# New Sigma Lenses Coming Q1 of 2015 [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 18, 2014)

```
<p>A reported roadmap for Sigma has shown up over at SigmaRumors.com. They’re told that Sigma’s 24mm f/1.4 ART lens has been delayed until Q1 of 2015. This has been a rumoured lens for quite some time.</p>
<p>Also mentioned are a 14-24mm f/4 Art which makes a lot of sense. Also mentioned is a 16-20mm f/2, which seems a bit constrained on the zoom range, why not just make a 16mm f/2?</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://sigma-rumors.com/2014/11/sigma-24mm-art-early-2015-rumor/" target="_blank">SR</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## jdramirez (Nov 18, 2014)

So no mention of the 24-70 f/2. I guess I will have to suffer with the Canon 24-105 for the time being. 

As for the 16-20... that is weird, but I'm not a wide angle guy... so I don't really care.


----------



## Woody (Nov 18, 2014)

I am curious about the 14-24 f/4 lens. If it does not have a bulbous front element and has decent optical performance, I'm all for it.


----------



## tron (Nov 18, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> A reported roadmap for Sigma has shown up over at SigmaRumors.com. They’re told that Sigma’s 24mm f/1.4 ART lens has been delayed until Q1 of 2015. This has been a rumoured lens for quite some time.
> Also mentioned are a 14-24mm f/4 Art which makes a lot of sense. Also mentioned is a 16-20mm f/2, which seems a bit constrained on the zoom range, why not just make a 16mm f/2?
> Source: http://sigma-rumors.com/2014/11/sigma-24mm-art-early-2015-rumor/


Mmmmm, 16mm f/2 is fantastic for astrophotography IF: 1. it has no coma 2. It contains a flat element that supports a hood to protect from falling light


----------



## cycleraw (Nov 18, 2014)

Where is the 85mm f/1.4 Art? That's the lens I'd like to see Sigma release.


----------



## docsmith (Nov 18, 2014)

I would be very interested in what a 24A could deliver. No interest in a 14-24 f/4. I'd just get the canon 16-35 f4 IS. The 16-20 f/2 would also be interesting. As said above, minimal coma, vignetting, and sharp at f2-2.8, that would be an excellent nightscape lens.


----------



## kfreels (Nov 18, 2014)

I just want a 35-70 f2.2 to slip nicely between my 18-35 1.8 and my 70-200 f2.8.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Nov 18, 2014)

24mm f1.4 looks very interesting for night photography, particularly if it does offers low coma.
16-20mm f2 looks very constrained range.

What happend with the new 85mm f1.4 Art (I hope sigma also adds OS ) and the 24-70mm f2?


----------



## Jesse (Nov 18, 2014)

Yeah I need a new 85....


----------



## beckstoy (Nov 18, 2014)

Where's the 85mm!?


----------



## ionian (Nov 18, 2014)

tron said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > A reported roadmap for Sigma has shown up over at SigmaRumors.com. They’re told that Sigma’s 24mm f/1.4 ART lens has been delayed until Q1 of 2015. This has been a rumoured lens for quite some time.
> ...



+100. 
I'd just love a sigma 16-20mm f2 for astrophotography given it's priced below the 800-900 mark and meets the two criteria you mentioned


----------



## Bennymiata (Nov 18, 2014)

+1 for the 85 1.4.
I've been holding off buying an 85 until I can check out the Art version.


----------



## wyldeguy (Nov 18, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > I am curious about the 14-24 f/4 lens. If it does not have a bulbous front element and has decent optical performance, I'm all for it.
> ...



I believe the bulbous front element is more of a compromise than anything. At the wider side of things the angle of view gets bigger and bigger. If it had a normal front element it would need to get wider and wider. This would result in filter threads no one could fill and a super expensive front element. So I think they add the bulbous element to use less glass and keep the cost down while still being able to use those square filters with adapters. Realistically you would probably see bulbous elements starting at 15mm and shorter. Maybe if Zeiss made an otus 14mm they would keep it flat.


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 18, 2014)

New lenses are always cool, but...

WHERE IS THE NEW FIRMWARE FOR THE 50MM 1.4 ART???


----------



## infared (Nov 18, 2014)

cycleraw said:


> Where is the 85mm f/1.4 Art? That's the lens I'd like to see Sigma release.




My thoughts exactly?....and yes add the IS...definitely.

Have to say that on the wide end I am extremely happy with my Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS ...IT WOULD TAKE A LOT FOR Sigma to tear that out of my hands!


----------



## Zv (Nov 18, 2014)

It says the other rumored ultra wide zoom is DC, are they talking about the 16-20 f/2 or the 14-24 f/4? 

Is Sigma just trying to make the fastest zoom lens ever, focal range be damned? In a previous interview I recall they were looking into what the optimal focal range was for an f/2 zoom lens. Maybe it's just those 4mm. Would be impressive nonetheless!

If it's a DC 16-20 f/2 then we're looking at a 25mm - 32mm range on crop which kinda misses the 24mm and 35mm boat but I guess it's about there. Could be useful I guess with such a wide aperture. But I feel like the already proven 18-35 f/1.8 has this general focal length covered on crop. They should just make it a 16mm f/2 and be done with it.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 18, 2014)

On one hand I hope Sigma does not come out with a new 85... because I recently bought an 85. :-[

Maybe if Sigma's 85 is as good as their other art lenses, my current 85 may be the first lens I will sell. ;D


----------



## NancyP (Nov 18, 2014)

Darn G.A.S.! I would really like a fast (f/2.0), sharp-and-no-coma-wide-open, FF UWA. On the other hand, I should not wish too hard, because I am happy with my Samyang 14mm f/2.8. Why tempt my wallet?


----------



## DominoDude (Nov 18, 2014)

For all I care they can release just about any lens they want. They won't catch my interest in a serious way until they make headlines saying they've mastered the art of making a reliable auto focus system. That and measures taken to minimize the deviation between various copies - i.e. improved quality control.

To make me eat my words they would have to release a new 300-800mm. I'm willing to order a full crate of those to get me *1* properly working birding glass.


----------



## TLN (Nov 18, 2014)

Sigma won't tell about 85Art, who gonna buy 85/1.4 from then, when we have a confirmation of a newer version coming? 
On the other hand, they have no 24/1.4, so they mentioned about it earlier, to get out attention. 
It will be no surprise to me, if they'll release them at the same time.


----------



## risc32 (Nov 18, 2014)

16mm is not really that close to 20mm in my book. sharp at f2? no/very low coma? sounds very good to me.


----------



## Chapman Baxter (Nov 19, 2014)

wyldeguy said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Woody said:
> ...



I suppose size reduction is one way of looking at it but within the constraints of realistic lens design, the bulbous front element design for ultra-wide focal lengths is chosen for optimal image quality and to minimise vignetting. Consider the TS-E 17mm with its bulbous front end. Its focal length wouldn't suggest a need for it, but it's the requirement for very high image quality across a much larger than standard imaging circle that necessitates it for that lens.

TS-E aside, empirical evidence suggests the cut-off point for bulbous front elements is 16mm, where you have the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 (with) and Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 (without). Golden samples of the Tokina are typically considered to be sharper than the Canon though, sadly, not all Tokina samples are equal.


----------



## denobulan (Nov 19, 2014)

docsmith said:


> Minimal coma, vignetting, and sharp at f2-2.8, that would be an excellent nightscape lens.



My thoughts exactly. Have gone through alot of lenses for nightscapes and Milky Way shots and most of the fast lenses have alot of coma. Shame it doesn't have a slightly larger range though. Would complement Samyang 14mm F2.8 nicely.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Dec 1, 2014)

dilbert said:


> TLN said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma won't tell about 85Art, who gonna buy 85/1.4 from then, when we have a confirmation of a newer version coming?
> ...


That sounds like a reasonable assumption. They could just make it in a manual focus version; good materials and surface finish, smooth manual focus ring and similar optical performance as the 50mm.


----------



## dgatwood (Dec 1, 2014)

risc32 said:


> 16mm is not really that close to 20mm in my book.



Really? That's only a 1.25:1 zoom ratio. Unless you're shooting landscapes, you can get a bigger framing difference than that by stepping forwards three or four steps.


----------

