet the usability expectations of current M4/3 users.


----------



## AJ (Dec 17, 2013)

candc said:


> Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat


Yeah I never understood why Sigma has their own lens mount. Who's going to invest in an arsenal of Sigma-mount lenses? Not me, even if they put out a decent body at a decent price. Much better to have bodies with Canon and Nikon mounts. That way a Sigma camera can mount more lenses ( = more camera sales) and Sigma can simplify its lens lineup by having fewer lens mounts ( = more profit).


----------



## NancyP (Dec 17, 2013)

I would welcome an APS-C Foveon SLR with good Live View, and I would go nuts over either a full frame Foveon SLR with Live View or any format Foveon SLR with Canon EF mount and Live View. Most of all, I would go bonkers over an upgrade of the current Sigma Photo Pro RAW converter to encompass some of the tools standard on Lightroom. The actual RAW conversion of the current SPP is fine, its monochrome is excellent, but can you believe - no cropping - no localized adjustments. 

I love my Sigma DP Merrills 1, 2, 3 compact fixed-lens cameras - the files are really nice for landscape work, the subtlety of colors is wonderful. These cameras are definitely special-use cameras, due to the very poor performance at ISO greater than 400, and due to somewhat compromised dynamic range even compared to Canon sensors. My real dream is for the Foveon sensor to be brought to a 6 x 7 or 6 x 9 camera back compatible with view cameras with extensive movements. That would be a large format killer for landscape. It would also cost nearly as much as the Green Bazooka, with a good camera (Arca-Swiss for preference) and 3 good lenses attached.

As my other interests include wildlife photography, Canon SLRs are still going to be in my camera bag. Consider me a fangirl of the 400mm f/5.6L.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Dec 17, 2013)

tianxiaozhang said:


> We love an aggressive Sigma when they make Art lenses.



+1 8) 8)


----------



## Bruce Photography (Dec 17, 2013)

beckstoy said:


> RGomezPhotos said:
> 
> 
> > Very good. The more competition and choices, better for the consumer.
> ...



+1. For my D7100 I was really pleased with the Sigma Art 18-35 1.8. I first bought the Sigma 35 1.4 Art lens and was very pleased (it was a full frame) but the 18-35 1.8 is just great. I wish Sigma had a 16-35 F1.8 full frame for both Nikon and Canon. This new series of Global lenses by Sigma with the USB dock is a great idea and I hope all lens makers follows suit. Sigma right now is the first lens maker with the dock and a zoom lens that actually works similar with primes at the 1.8 level. What a wonderful feel these lenses have.


----------



## candc (Dec 17, 2013)

Bruce Photography said:


> beckstoy said:
> 
> 
> > RGomezPhotos said:
> ...



The 18-35 makes a really good 35 f/1.8 lens on full frame also, it vignettes but not that bad at 35, about 28 mm and the corners go black. Same thing with the 8-16, it works on ff pretty good at 16


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



add IS and remove longitudinal CA and make it even crisper still (seems hard to believe, but I believe Zeiss already has one that is crisper at the wider apertures)

135L is good though, very good, other than some longitudinal CA


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 17, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> lol said:
> 
> 
> > My 135L is a lens I'd like to update, but not even the Zeiss is quite there in performance/value ratio (I would go for an Otus level one if they ever do that!). My biggest beef with the L is the longitudinal colour is rather poorly corrected. Can we have a true APO or better design please?
> ...



???

I've seen people bring up longitudinal CA regarding the 135L all over the place. It's basically the one issue with it that people bring up.


----------



## zim (Dec 17, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> but there’s a possibility of a big DSLR announcement.



This is the most interesting part of this to me, I remember posting about their body strategy before.
Imagine if they release a 6d equivalent body, in all ways except a little better AF you know one that allows you to photograph your children running about, not exactly unreasonable for that price point, that would really put the cat among the pigeons.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > lol said:
> ...



I have seen people bring up all kinds of things, they very rarely have images to back the claims up. I have posted hundreds of illustrative images in threads like this. 

What I was asking for was actual images where axial CA has ruined the shot and was not easily fixable in post. Lateral CA is a completely different problem that has no practical post correction, axial, unless very pronounced, is not.


----------



## lol (Dec 17, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> Wow, you are the first person I ever heard of complain about the longitudinal (axial) CA from a 135L, can you post some images of yours that demonstrate this?


Too lazy to fish them out, as obviously they didn't make the priority keep list.

I should add I'm probably not the biggest demographic for this category lens. For normal shots, you can easily see green/magenta on high contrast transitions which are a characteristic of longitudinal CA. I can live with that, or manually photoshop it if I feel like it.

Where it can not be ignored is for astrophotography. Having pin points of light across the whole frame is near enough the ultimate stress test for any lens. Where the 135L fails is that while the green/blue focal points are close enough, the red channel is way off in comparison. As such, I tend to only use it with narrowband colour filters.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

lol said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, you are the first person I ever heard of complain about the longitudinal (axial) CA from a 135L, can you post some images of yours that demonstrate this?
> ...



Don;t believe the first, sorry. I have seen too many images from the 135 f2 to give much credence.

I do 100% believe the astrophotography issue though. I remember reading a review of the 200 f2 where the guy was very disappointed in how bad most of his Canon lenses were for that field. He said the 200 f2.8 was considerably better for the task than the 200 f2, so I am not surprised you find the 135 f2 a disappointment.

As you said, a comparatively small demographic, but one where that particular lens does show its design objectives to be out of sync for that user base. Even if "they" make the perfect lens, it won't be perfect for everyone  Just look at the complaints about the MkII 70-200 f2.8IS as not having the smooth Bokeh of the MkI from the portrait shooters while the sports shooters rave about the faster AF and sharper images from the MkII.........


----------



## lol (Dec 17, 2013)

Maybe the 200mm f/1.8L was better for the guy disappointed with the 200mm f/2L  I've certainly heard good things about the 200mm f/2.8 too, although "only" f/2.8 and for the more serious they stop down slightly from there anyway.

Back to the 135L, I guess we have different tolerances to aberrations. As said, I can live with it on the 135L for normal use, although still wish it wasn't there. If the Sigma is better for a similar ball park cost, I'll probably make the switch. If it costs more, it better be a LOT better, but that doesn't sound like the Sigma we know.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 17, 2013)

lol said:


> Maybe the 200mm f/1.8L was better for the guy disappointed with the 200mm f/2L  I've certainly heard good things about the 200mm f/2.8 too, although "only" f/2.8 and for the more serious they stop down slightly from there anyway.
> 
> Back to the 135L, I guess we have different tolerances to aberrations. As said, I can live with it on the 135L for normal use, although still wish it wasn't there. If the Sigma is better for a similar ball park cost, I'll probably make the switch. If it costs more, it better be a LOT better, but that doesn't sound like the Sigma we know.


No he didn't rate the 200 1.8 for astrophotography either. Here is the link, http://www.welsh-house.net/andy/review200f2.html he does reference the 135 and 200 f1.8 and 200 f2.8.


----------



## AdamJ (Dec 17, 2013)

Am I alone in finding lateral CA easier to correct in post than axial CA? I'd be happy to learn how to correct axial CA reliably.


----------



## 9VIII (Dec 18, 2013)

There's lots to improve on the 135L. If all Sigma did was improve corner performance wide open I would be happy. A shorter MFD would be nice too.




ScottyP said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > Big DSLR announcement, hmmmm. Could they make a camera with an EF mount? Just think, all the sigma lenses sold to canon users would now work on it along with the canon lenses too, it would be a Trojan horse coup d'e'tat
> ...



I think part of the whole reason their Foveon camera didn't take off was that it was a crop sensor. Originally they were asking 1D prices for an APS-C camera, that just doesn't fly.
If they can put out a 20MP full frame Foveon sensor (60MP counting individual sub pixels), upgrade the autofocus, make sure it has lots of dials and price it to compete with the D800, I think they would have a winner.


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 18, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How do you improve on the 135L?



I agree but adding OS / IS is a big assist for this lens IMO

however its going to take some amazing optics to out perform the 135 f2L at a pure optical level


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 18, 2013)

AdamJ said:


> Am I alone in finding lateral CA easier to correct in post than axial CA? I'd be happy to learn how to correct axial CA reliably.



Are you sure you have them the right way round?

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/lens-corrections.htm

The control panel in Lightroom-Develop-Lens Corrections-Color is all about correcting fringing, this can manifest from either lateral or axial CA. Though it can deal with blooming too, the colours are normally different. Lateral is two colours with red/magenta and green/yellow, axial is normally purple, as is blooming.

Just click the box! If that doesn't do the job very well adjusting the range and colour of the sliders will normally sort it out very well. You can even use the picker to select the exact tone of your problem CA/blooming.


Below are two images that illustrate dealing with lateral CA, the image is enlarged 200% and then a screen shot of the image and the control box.


----------



## LowBloodSugar (Dec 18, 2013)

Its strange that canon doesn't have more IS lenses. 100mm 2.8L IS Macro is the only macro IS prime canon has near that range. The one drawback of that lens is that manual focus is twitchy at longer distances. I am hoping for a non-macro IS prime in the 90-135 range. Perferably canon. This is an enticing rumor


----------



## ScottyP (Dec 18, 2013)

9VIII said:


> There's lots to improve on the 135L. If all Sigma did was improve corner performance wide open I would be happy. A shorter MFD would be nice too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd welcome the competition. Price would have to come down, but FPS and buffer depth would need to come up. Not sure how much Sigma can do about that given those huge files. Their latest body was a little weak on that department. Is the blockage there the card's speed or their processor speed?


----------



## beckstoy (Dec 18, 2013)

Just today I purchased my first (and only) 135L. I'd been putting it off until I learned more about the Rumored Siggy, but realized that I'll probably be able to sell my 135L for the Sigma if it's really so amazing. I'm sure I'll get back nearly the whole purchase price!

...not to mention that I'll have ten months using it! For what it's worth, the 135L is a stunner. I'm super excited.


----------



## AdamJ (Dec 18, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> AdamJ said:
> 
> 
> > Am I alone in finding lateral CA easier to correct in post than axial CA? I'd be happy to learn how to correct axial CA reliably.
> ...



The link you provided confirms what I said, that lateral CA is easier to correct than axial CA!


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 19, 2013)

AdamJ said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > AdamJ said:
> ...




You are right, I am very sorry I obviously suffered from scrambled brain! I even provided the link that confirmed it! Too much coffee ;D

In my defense I just read your comment the wrong way round, but ended up describing it the right way round. Of course with regards Axial CA, it depends on how blurred the image looks, if the fringing is more noticeable than the blur then you can mitigate it to a large extent with de-fringing and sharpening, obviously not super effective on the graphic but probably passable on screen in a real image.


----------

