# Patent: Sigma 200mm f/2 DG OS USM & 1.4 Teleconverter



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 11, 2016)

```
It looks like Sigma is developing a competitor to one of my favourite Canon lenses, the EF 200mm f/2L IS. This is one of those lenses that once you try one, you never want to put it down. It’s a very versatile focal length and is especially magical for portrait work.</p>
<p>Patent Publication No. 2016-45314 (Google Translated)</p>
<ul>
<li>Published 2016.4.4</li>
<li>Filing date 2014.8.21</li>
</ul>
<p>Sigma 200mm f/2 DG OS</p>
<ul>
<li>Focal length 194.93</li>
<li>F-number 2.05</li>
<li>Full angle of view 2ω 12.70</li>
<li>The image height Y 21.63</li>
<li>Overall length of the lens 231.33</li>
<li>BF 60.2233</li>
</ul>
<p>Sigma 1.4x TC</p>
<ul>
<li>Focal length 274.52</li>
<li>F-number 2.89</li>
<li>Full angle of view 2ω 9.06</li>
<li>The image height Y 21.63</li>
<li>Overall length of the lens 252.18</li>
<li>BF 39.5088</li>
</ul>
<p>Along with the optical formula patent for a 200mm f/2 OS, it looks like Sigma is developing a dedicated 1.4x teleconverter for the lens.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 11, 2016)

I like the way Sigma is always presenting something new and interesting. 
Of course this is just a patent and we'll see if it's becoming a product, 
but if so it will be quite interesting seeing this comparing to the Canon offer in price, AF and IQ.


----------



## Chaitanya (Apr 11, 2016)

Doesnt Sigma already offer 1.4x TC under their Sport line up?


----------



## Monchomac (Apr 11, 2016)

So...Sigma Art lenses are anywhere from 30% to 50% cheaper than the canon "L" equivalents so it could be from 2,800 to 4,000 ? Unless they really want to take canon down and, they could go for about $2,000. Even I would save for one!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 11, 2016)

Very interesting. If this becomes a reality, though, Sigma absolutely HAS to get the focus consistency gremlins dealt with. This is an incredibly demanding focal length.


----------



## pierlux (Apr 11, 2016)

I wonder whether the "_dedicated_ 1.4X teleconverter" will work with Canon lenses, too, and, in particular, with those lenses - I'm thinking of the 70-300 L - which do not accept teleconverters other than the Kenko.


----------



## Cali Capture (Apr 11, 2016)

Isn't the Canon 200mm f/2 version ll, on the CR list of possible 2016 announcements? it still has the old 2mode IS and is starting to look a bit dated. A sigma would keep canon's price down. Hoping the Olympics will give us a new 200 f/2! Only rented this one, but sure is great for indoor sports, and improved IS would make it better, so long as they don't blow up the cost!


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 11, 2016)

" This is one of those lenses that once you try one, you never want to put it down"

+100,000,000,000,00000000000000000000000000000000


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 11, 2016)

And in other news, Sigma's CEO also stated that he was deliberately withholding the 85mm f/1.4 Art from the public with no plans to release it: 

_"It's done, it's phenomenal, and you'll never have one! I will release other focal lengths of Sigma Art lenses just to flummox you! Moohahaha!!"_

- A


----------



## Etienne (Apr 11, 2016)

At first reading I thought the teleconverter was built-in. Too bad. Still looks like a really interesting lens if it's relatively affordable.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 11, 2016)

Very interesting. I'd love a 200L f/2 but the price is so high - even secondhand - I just can't justify it (in the meantime I hope to get a 200 1.8, even with all the drawbacks - lack of IS, so-so ergonomics, focus by wire lack of repair support). A third party equivalent would be a good compromise - assuming it was reasonably good.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 11, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> And in other news, Sigma's CEO also stated that he was deliberately withholding the 85mm f/1.4 Art from the public with no plans to release it:
> 
> _"It's done, it's phenomenal, and you'll never have one! I will release other focal lengths of Sigma Art lenses just to flummox you! Moohahaha!!"_
> 
> - A



It's official, Sigma has now attained the status level of "Overlord of the Lens Industry".

Someone needs to photoshop Kazuto Yamaki into the big spikey chair from Game of Thrones.


----------



## Andyx01 (Apr 11, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> I like the way Sigma is always presenting something new and interesting.
> Of course this is just a patent and we'll see if it's becoming a product,
> but if so it will be quite interesting seeing this comparing to the Canon offer in price, AF and IQ.



"New and interesting", as in the same as Canon's lens, Alrighty then.


----------



## tr573 (Apr 11, 2016)

Andyx01 said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > I like the way Sigma is always presenting something new and interesting.
> ...



the new and interesting part is that you won't have to spend 6 grand to get a 200mm f/2


----------



## bholliman (Apr 11, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Very interesting. If this becomes a reality, though, Sigma absolutely HAS to get the focus consistency gremlins dealt with. This is an incredibly demanding focal length.



That was my first thought. Unless Sigma corrects their auto focus and copy variation issues, I would avoid this lens even if it was incredible optically. Out of focus pictures are out of focus pictures...


----------



## Jopa (Apr 11, 2016)

tr573 said:


> Andyx01 said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian said:
> ...



I got mine for $5.5k - the best money ever spent.


----------



## Jopa (Apr 11, 2016)

Cali Capture said:


> it still has the old 2mode IS and is starting to look a bit dated.


Oh no... The *old* 2 mode IS kills it!!! The *new* 3 mode IS adds so much to the optical quality, it makes the images taken with the poor old 200 look like [email protected] LOL


----------



## Maiaibing (Apr 11, 2016)

For the right price ~2.500$ I'd accept some OOF shots and take 2 each time I needed one.


----------



## wsmith96 (Apr 11, 2016)

This is very interesting news. Like everyone else, I'll be keeping my eye on this one with hopes of accurate focusing.


----------



## addola (Apr 11, 2016)

The Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS sells for $3,399 so I expect a 200mm f/2 to sell around that price if not more!


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 11, 2016)

addola said:


> The Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS sells for $3,399 so I expect a 200mm f/2 to sell around that price if not more!



_But no one else sells_ that 120-300 lens. It is unique in that regard. Sigma can be bullish there and thumb their nose at folks struggling between a slow 70-300L, short 70-200L, or comically pricey 300 f/2.8L.

If this lens materializes, it will be pricey, but perhaps not *as* pricey as you think.

- A


----------



## brad-man (Apr 11, 2016)

The 200 (assuming they build it, and they probably will) will likely be out of my price range for such a specialized lens. But I am still waiting for the mythical 135 f/1.8 OS. I'll likely bust open the piggy bank for that one. But like Dustin said, they'll need consistent AF for either of these.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 11, 2016)

Chaitanya said:


> Doesnt Sigma already offer 1.4x TC under their Sport line up?


Yes, they have a 1.4X and a 2X teleconverter..... but this one might be integrated into the lens....


----------



## JoseB (Apr 11, 2016)

At least, the outside is identic to Canon!!! Must be good...


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 11, 2016)

Don Haines said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > Doesnt Sigma already offer 1.4x TC under their Sport line up?
> ...



Integrated might not be ideal, a lot of people probably just want a 200f2.0, but I do like the idea of shipping one with the lens for anything that costs over $3,000. A Teleconverter that's designed for a specific lens should do a better job, and the cost of the TC itself is probably minimal (no moving parts).

If would be super awesome if Sigma could make it a trend to include a dedicated Teleconverter with every Supertelephoto lens they make.


----------



## Cali Capture (Apr 11, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Cali Capture said:
> 
> 
> > it still has the old 2mode IS and is starting to look a bit dated.
> ...



I would Imagine that the weight would be light w/ Canon also J. I'm by no means knocking the current lens, Just thinking as to what they may throw into a new one and if Canon will make a version II.


----------



## Cali Capture (Apr 11, 2016)

Jopa, The 200mm f/2 is my short list of "next to get". I love fast lenses, do a lot of natural light work and sports. I've been holding of due to the rumor of a replacement which usually means a lower price on the existing or perhaps a reason to spend on the next. What do you use yours for most, Sports or Portrait? Do you Hand hold or Mount most often?


----------



## IglooEater (Apr 12, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Cali Capture said:
> 
> 
> > it still has the old 2mode IS and is starting to look a bit dated.
> ...



Yup, and lacking that 3rd mode makes it utterly unusable for anything that moves. If you leave this lens in the studio on a tripod in good light it'll be okay but is useless otherwise without that 3rd mode. ;P


----------



## slclick (Apr 12, 2016)

IglooEater said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Cali Capture said:
> ...



Utterly unusable was just used. 

So now I wait for the responses. 

I have no dog in this fight just the urge to chow on some popped corn when absolutes are thrown around on the forum.


----------



## TexPhoto (Apr 12, 2016)

slclick said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



Please forward all your useless lenses to me for proper disposal. If tan/white or bearing a red ring, please pack carefully and use Fed-Ex overnight. 

Good to see Sigma pressure Canon. The results will be great.


----------



## Cali Capture (Apr 12, 2016)

Geezzz! I guess I left some troll bait in my post! Like how only some of my post was used for quotes! Guess I hit a sore spot, Hope the Canon 200mm f/2 "II" doesn't come out lighter, faster (back to 1.8) w/ better focus speed & lower cost than what a troll bought it for :0


----------



## TeT (Apr 12, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Cali Capture said:
> 
> 
> > it still has the old 2mode IS and is starting to look a bit dated.
> ...



The 200 2 L does look a little tired and old compared to many lenses coming out today. IS 2 to IS 3 was an upgrade.


----------



## PeterAlex7 (Apr 12, 2016)

I dont know why sigma in a hurry to announce that they want to join the professional level. They want to join the club but afaik they still have some issue with AF consistency with their current lenses. Will they sacrifice weatherproof for a cheaper 200 f2? I doubt professionals out there will glad with this idea or thinking this is the solution for them who wont spent 6k for a 200 f2 lenses.

And for canon, i hope they replace the 200 f2. Come with the 3rd IS generation, and sharpness like the 300 f2.8 II.


----------



## ykn123 (Apr 12, 2016)

Hm someone really complains about the sharpness of the 200 f2 from Canon ? Must be a bad copy - the lens is a legend if it comes to sharpness. And the IS - i'll use mine for indoor / outdoor sports to freeze motion - in the 1/2000s range. IS doesn't matter here. I would not spent 6K for just doing portraits (the 85 1.2 or 135 f2 are much better value for money then) - and even if, with f2 and a decent camera (ISO noise wise) you have enough light to shoot at 1/200 or so - and the IS is way good enough for this. (except you have a strong tremor)


----------



## GuyF (Apr 12, 2016)

Currently owning the Sigma 85mm f1.4 and awaiting an Art version, I hadn't considered a 200mm f2 for portraits. Since Sigma's focus consistency can be quite poor, the thought of having just 4 or 5cm of "in-focusness" when shooting a subject, say, 4m away at f2 with a 200mm lens must be a bit of a concern.

Anyone got any Canon 200mm f2 portraits to demonstrate the really narrow depth of field such a lens gives?

(I used the two sites below to calculate depth of field for a given sensor size + lens + f-stop + distance to subject)

http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm


----------



## JimmyJames (Apr 12, 2016)

GuyF said:


> Anyone got any Canon 200mm f2 portraits to demonstrate the really narrow depth of field such a lens gives?



https://500px.com/search?q=200L+lisa+holloway&type=photos&sort=relevance


----------



## Andyx01 (Apr 12, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> addola said:
> 
> 
> > The Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS sells for $3,399 so I expect a 200mm f/2 to sell around that price if not more!
> ...



My bet would be this will be priced at or around $2199

If they made it without IS (which I doubt they will) I could see it as low as $1499 give or take.

My bet is also that the focus speed and accuracy will perform accordingly.

Bottom line is if you are a pro that needs to capture the moment, you will want he Canon.

If you have some wiggle room and can afford a few missed shots, or your composure doesn't demand as much, the sigma will do just fine.


----------



## Maiaibing (Apr 12, 2016)

GuyF said:


> Currently owning the Sigma 85mm f1.4 and awaiting an Art version, I hadn't considered a 200mm f2 for portraits. Since Sigma's focus consistency can be quite poor, the thought of having just 4 or 5cm of "in-focusness" when shooting a subject, say, 4m away at f2 with a 200mm lens must be a bit of a concern.
> 
> Anyone got any Canon 200mm f2 portraits to demonstrate the really narrow depth of field such a lens gives?
> 
> ...



In real life you have a little more tolerance with the same look and feel compared to the 135L. I remind people when they consider the 85L or the 134L that you get more wide open keepers with the 135L than the 85L with very much the same look and feel to the result. And conversely even more with the 200L f/2 II. 

The two girls in full figure on a road shows this eminently well.

So there is a little room for variations in AF as your numbers also show.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 12, 2016)

JimmyJames said:


> GuyF said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone got any Canon 200mm f2 portraits to demonstrate the really narrow depth of field such a lens gives?
> ...



Great example. Lisa really rocks the 200L and makes me jealous every time she posts!


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 12, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> JimmyJames said:
> 
> 
> > GuyF said:
> ...



Yep. I know people use that lens for sports, but every time I see 200 f/2L portraits I wonder why it's used for anything else.

- A


----------



## Jopa (Apr 13, 2016)

Cali Capture said:


> Jopa, The 200mm f/2 is my short list of "next to get". I love fast lenses, do a lot of natural light work and sports. I've been holding of due to the rumor of a replacement which usually means a lower price on the existing or perhaps a reason to spend on the next. What do you use yours for most, Sports or Portrait? Do you Hand hold or Mount most often?


I was kidding about the 3 mode IS, don't take it seriously 
I use it for portraits, along with the 300 f/2.8. I'm a little tired of the 85-135 standard-looking portraits, prefer more compression. The 200 f/2 is an ultimate portrait lens IMHO. The 300 is also great, but to take a full body shot of an adult you have to be quite far away, for kids - no problem though. Sometimes I'm also using the 600 f/4 wrong - for portraits  All 3 have so good IS - I never needed to mount them, except of maybe a monopod for the 600 f/4. The 200 is a little heavier the 300 f/2.8 II, so if one day Canon makes a 200 v2 - most likely it will be lighter, "modern" color, and 3 mode IS. In terms of IS and optical quality - I think it's the same level as the newer 300, but who knows - Canon never stops, so maybe they will improve it optically to prepare for the upcoming 120Mpx sensor?


----------



## GuyF (Apr 13, 2016)

JimmyJames said:


> GuyF said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone got any Canon 200mm f2 portraits to demonstrate the really narrow depth of field such a lens gives?
> ...



Thanks for the link. Of course I hadn't even thought to look in the lens gallery right here on CR! Doh! :-[


----------



## TeT (Apr 13, 2016)

following the 500.px link: the portrait of the boy holding the chicken by Holloway is one of my all time favorite portrait snapshots...

Random & OT


----------



## johnhenry (Apr 14, 2016)

scyrene said:


> Very interesting. I'd love a 200L f/2 but the price is so high - even secondhand - I just can't justify it (in the meantime I hope to get a 200 1.8, even with all the drawbacks - lack of IS, so-so ergonomics, focus by wire lack of repair support). A third party equivalent would be a good compromise - assuming it was reasonably good.



I own a 200mm f/1.8 and love it. That lack of IS is noticable but I have taken portraits from across a room with it at 1/15th second and could see the guys tiny nose hairs. The focus by wire is oddish but I got used to it. I also picked up a brand new focus motor on eBay in 2011 when I got the lens and wanting to think ahead.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 14, 2016)

johnhenry said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > Very interesting. I'd love a 200L f/2 but the price is so high - even secondhand - I just can't justify it (in the meantime I hope to get a 200 1.8, even with all the drawbacks - lack of IS, so-so ergonomics, focus by wire lack of repair support). A third party equivalent would be a good compromise - assuming it was reasonably good.
> ...



Good plan! I'd imagine even a broken one could sell reasonably well for parts, given there's a small and surely shrinking number of them.


----------



## tpatana (Apr 14, 2016)

Wish I had one. Or I could settle for the Canon version too.


----------

