# SIGMA Announces the 14mm F1.8 DG HSM Art Series Lens



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 21, 2017)

```
<strong>A true high-speed lens that delivers a new dimension of visual experience</strong></p>
<p><span class="green">*Among interchangeable lens for digital SLRs as of February 2017</span></p>
<ol>
<li>14mm ultra-wide angle of view and F1.8 brightness deliver a new dimension of visual experience</li>
<li>Seventh 35mm full-frame prime lens to join the Art line</li>
<li>Other features</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>A true high-speed lens that delivers a new dimension of visual experience</strong></p>
<p>In taking photographs of starry skies or other celestial scenes at night, or of the seashore with a wide perspective, a large-diameter lens is a strong ally, since it allows the capture of a moving subject by adjusting shutter speed without relying on ISO sensitivity. With its full-frame 35mm coverage, 14mm focal length for an ultra-wide angle of view, F2 barrier-breaking F1.8, the SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM | Art is the true high-speed ultra-wide-angle lens for which so many photographers have been waiting. Although some zoom lenses are available that can cover 14mm, the large diameter delivering F1.8 brightness is a singular advantage. Going beyond fast shutter speed, this lens can capture a swarm of fireflies with crystal clarity, a beautiful bokeh effect, and outstanding control of light streaking.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>【Key features】</p>
<ol>
<li>14mm ultra-wide angle of view and F1.8 brightness deliver a new dimension of visual experience</li>
</ol>
<p>By leveraging its extreme angle of view and the dramatic perspective this creates, an ultra-wide-angle lens can get up close and personal with a subject while at the same time taking in a vast background—an example of photography going beyond normal human vision.</p>
<p>SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM | Art combines the extremely deep depth of field that comes from an ultra-wide angle of view with the extremely shallow depth of field that comes from F1.8 brightness. The result is a sharply captured subject set against a vast background dramatically blurred with a beautiful bokeh effect. It is a highly impressive mode of photographic expression that until now simply has not existed.</p>
<ul>
<li>Minimized chromatic aberrations</li>
</ul>
<p>Three FLD (“F” Low Dispersion) glass elements and four SLD (Super Low Dispersion) glass elements help minimize transverse chromatic aberration, which tends to be noticeable in shots taken with ultra-wide-angle lenses. The result is outstanding image quality from the center of the image to the edges.</p>
<ul>
<li>Featuring a large-diameter aspherical lens element</li>
</ul>
<p>The SIGMA 12-24mmF4 DG HSM | Art was the first SIGMA lens to feature a large ⌀80mm aspherical lens element. Building on the expertise derived from this success, the new lens features a large ⌀80mm precision-molded glass aspherical lens as its front element. This technology has made possible the 14mm F1.8 specification—the first of its kind.</p>
<ul>
<li>Minimized distortion</li>
</ul>
<p>Serving as the front lens element, the large ⌀80mm precision-molded glass aspherical lens effectively minimizes distortion. Offering excellent peripheral brightness, this lens delivers outstanding image quality from the center to the edges.</p>
<ul>
<li>Distinctive bokeh effect</li>
</ul>
<p>Even at the 14mm ultra-wide-angle of view, F1.8 brightness makes possible a very shallow depth of field with the subject standing out dramatically against a bokeh background. It’s the unique mode of expression that only a large-diameter lens can deliver.</p>
<ol start="2">
<li>Seventh 35mm full-frame prime lens to join the Art line</li>
</ol>
<p>Launched in 2012, the SIGMA 35mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art was the first lens in the Art line. Since then, SIGMA has developed a wide variety of lenses for the line, and the SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM | Art is the seventh prime lens in the line to offer 35mm full-frame coverage. Now even stronger, the Art line sets the new standard for prime lenses in the ultra-high-megapixel era.</p>
<ol start="3">
<li>Other features</li>
</ol>
<ul>
<li>Fast AF with full-time manual override</li>
</ul>
<p>Note: The operation of full-time MF may vary based on mount type</p>
<ul>
<li>Compatible with Mount Converter MC-11</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Available SIGMA USB DOCK (Makes customization and flexible adjustment possible)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Available Mount Conversion Service (Allows use with another camera body)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Rounded diaphragm</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Designed to minimize flare and ghosting</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>High-precision, durable brass bayonet mount</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Evaluation with SIGMA’s own MTF measuring system “A1”</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Made in Japan (With outstanding craftsmanship)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The lens barrel is engraved with the year of release</li>
</ul>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## keriboi (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM Introducing the World’s First and Only F1.8 Ultra-Wide-Angle Lens*

When I buy a 6DMkII I will buy this lens. Epic. Well done sigma


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM Introducing the World’s First and Only F1.8 Ultra-Wide-Angle Lens*

"F" Low Dispersion? Is that the nice way to say effing low dispersion?


----------



## VooDooZG (Feb 21, 2017)

Biggest question - what price it will be ??


----------



## sanj (Feb 21, 2017)

Am buying.


----------



## pierlux (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM Introducing the World’s First and Only F1.8 Ultra-Wide-Angle Lens*



uri.raz said:


> "F" Low Distortion? Is that the nice way to say effing low distortion?



It's "Low Dispersion" actually, not "Low Distortion". The Sigma claim that the FLD glass has a performance equal to fluorite glass seems a bit exaggerated to me, I strongly doubt it's actually "equal".

Nice lens! Let's see how much it will cost...


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: SIGMA 14mm F1.8 DG HSM Introducing the World’s First and Only F1.8 Ultra-Wide-Angle Lens*



pierlux said:


> uri.raz said:
> 
> 
> > "F" Low Distortion? Is that the nice way to say effing low distortion?
> ...



Corrected.


----------



## hne (Feb 21, 2017)

This might very well be the astro lens people have been waiting for.

From the press release:


> In taking photographs of *starry skies or other celestial scenes at night*, or of the...


From the product page https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/wide-angle-lenses/14mm-f18-dg-hsm-a:


> Ideal Use: Landscape Photography, *Astrophotography*, Documentary and Architecture



Emphasis mine.


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 21, 2017)

low light Documentary, low light crowd shots, tight architectural shots, reception and dance foor.... here is one at 16mm, about a meter distance to subject. perspective distortion was fixed in post.


----------



## NorbR (Feb 21, 2017)

I hate announcements that give no clue about price and no time frame for availability. It's teasing, and it's annoying 

That being said, I'm still first in line for this lens, as long as the price remains reasonable of course ;D


----------



## CosminD (Feb 21, 2017)

anybody noticed that is has 1170gr ??? Lol ;D


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 21, 2017)

i can give you a hint:

Sigma Art glass is typically priced at around a $1.00 per each gramm of the lens weight. so around $1100 -$1150 is a good price guestimate.



NorbR said:


> I hate announcements that give no clue about price and no time frame for availability. It's teasing, and it's annoying
> 
> That being said, I'm still first in line for this lens, as long as the price remains reasonable of course ;D


----------



## ecka (Feb 21, 2017)

I thought 20/1.4Art was heavy


----------



## tron (Feb 21, 2017)

beautiful bokeh effect my @_ _ 

Not a single word about coma...


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 21, 2017)

Tron,

at least vignetting is not too bad at 2EV in extreme FF corners wide open. Good starting point though 



tron said:


> beautiful bokeh effect my @_ _
> 
> Not a single word about coma...


----------



## NorbR (Feb 21, 2017)

Alex_M said:


> i can give you a hint:
> 
> Sigma Art glass is typically priced at around a $1.00 per each gramm of the lens weight. so around $1100 -$1150 is a good price guestimate.



I'd take that 
I honestly expect it to come at a higher price. It looks similar to the 12-24mm, both physically and in terms of optical design (same number of elements, same aspherical big-ass front element), so I expect it to get a similar price tag, around $1600. Of course I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

sanj said:


> Am buying.



I probably will, too. I've had the Rokinon/Samyang 14mm 2.4 on order since 12/30/2016, and now it is not expected until late March. I've about had it with Rokinon/Samyang. And this Sigma is a full stop faster!


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 21, 2017)

Headline grabber! That's the easy part...


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 21, 2017)

I doubt that sigma will price this lens at the level of 12-24 lens. You are correct lens are similarly designed and constructed. Still prime vs zoom. Around $1250-1300. Ok. possible. Interestingly enough, street price for 12-24 Art in Australia is only around US$1250. 




NorbR said:


> Alex_M said:
> 
> 
> > i can give you a hint:
> ...


----------



## infared (Feb 21, 2017)

Really want to see this paired against the SamYang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.4.
Can't wait!!!!! 8)


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 21, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Am buying.
> ...



My buy decision will be largely based on how much it distorts.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

3kramd5 said:


> My buy decision will be largely based on how much it distorts.



I'm greedy - I want reasonably low distortion, sharp edges wide open, low coma, low lateral and longitudinal chromatic aberrations wide open, reasonably low vignette and spherical aberration and good flare control. I can live with heavy weight and don't care much about AF.


----------



## tron (Feb 21, 2017)

Alex_M said:


> Tron,
> 
> at least vignetting is not too bad at 2EV in extreme FF corners wide open. Good starting point though
> 
> ...


Hello Alex,

if this Sigma has low coma I will go running for it  against my beliefs that I want to shoot only with Canon for future compatibility reasons - OK I will get the dock too 

Where did you see the 2 stop vignetting at the corners for the new 14 1.8 Sigma? This is a very good number indeed!


----------



## NancyP (Feb 21, 2017)

Coma? Here's hoping that "Lenstip" Polish review site gets its hands on a copy soon. It's the only site that routinely tests for coma (with a laser pointer as image).


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

NancyP said:


> Coma? Here's hoping that "Lenstip" Polish review site gets its hands on a copy soon. It's the only site that routinely tests for coma (with a laser pointer as image).



I'm with you; LensTip provides the most thorough and objective reviews I have found. But other sites do provide astro shots for coma evaluation.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

This lens is now on B&H's site. I have placed one on 'notify when available'.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 21, 2017)

"Distinctive bokeh effect" even at 14mm. I'd like to see that. 

According to my calculator: 3ft from the subject at f/1.8 / 14mm... focus kicks in at 2.4ft runs 1.62ft deep to 4.02ft and then back out of focus. Hyperfocal distance at these parameters is 11.91ft. None of this, of course, means the bokeh is any good.

6 ft. from the subject gives a depth of field 8.11 ft deep.

Some of you that are gonna buy right away ( before testing or reviews) are brave souls.

Then again, surely there will be some independent testing before it hits the store shelves.

I'll never be that brave.


----------



## sanj (Feb 21, 2017)

My wish: Good autofocus, edge sharpness, less than 3 stop vignetting.

My use will be low light crowd shots.


----------



## Botts (Feb 21, 2017)

Pro: Distortion control seems solid!

Con: 2+ stops of vignetting in the corners wide open.

All in all, looks like a pretty awesome tool!. Sigma tech data here.


----------



## tron (Feb 21, 2017)

Thanks for the link. Actually 2 stop vignetting at 1.8 is good news not bad news.

I have yet to see such an uwa lens with less vignetting than that. On the other hand there are many with 3.5 to 4.5 stops of vignetting...

Now back to coma... 8) 8) 8)

EDIT: Since I shoot astro during summer I can have a little patience


----------



## RGF (Feb 21, 2017)

CosminD said:


> anybody noticed that is has 1170gr ??? Lol ;D


not surprised. F1.8. the canon F2.8 is 645 gms. So doubling is not surprising Thought it might be a bit heavier


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

tron said:


> Hello Alex,
> 
> if this Sigma has low coma I will go running for it  against my beliefs that I want to shoot only with Canon for future compatibility reasons - OK I will get the dock too
> 
> Where did you see the 2 stop vignetting at the corners for the new 14 1.8 Sigma? This is a very good number indeed!



Well, according to LensTip, the Sigma 12-24 has very little coma. I would expect the 14mm to be similar. flaring is my worry, as I intend this for landscape as well as astro.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 21, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> "Distinctive bokeh effect" even at 14mm. I'd like to see that.
> 
> According to my calculator: 3ft from the subject at f/1.8 / 14mm... focus kicks in at 2.4ft runs 1.62ft deep to 4.02ft and then back out of focus.



MFD is 10.6 inches, not 3 feet. DOF in that use case is about 1.3".


I often use my 25mm f/2 that way (ultra close thus shallow DOF at wide angles). It's a unique look, but doesn't play in many situations.



CanonFanBoy said:


> Some of you that are gonna buy right away ( before testing or reviews) are brave souls.



shrug... BH and Amazon have great return policies. If it's a dud, I'm out a couple grand for a couple weeks. NBD.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 21, 2017)

Looks like an awesome lens- I'd rather have a Canon L equivalent but I will be buying this one.


----------



## tron (Feb 21, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Hello Alex,
> ...


Well the 20 1.4 was bad but indeed the latest 12-24 was OK. So if this one has low coma it's definitely the Astro King...


----------



## Mac Duderson (Feb 21, 2017)

Conspiracy theory. ;D What the heck is up with Sigma. These announcements are just insane! WHAT IF....
K so here is my conspiracy theory. I'm sure I don't have the details right but here I go. So Nikon finished that lengthy lawsuit last year and they came to terms somehow which I'm not sure if anyone knows what they were.
I always believe competition is good for companies. Nikon, Canon, Sony, Sigma.... all work together. Each year one leapfrogs the other. One year Nikon dominates and everyone sells their Canon stuff and buys NEW Nikon gear. Then its Sony's turn and everyone sells their Nikon gear to buy NEW Sony gear. Then its Canon's turn and so on.
Maybe Canon and Nikon "sued" Sigma to buy in. They then make tons of crazy cool lenses and share part of the $moola$ with Sigma now. Everyone buys new. Then when they are finished putting out a ton of crazy amazing lenses and sigma is kinda out and back to 18-55mm's then say in 5 years then its Nikon and Canon's turn.
Nikon and Canon come out with their versions of those or better lenses so that everyone AGAIN sells their Sigma's to buy NEW Canon and Nikon upgrades AGAIN.
For example Sigma came out with their 35mm ART and shortly after Canon released their MKii. I know a few people including myself that jumped to the Canon MKii. Thankfully I never bought the Sigma first. But lots have.
Sigma just put out their 85mm ART and lo and behold Canon is getting ready to release their 85mm....
Same with the 50mm we know is coming.
I don't follow Nikon much now but I'm sure they are doing the same thing.
"A good businessman makes money on both sides." 8)


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

Mac Duderson said:


> Conspiracy theory. ;D What the heck is up with Sigma. These announcements are just insane! WHAT IF....
> K so here is my conspiracy theory. I'm sure I don't have the details right but here I go. So Nikon finished that lengthy lawsuit last year and they came to terms somehow which I'm not sure if anyone knows what they were.
> I always believe competition is good for companies. Nikon, Canon, Sony, Sigma.... all work together. Each year one leapfrogs the other. One year Nikon dominates and everyone sells their Canon stuff and buys NEW Nikon gear. Then its Sony's turn and everyone sells their Nikon gear to buy NEW Sony gear. Then its Canon's turn and so on.
> Maybe Canon and Nikon "sued" Sigma to buy in. They then make tons of crazy cool lenses and share part of the $moola$ with Sigma now. Everyone buys new. Then when they are finished putting out a ton of crazy amazing lenses and sigma is kinda out and back to 18-55mm's then say in 5 years then its Nikon and Canon's turn.
> ...



Wow! I guess I am unusual because I rarely sell any gear. I do buy new gear when something interests me, though. Especially if it is a technical quantum leap, rather than just a so-so upgrade.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

tron said:


> Well the 20 1.4 was bad but indeed the latest 12-24 was indeed OK. So if this one has low coma it's definitely the Astro King...



I agree on the 20mm 1.4; it could have been in my bag now, but the reviews stopped that. I'm excited about the 14mm 1.8, but if the reviews show serious flaws... The same goes for the mythical Rokinon 14mm 2.4. But I'll get one of these if only for caves and landscapes. I love having a choice!


----------



## DtEW (Feb 21, 2017)

Why is anybody at all hopeful about this lens being coma-free enough for astrophotography?

Sigma had the 24mm f/1.4 Art, and especially the 20mm f/1.4 Art, to show that they were willing to (capable of?) achieve this important characteristic for astrophotography. Famously, they didn't. Why does anybody think that they are suddenly going to do it with the 14mm f/1.8 Art, an even more unprecedented lens spec?

When Canon was introducing their Mk III version of the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L, they made sure to release it with a Milky Way shot to show that it was indeed as coma-free as was hoped. It seems pretty obvious that manufacturers are indeed aware of the pent-up demand for good astro lenses. They'd brag about it if they could. It's not Sigma marketing being stupidly unaware, or just playing coy. Marketing does not play coy.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 21, 2017)

DtEW said:


> Why is anybody at all hopeful about this lens being coma-free enough for astrophotography?



Because the 12-24 has very good coma.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 21, 2017)

How is Sigma going to produce all of these new lenses in the near term? Do they have the production capacity or new facilities? Does anyone know? Or, are we going to have to wait a long time for these to hit the shelves?


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 21, 2017)

With all these new lens it would seem to be a Win or Bust strategy for Sigma.
Each new lens must take up alot of resources in tooling and testing and design.
They are covering so many niches and focal length's its getting bit confusing.
Are there any figures for lens sales by volume.
Do Sigma sell more lens than Nikon, are they any way close or selling more than Canon (i'd guess not but I don't know)?

I'm surprised they are not upgrading their Marco lens to Art style lens.
This was always a popular category for buying Sigma,
Maybe they are hard to improve.


----------



## tron (Feb 21, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Well the 20 1.4 was bad but indeed the latest 12-24 was indeed OK. So if this one has low coma it's definitely the Astro King...
> ...


The mythical Rokinon=Samyang does exist and it's excellent comawise. 

http://gippslandimages.com.au/samyang-xp-14mm-f2-4-lens-review/

http://gippslandimages.com.au/samyang-xp-14mm-f2-4-vs-tamron-15-30-f2-8-vi-dc-coma-tests/


----------



## YellowJersey (Feb 21, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> DtEW said:
> 
> 
> > Why is anybody at all hopeful about this lens being coma-free enough for astrophotography?
> ...



And the press release for it starts by expressly mentioning astrophotography. If coma were crap, I doubt Sigma would be marketing it for astro like that. 

At the very least, there's reason to be encouraged. Proof is in the pudding, though. We'll have to wait for the reviews (or at least sample images) to know with any degree of certainty.


----------



## DtEW (Feb 21, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> DtEW said:
> 
> 
> > Why is anybody at all hopeful about this lens being coma-free enough for astrophotography?
> ...



When has any modern-ish lens been unacceptable for coma at f/4?

Even my generally terrible Tokina 17-35mm f/4 had acceptable coma.

Controlling coma at f/4 is a totally different game than controlling it for f/1.4 to f/1.8.



YellowJersey said:


> And the press release for it starts by expressly mentioning astrophotography. If coma were crap, I doubt Sigma would be marketing it for astro like that.



Sigma said the same thing for the 20mm f/1.4 Art, and look where that got us.

https://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/new/new_topic.php?id=548


----------



## infared (Feb 21, 2017)

After absorbing this info for a little while I came back...and took another look. Damn...that lens is quite styl'in visually as well.


----------



## applecider (Feb 22, 2017)

The samsung/ Rokinon 14mm f2.4 premium is listed at BHphoto and others but not in stock, the only place I've seen it for sale is on ebay and then it is from Hong Kong and who knows when you 'd get one if ordered from there.

As are others here I'm holding off on the gas long enough to get a handle on the wide open coma on all.
I've been thinking of getting the samyang 2.4 14mm or the zeiss 15mm f2.8 as I'v heard great things about this lens (i'd get it used). The appearance of the sigma changes all considerations. An f 1.8 wide angle that is good wide open would have to win. I'd probably keep the rokinon 2.8 just for its light weight and hiking use. It is a great lens except that the distance scale is f'ed up not being consistent from morning till afternoon, nothing wrong with the focus just can't use the scale to prefocus. The other problem I've had with it is trying to patch together panoramas, the lens correction software doesn't seem to remove enough distortion to patch .together a number of images, although this might be a characteristic of just the wide angle.

The image attached shows what I mean by this though it might have been generated by the rokinon 24mm f 1.4 there are bands of lighter sky where i think the vignetting came into play.


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

applecider said:


> The samsung/ Rokinon 14mm f2.4 premium is listed at BHphoto and others but not in stock, the only place I've seen it for sale is on ebay and then it is from Hong Kong and who knows when you 'd get one if ordered from there.
> 
> As are others here I'm holding off on the gas long enough to get a handle on the wide open coma on all.
> I've been thinking of getting the samyang 2.4 14mm or the zeiss 15mm f2.8 as I'v heard great things about this lens (i'd get it used). The appearance of the sigma changes all considerations. An f 1.8 wide angle that is good wide open would have to win. I'd probably keep the rokinon 2.8 just for its light weight and hiking use. It is a great lens except that the distance scale is f'ed up not being consistent from morning till afternoon, nothing wrong with the focus just can't use the scale to prefocus. The other problem I've had with it is trying to patch together panoramas, the lens correction software doesn't seem to remove enough distortion to patch .together a number of images, although this might be a characteristic of just the wide angle.
> ...


This is not normal no matter the lens if you shoot raw.


----------



## Ah-Keong (Feb 22, 2017)

gotta rob bank soon!
:


----------



## infared (Feb 22, 2017)

DtEW said:


> Why is anybody at all hopeful about this lens being coma-free enough for astrophotography?
> 
> Sigma had the 24mm f/1.4 Art, and especially the 20mm f/1.4 Art, to show that they were willing to (capable of?) achieve this important characteristic for astrophotography. Famously, they didn't. Why does anybody think that they are suddenly going to do it with the 14mm f/1.8 Art, an even more unprecedented lens spec?
> 
> When Canon was introducing their Mk III version of the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L, they made sure to release it with a Milky Way shot to show that it was indeed as coma-free as was hoped. It seems pretty obvious that manufacturers are indeed aware of the pent-up demand for good astro lenses. They'd brag about it if they could. It's not Sigma marketing being stupidly unaware, or just playing coy. Marketing does not play coy.



I own the 20mm ART. It's a ground-breaking lens and I positively LOVE my copy. Nothing comes close to it's unique capabilities for me...but you are correct about Sigma touting it for astrophotography and it's inability to pass the coma test at it's widest apertures...that is sort of bizarre on Sigma's part??? Astro is a way back-burner thing for me...so I did not let that little foible (for this photographer), distract me from an incredible optic....but yeah..I understand your doubt that the coma will be any better on this new, even more extreme lens offering. Sigma could surprise us with great coma performance wide open...but I would not be expecting it....and I also will not let that small fact stop me from seeing other qualities that this new, unique lens may offer. Am really looking foward to the lens debut and the reviews. This is an exciting prospect.


----------



## hne (Feb 22, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> "Distinctive bokeh effect" even at 14mm. I'd like to see that.
> 
> According to my calculator: 3ft from the subject at f/1.8 / 14mm... focus kicks in at 2.4ft runs 1.62ft deep to 4.02ft and then back out of focus. Hyperfocal distance at these parameters is 11.91ft. None of this, of course, means the bokeh is any good.
> 
> ...



At what magnification?

If you attach a 14/1.8 to a Canon 5Ds and set focus on a stone 1m (3.3ft) away, stars would come across as 34 pixel diameter circles on the sensor. Even trees 5m (16ft) behind that foreground stone would look like you'd run a 28 pixel diameter Gaussian blur on them. If you print this postcard size (10x15 cm/4x6") that amounts to half a millimeter (20 thou) which would be just barely noticeable, but for a 3 meter (10 feet) wide panorama seen from half the image width it should be clearly visible (results in 72dpi print, which at 1.5m/5ft distance is roughly where the angular resolution becomes the same between the printed pixels and the line thickness of the block font characters for 20/20 eye sight on the Snellen test charts).

Under some circumstances, Bokeh might actually matter even on a 14mm lens. I applaud Sigma for taking this into consideration!


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

Bokeh will prove useless if it has coma. I believe much more would care for coma than bokeh. Let's hope it will excell there too...


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 22, 2017)

I agree on the 20mm 1.4; it could have been in my bag now, but the reviews stopped that. I'm excited about the 14mm 1.8, but if the reviews show serious flaws... The same goes for the mythical Rokinon 14mm 2.4. But I'll get one of these if only for caves and landscapes. I love having a choice!
[/quote]The mythical Rokinon=Samyang does exist and it's excellent comawise. 

http://gippslandimages.com.au/samyang-xp-14mm-f2-4-lens-review/

http://gippslandimages.com.au/samyang-xp-14mm-f2-4-vs-tamron-15-30-f2-8-vi-dc-coma-tests/
[/quote]

Yes, I've seen that review and agree that the coma looks pretty good. When I wrote 'mythical', I wasn't being literal, I was expressing frustration. When I ordered my copy, I was told it would arrive in a few days. It has now been over a month and a half.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 22, 2017)

DtEW said:


> When has any modern-ish lens been unacceptable for coma at f/4?
> 
> Even my generally terrible Tokina 17-35mm f/4 had acceptable coma.
> 
> ...



Very good points! My enthusiasm is quelled. I eagerly await reviews.


----------



## bwud (Feb 22, 2017)

Forgive my ignorance, but why are astophotographers specifically so concerned with coma? Is it because the subject is generally round points?


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

bwud said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but why are astophotographers specifically so concerned with coma? Is it because the subject is generally round points?


Check lenstip reviews and see in coma sections what happens to stars near the edges. In the worst case
(like Canon's 24mm 1.4L II) the stars look like seagulls...


----------



## bwud (Feb 22, 2017)

tron said:


> bwud said:
> 
> 
> > Forgive my ignorance, but why are astophotographers specifically so concerned with coma? Is it because the subject is generally round points?
> ...



I know what coma does, it just struck me that it is generally only emphasized in discussions of astrophotography (portrait artists for example I don't recall ever being concerned with coma). My guess is that the subject essentially being small round points makes coma particularly destructive.


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

bwud said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > bwud said:
> ...


Yes, plus it is becoming more evident as we move towards the corners which nornally is not the case for portraits (although it wouldn't show like that anyway).


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 22, 2017)

bwud said:


> I know what coma does, it just struck me that it is generally only emphasized in discussions of astrophotography (portrait artists for example I don't recall ever being concerned with coma). My guess is that the subject essentially being small round points makes coma particularly destructive.



coma aberration is only an issue with MOVING objects [like stars in long-time exposures]. Portraits are usually taken with subject not in motion. And most of the time with subject not in corner of frame. So not much of an issue for portrait artists. 


*[EDIT] as pointed out in subsequent posts, first sentence is wrong. Thanks. Correct description: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coma_(optics) *


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> bwud said:
> 
> 
> > I know what coma does, it just struck me that it is generally only emphasized in discussions of astrophotography (portrait artists for example I don't recall ever being concerned with coma). My guess is that the subject essentially being small round points makes coma particularly destructive.
> ...


Coma exhibits itself also in STATIC subects like stars with NO strartrails as well as light sources in LANDSCAPE night photos.

http://stormandsky.com/lens24mm


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 22, 2017)

Curious to see the discussion on this.

No one has ever been able to make a lens that is simultaneously [UWA] + [f/2 or faster] + [coma well controlled]. The astro camp only ever gets two out of three. 

For those defending the Sigma 12-24 f/4 Art and the 16-35 f/2.8L III, both could be used for astro, but the former is f/4 and the latter has that lovely > 4 EV of vignetting at 16mm f/2.8 -- exactly where astro folks would prefer to use it.

The 20 f/1.4 Art and 24 f/1.4 Art didn't control coma well from what reviews (and folks here at CR) have said. So this 14 f/1.8 Art represents Sigma's _third_ try in recent times at a dream astro lens. Of course, there are many other uses for all three of these lenses -- none are dedicated astro tools -- but a good slice of prospective buyers will jump right to the coma testing page when this new lens is reviewed. Presuming it's sharp, coma really is the make/break metric for a whole group of photographers here.

- A


----------



## sanj (Feb 22, 2017)

infared said:


> After absorbing this info for a little while I came back...and took another look. Damn...that lens is quite styl'in visually as well.



Yep.


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Curious to see the discussion on this.
> 
> No one has ever been able to make a lens that is simultaneously [UWA] + [f/2 or faster] + [coma well controlled]. The astro camp only ever gets two out of three.
> 
> ...


True. And at least Norhern hemishpere inhabitants can be more patient (Milky way dependent) until the new sigma gets released and reviewed


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 22, 2017)

3kramd5 said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > "Distinctive bokeh effect" even at 14mm. I'd like to see that.
> ...



I said nothing about MFD. I was speaking about a specific distance from a subject at wide open aperture and what the plane of focus would be.

10.3" from a subject wouldn't probably be used too often. Especially with a 1.3" DOF. 

Now, I did run outside with my 15-30 Tamron to see what I could get bokeh wise. The MFD is supposed to be 11". Photo is SOOC except for resizing. No corrections. 

I'm sure the wider aperture of the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM will get better out of focus background due to the wider aperture, but I found that less than 2 feet from the subject (With the Tamron) brought everything in the photo into sharp relief... which is great for the astro guys. 

Problem is that Sigma is touting the bokeh when lack of Coma and uncorrected distortion ought to be the major selling point. Just my opinion, which might be lame or not.   

Correction for myself: MFD does not equal distance of front element to subject.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 22, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



All I'm saying is: you aren't going to see a substantially shallow DOF unless you get up close, and since you'd "like to see that ["Distinctive bokeh effect" even at 14mm]," you should prepare to move towards the subject. 

As I said, it doesn't play in many situations, but it can. Your "bird" photo is an example where I think it works.

I personally dump a huge pile of salt on any marketing claims of bokeh, since it's an entirely subjective quality.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 22, 2017)

3kramd5 said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



True. But Sigma is making claims like this:


Canon Rumors said:


> Going beyond fast shutter speed, this lens can capture a swarm of fireflies with crystal clarity, a beautiful bokeh effect, and outstanding control of light streaking.



THAT, I would like to see. A swarm of fireflies. Crystal clarity. A beautiful bokeh effect. Outstanding control of light streaking. Also claiming corner to corner sharpness. And all of this at the same time.


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...


But no stars? Strange they mentioned fireflies but not stars. It seems there is a swarm of ... fireflies photographers out there that I have no idea about ;D


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 22, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> True. But Sigma is making claims like this:
> 
> 
> Canon Rumors said:
> ...



I think I'd like to see that, too. the bokeh would be the background at night? Probably quite smooth, being solid darkness! Control of light streaking at, what, 1/640? How can I possibly believe the coma claims?

The only way I know to get that effect is to apodize myself with three shots of mescal in quick succession.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 22, 2017)

tron said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



Why look at stars when swarms of fireflies are posing? Here's a link for you. Looks like the photos are pure bokeh. Obviously not the miracle working Sigma 14mm. ??? I can't see a single leg or antenna or wing.


----------



## infared (Feb 23, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Curious to see the discussion on this.
> 
> No one has ever been able to make a lens that is simultaneously [UWA] + [f/2 or faster] + [coma well controlled]. The astro camp only ever gets two out of three.
> 
> ...


...Certainly not the majority.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 23, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> bwud said:
> 
> 
> > I know what coma does, it just struck me that it is generally only emphasized in discussions of astrophotography (portrait artists for example I don't recall ever being concerned with coma). My guess is that the subject essentially being small round points makes coma particularly destructive.
> ...



Utterly incorrect. Even by your standards, this is poor.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 23, 2017)

scyrene said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > bwud said:
> ...



You are right and so is @Tron. My first sentence was incorrect. Coma aberration affects static subjects ... e.g. making stars appear as if they were moving, dragging a tail behind them. That's what confused me for a moment. Looked it up again https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coma_(optics) and included an edit in my earlier post.


----------



## hne (Feb 23, 2017)

Perhaps slightly off topic, but wouldn't it be rather easy to correct for slight coma if you know the lens coma characteristics (easily measurable with point light sources), focus distance (pretty much guaranteed to be at infinity for astrophotography purposes) and know that there is nothing out of focus?

For each position on the sensor there'd be a measurable point spread function. It varies in shape and orientation radially. Deconvolution isn't cheap but should be able to yield quite good results for well behaved systems like this and has been in use in astronomy for decades by now, for example in the Hubble telescope.

http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/iris/tutorial12/doc30_us.htm
http://cds.cern.ch/record/576204/files/0208247.pdf


----------



## epsiloneri (Feb 23, 2017)

hne said:


> Perhaps slightly off topic, but wouldn't it be rather easy to correct for slight coma if you know the lens coma characteristics (easily measurable with point light sources), focus distance (pretty much guaranteed to be at infinity for astrophotography purposes) and know that there is nothing out of focus?


It's an interesting point, but unfortunately deconvolution is far from easy, in particular for these wide-angle lenses where the PSF is strongly position-dependent. HST images are by comparison far easier to de-convolve, since the PSF is extremely stable and changes only subtly with position in the field (the focal length of HST is >120000 mm, so quite far from wide field...). Even so, since de-convolution is generally an ill-posed inverse problem, some regularisation strategy is needed even in this case (like "maximum entropy").

If the PSF was very well characterised and parametrised, it should be possible to in principle make a reasonable deconvolution. It is a fairly major effort though, and the computational cost would be enormous. I would be very interested in seeing the results if anyone feels tempted to try it out....


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 23, 2017)

epsiloneri said:


> hne said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps slightly off topic, but wouldn't it be rather easy to correct for slight coma if you know the lens coma characteristics (easily measurable with point light sources), focus distance (pretty much guaranteed to be at infinity for astrophotography purposes) and know that there is nothing out of focus?
> ...



Could this technique be applied to swarms of fireflies? Or would maximum entropy be better achieved with bug spray?


----------



## Ah-Keong (Feb 24, 2017)

wow. Gigantic!

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4711801152/cp-2017-hands-on-with-sigmas-newest-lenses
:


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 24, 2017)

Ah-Keong said:


> wow. Gigantic!
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/4711801152/cp-2017-hands-on-with-sigmas-newest-lenses
> :



nothing comes from nothing. ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 24, 2017)

Ah-Keong said:


> wow. Gigantic!
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/4711801152/cp-2017-hands-on-with-sigmas-newest-lenses
> :



Not really wow. Just physics. 

All of Sigma's 'firsts' of madly wide apertured glass are behemoths -- the 20 f/1.4, 24-35 f/2, the 18-35 f/1.8, etc. It's a combination of the realities of those apertures with the added heft of more complicated/involved designs that are gunning for that great wide open performance. It's the Zeiss Otus story all over again... but with a ton more focal lengths, decent-to-solid working AF, a much lower price and the Sigma badge on it. 

- A


----------



## hne (Feb 24, 2017)

epsiloneri said:


> hne said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps slightly off topic, but wouldn't it be rather easy to correct for slight coma if you know the lens coma characteristics (easily measurable with point light sources), focus distance (pretty much guaranteed to be at infinity for astrophotography purposes) and know that there is nothing out of focus?
> ...



I agree with everything you say. Especially about the computational cost and the problems of handling noise in the frequency domain. This isn't something you'd see done in-camera, but for astrophotography where you're stacking dozens of several-second long exposures already, an extra minute or two of processing on a modern computer should still be acceptable if the results are good enough.

My point was exactly that which you base your initial assumption on, that the PSF should be well characterisable and parameterisable. Additionally, for shooting the stars with a UWA prime, you have both fixed focal length and focus distance fixed, so two parameters fewer.

There's a deconvolution example in the OpenCV dev distribution if someone wants to play around. The easy way out would be similar to what was done in one of the links I supplied: piece-wise application of different PSFs and then a merge.


----------



## infared (Feb 26, 2017)

Ah-Keong said:


> wow. Gigantic!
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/4711801152/cp-2017-hands-on-with-sigmas-newest-lenses
> :



It's small hands. Look how big the camera body looks?! The lenses are big, nodoubt...but those hands make them look bigger.


----------



## Ah-Keong (Feb 27, 2017)

infared said:


> It's small hands. Look how big the camera body looks?! The lenses are big, nodoubt...but those hands make them look bigger.



opps, my bad. my hands are small!! 

:


----------



## chik0240 (Mar 20, 2017)

Really nervous about the actual pricing of this lens


----------



## tron (Mar 21, 2017)

Really nervous about coma...


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Mar 28, 2017)

Here are sample images. I don't have the patience or expertise to examine them for COMA right now, so I'll just let someone else do it and let me know how it is. ;D

https://www.dpreview.com/samples/8743754083/sigma-14mm-f1-8-sample-gallery


----------



## chrysoberyl (Mar 28, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Here are sample images. I don't have the patience or expertise to examine them for COMA right now, so I'll just let someone else do it and let me know how it is. ;D
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/samples/8743754083/sigma-14mm-f1-8-sample-gallery



No coma! But no stars, either. So no answer to that question. Veiling flare looks pretty strong.


----------



## tron (Mar 28, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Here are sample images. I don't have the patience or expertise to examine them for COMA right now, so I'll just let someone else do it and let me know how it is. ;D
> 
> https://www.dpreview.com/samples/8743754083/sigma-14mm-f1-8-sample-gallery


You have to have specific shots for coma testing and these are not.

You have to shoot the stars or leds at the corners or at least some night distant city photos with lights at the corners. So we still have to wait... But there is some time for milky way/ astro landscape shooting at the nothern hemisphere at least...


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Mar 28, 2017)

I thought there were some aspects of COMA that would appear in varying types of photos, such as color fringing.

Well, I tried.


----------



## Hector1970 (Mar 29, 2017)

Has Sigma given any more details about Coma in this new lens?
I'm surprised they haven't left one loose to an Astrophotographer.
Surely it would be a major selling point.


----------



## BeenThere (Mar 29, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> Has Sigma given any more details about Coma in this new lens?
> I'm surprised they haven't left one loose to an Astrophotographer.
> Surely it would be a major selling point.


Unless ....... it's not stellar in that regard. Pardon the pun!


----------



## motorhead9999 (Apr 20, 2017)

It does feel like a massive lens to me, small hands aside. At least this one looks fairly "even" though. My Rokinon 14mm f2.8 is so oddly shaped that I almost hate carrying it around. 

But still....f1.8...for night time star shooting...I'm eager to see the reviews on this. Part of me hopes it sucks though, as I've got two other (very expensive) lenses I'd like to get too.


----------



## tron (Apr 21, 2017)

Still no news about this lens...


----------



## ND (May 1, 2017)

Anyone else see this?

http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_14_18/testshot/index.html


----------



## Jopa (May 2, 2017)

Very impressive.


----------



## WRS (May 4, 2017)

ND said:


> Anyone else see this?
> 
> http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_14_18/testshot/index.html



Any other comments on the link from those who shoot astro? I'm anxiously awaiting the release and reviews of this lens for that purpose. Thanks....


----------



## chik0240 (May 8, 2017)

WRS said:


> ND said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone else see this?
> ...



This looks fantastic! I was previously using the 16-35L II for astro (I know it's far from best lens, but I am a poor people who only occasionally shoot astro), but this thing's lack of coma and distortion and with the crazy F1.8 aperture sounded like THE lens for astro photography, come sigma, release it under 15k before september so I can get this baby to my austria trip


----------



## BeenThere (May 8, 2017)

chik0240 said:


> WRS said:
> 
> 
> > ND said:
> ...


15K? Deep pockets indeed!


----------



## tron (May 8, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> chik0240 said:
> 
> 
> > WRS said:
> ...


It has to be a typo for 1.5K in reality.


----------



## Jopa (May 8, 2017)

tron said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > chik0240 said:
> ...



Nope, too late, they're working on it already, targeting $15k for a copy. So whoever asked for it - will have to buy!


----------



## chrysoberyl (May 8, 2017)

15K? Deep pockets indeed! 
[/quote]It has to be a typo for 1.5K in reality.
[/quote]

Nope, too late, they're working on it already, targeting $15k for a copy. So whoever asked for it - will have to buy! 
[/quote]

15K quetzales? This is an international forum...


----------



## Jopa (May 8, 2017)

Old Zimbabwean dollars. For $10^14 could barely buy yourself a burger, so yes, $15k doesn't sound like too much. I'm not sure if it will be a good glass after all


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 8, 2017)

;D ;D


----------



## BeenThere (May 8, 2017)

While we are waiting for Sigma to price their new 14mm f1.8 lens, how about some guesses as to their U.S. Price point. Take a WAG at where you think it will be priced, not where you want it to be priced. My guess is $1299.


----------



## chrysoberyl (May 8, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> While we are waiting for Sigma to price their new 14mm f1.8 lens, how about some guesses as to their U.S. Price point. Take a WAG at where you think it will be priced, not where you want it to be priced. My guess is $1299.



I believe it will be the same as the $1400 (US) 135mm f/1.8.


----------



## NorbR (May 8, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> While we are waiting for Sigma to price their new 14mm f1.8 lens, how about some guesses as to their U.S. Price point. Take a WAG at where you think it will be priced, not where you want it to be priced. My guess is $1299.


I'm less optimistic.

The lens looks a lot like the 12-24mm, it has the same kind of large, aspherical front element, so I would guess it will be priced at least the same. So $1599. 
And frankly I wouldn't be surprised if it was higher than that. The 12-24mm had competitors, this one doesn't, it's really the first of its kind. I think Sigma could get away with a pretty high price point. 

I hope I'm wrong, of course. ???


----------



## RGF (May 12, 2017)

be nice to know when this lens will be available.


----------



## chik0240 (Jun 6, 2017)

It's June and still not available in MSRP, I am starting to get worried will it arrive on time for my end of September trip.


----------



## NancyP (Jun 12, 2017)

There are still some fairly significant width "wings" on the stars in the f/1.8 photo on the Sigma site, but the wings are quite pale.


----------



## tron (Jun 13, 2017)

NancyP said:


> There are still some fairly significant width "wings" on the stars in the f/1.8 photo on the Sigma site, but the wings are quite pale.



1. If it has zero coma at f/2.4 then it is at least as good as the new Samyang with the added advantage of f/1.8 should we need it it is just fine.

2. If at f/1.8 is better than my Canon 14mm f/2.8 II at f/2.8 I am also satisfied.

But where is it????????????????????????

P.S In addition, once it apears lenstip.com will check coma for good


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jun 14, 2017)

tron said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > There are still some fairly significant width "wings" on the stars in the f/1.8 photo on the Sigma site, but the wings are quite pale.
> ...



All that, except 2. I don't have Canon 14mm 2.8; I got the Samyang 14mm 2.4 instead. Will I get the Sigma? Maybe...1.8 is tempting. Only after it is it is blessed by LensTip.


----------



## nubu (Jul 26, 2017)

Hi!

Last week I was able to do a astro comparison between the new sigma and the ef 14/2.8 II . Here are the
(clear) results: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59871149


----------



## tron (Jul 26, 2017)

nubu said:


> Hi!
> 
> Last week I was able to do a astro comparison between the new sigma and the ef 14/2.8 II . Here are the
> (clear) results: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59871149


Thanks for sharing your tests with us.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 26, 2017)

NorbR said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > While we are waiting for Sigma to price their new 14mm f1.8 lens, how about some guesses as to their U.S. Price point. Take a WAG at where you think it will be priced, not where you want it to be priced. My guess is $1299.
> ...


You win with exact guess of $1599. U.S.


----------

