More info about the new Sigma “ART” lenses (with MTF charts). Poll: What will you buy or not buy?
For those of you wondering what’s so special with the new “Sigma ART” definition check out the official Sigma website:
Sigma 19mm lens page (Click here)
Sigma 30mm lens page (Click here)
Sigma 60mm lens page (Click here)
As I wrote on MR days ago the word “ART” stays for the high quality photographer prime lenses. They are designed to be high quality alternative of other companies lenses but at the same time priced much lower than the competition. The official Sigma pages also contain the MTF, Distortion and Vignetting chart (you have to tab to “Performance chart” on Sigmas page).
With the Tamron 14-150mm zoom and Panasonic 14-42mm II kit lens we had a total of five new MFT lenses (althaugh most of them are just “updates” of existing lenses). And now tell me…
Loading ...
JimD
4 months ago |I am not going to buy any.
I would buy the Tamron if I did not have the oly 14-150.
Tamron should have gone shorter and a little wider. Say 2/10-100. Made a new position. Would I buy a 12-100? yes.
The Sigma 19mm maybe but I have a Voigtlander 20mm so……
Izumi
4 months ago |Same-same as Jim.
I have the Olympus 14-150
I have the Panasonic 20mm 1.7
If the 30mm was 1.8 it would fit in nicely between the Olympus 45mm which I have and the 75mm which I’m about to have.
But at 2.8, no thanks…
Besides, I’ve just bought a Rollei 35S which is so much fun that I go to bed quite tired but very happy.
Andrew
4 months ago |Did you say a 10-100mm f/2??? Hey man, I’d love that lens as much as you, but the best Pana can do is 35-100mm f/2.8 for $1500. I can’t imagine the size of a such lens that would be wider AND faster than Panasonic’s. Not to mention the cost. Basically, you want the 12-35 and 35-100 to be as one, AND faster. Those lenses together is about $2500. Remember, at f/2.8… Don’t mean to be so negative, but jesus, that may be some crazy wishful thinking.
JimD
4 months ago |Yes, I re read my post. What I meant was a 10-100 at f2 to f4 That’s what I put on an earlier post. I got carried away with myself. f2 all through a bit of a handfull and not what I intended (but….). I was looking to a m43 version of my 12-60 but a little longer and wider and faster. I think Tamron would have had a hit with such a lens. (even 10-70mm and F2 or 2-3.5 would not be unreasonable here) The 14-150 seems to be more of the same, it would need to have some remarkable properties to replace my oly 14-150 for me to even think about it, as a ‘sometimes use’ lens.
Andrew
4 months ago |+1
Jeff
4 months ago |Fantard
Burnhard
4 months ago |exactly… why do we need another 14-xxx? 12-something would be a travel lens. And the Sigmas are totally boring. How can primes be so slow? Do they have a non removable ND built in?
Cronny
4 months ago |These sigma lenses’ aperture at f2.8 are way too boring. Not suitable for MFT at least.
I don’t know about the Tamron’s though. Need some review to prove its worth. But for now, I won’t buy none of these.
Rambalac
4 months ago |You should add “old” 12-35 2.8. Probably it’s much more interesting than all of this
Corby
4 months ago |I bought the two pack from B&H for $199.00 – regardless of the improvements – $100 per lens for the current versions is more than enough until there are some 1.7/1.8 options in market.
JimD
4 months ago |If you have not got that area covered then they are a great buy.
cc
4 months ago |I Need.. 14-54 f4 or 2.8-4
Anonymous
4 months ago |Might buy the tamrom pending reviews.
Won’t buy any of the sigmas. Rather buy the old ones that’s on sale. Won’t buy the 60 without ois
Gino
4 months ago |Having “old” 12-35/2.8 keeps my heart quit cold for those lenses.
james70094
4 months ago |If the corners are better on the Tamron, I will replace my Olympus 14-150mm. I am hopeful it will be, with the larger front element and smaller aperture at the long end. I know they are big differences. I am hopeful small differences yield better results.
Lily
4 months ago |Probably the Tamron, but for my husband’s GH2, not for me. I’m still waiting for a weather-sealed telephoto zoom for my EM5.
JimD
4 months ago |Cameras and Lenses. After the perfect first purchase, we think! We need more!
What we want is often not what we need. Though at the time of thought, it crowds and takes over. Until we are convinced we really want one.
We buy what ‘they’ thought we wanted because that caused the initial thought.
Only then, do we discover that it was not what we needed at all.
Proof! read the comments.
It needed to be bigger, smaller, wider and narrower, sharper, softer, wrong size filters….. The only single thing that seems to be common on the wants and needs front is faster. I would say black but I like silver…….
MarcoSartoriPhoto
4 months ago |I think it’s normal. Since I already have a nice range of lenses, I already know what I’d like to have (no real need), given the kind of photos I take. I don’t really need these slow zooms nor these focal lenghts from Sigma, but I’m happy that they joined the party.
JimD
4 months ago |I am being moderated again.
Hamed
4 months ago |all of these lenses are great addition to micro 4/3 lenses lineup, actually i am waiting for a wide angel lens from sigma or tamron for this system at least it will be cheaper than oly & pana.
what do you think guys?
Eureka
4 months ago |As happy as I am that there are new m4/3 lenses being announced, these are all useless to me. I have a Panasonic 20mm which I prefer to the Sigma 19mm, an Olympus 45mm that I prefer to the Sigma 30mm, I am planning on picking up the Olympus 60mm macro for both the macro and focal length, and I have zero interest in a bulky superzoom. Oh yeah, and I have a secondhand 14-42mm Panasonic kit lens as a throwaway or as something to bundle in if I ever sell/loan a camera out.
I don’t yet have all of the currently available lenses that I want/need so I’m not too disappointed at the lens designs coming out- I still have room to grow my kit. However, once I’ve sold off my EF glass, flashes, and accessories, I should have enough money to round out my m4/3 lenses and start yearning for something interesting like a super wide prime, tilt/shift, or other exotic lenses.
Garypen
4 months ago |I might be interested in the Tamron zoom IF the reviews are overwhelmingly positive.
Alberto Respezzo
4 months ago |I just bought the old pair of the Sigmas at B&H, so I won’t buy these unless they are a vast improvement and as cheaply priced.
It’s nice that someone is making cheap glass for the M43. If only Oly and Panny could price a lens or two under $500.
hinting
4 months ago |There is really no need to release lenses with focal length that is already available. We want fast tele prime and tele zoom, and more pancake lenses…
Ming Dang
4 months ago |19mm? 30mm? 60mm? I donno. I already have Panny 20mm and it’s f1.7 not f2.8. Also my PanaLika 25mm f1.4 is a perfect 50mm. The Olympus 60mm Macro is nice too. So, what is Sigma thinking with these? If I were Sigma I would show Olympus how a proper 17mm is done. I will surely buy that one!
Ming Dang
4 months ago |I want to add.. If I were having APS-C and Fullframe I will surely buy the Sigma 35mm 1.4. Sigma shows Nikon and Canon how it is done! So, come on Sigma, show Olympus how to make a 17mm f1.4 just like your excellent 35mm 1.4. You will win many fast friends here at m43 world!
Es
4 months ago |They are thinking APS-C. All of these are really NEX lenses and the focal lengths/prices are quite interesting if you own a NEX camera.
Dolan
4 months ago |I really wish the Sigma primes were faster than 2.8. m43 has a hard enough time with shallow DoF as it is.
The Tamron looks intriguing as a possible superzoom, though as an Oly owner the IS is useless so it would be nice if they offered a cheaper version without it.
The new 14-42 is a step in the right direction. Too bad they could never get the pancake zoom to work as expected.
Anonymous
4 months ago |Yep 2.8 just doesn’t cut it.
zozio32
4 months ago |I am personally very happy with the 30mm 2.8 that I already have.
For my point of view, it’s a very good focal length for casual portrait on the fly. 1.8 would be better of course, but more to keep iso lower or shutter speed higher. But the optical quality is very good I think, without software corrections. For the current price, that’s a very good buy.
Alain
4 months ago |Same for me, the 19 and the 30 are among my best m43 lenses (and I have a lot of them), I even tend to prefer the Sigma 30mm to the Panasonic 25mm for its excellent color rendering. The 19mm is tack sharp, better corrected and faster to focus than the Panasonic 20mm.
As a matter of fact, the two sigma (v1) are incredibly good, especially if you consider the price or even if you don’t consider it. Those who bash them did not test them. Regarding the speed, f2 would of course be better for subject isolation, but f2.8 is enough in most situations, even dimly lit interiors. and f1.4 would mean bulkier and way more expensive lenses (but a 19mm f1.4 would be a nice addition to the m43 family).
adaptor-or-die
4 months ago |+1
as well the DoF and bokeh of both the 19mm and 30mm is good. It’s got that creamy Leica/Zeiss/Schneider feel … f/2.8 is still a bright enough. Of course it’s not a dreamy portrait feel, but you don’t always need that … the fact that Sigma is improving an already decent set of choices, [they will likely still be cheaper that Panasonic or Olympus] metal bodies and the same characters as the first, I’d upgrade if I can flip the old ones, because they are nice and a hard tube version would be that much better
Rasmus
4 months ago |I have the 9-18, the 7.5mm fisheye, the 20mm/1.7, the 12-35/2.8, the 45mm/1.8, the Olympus 60mm and the Panasonic 100-300. Next month I’ll probably get the 35-100/2.8. I don’t see the need for any of the new lenses, the only lens that’s really missing in my camera bag is a sharp and fast telephoto.
Mike Fix
4 months ago |Too slow for me.
Nico Foto
4 months ago |Slow, duplicate and boring.
Frank
4 months ago |Looking at the specs and the charts (performance data), nothing(?) has changed optically, it seems. I ordered the old 19mm for 99 EUR.
cuius
4 months ago |At least they’ve kept the filter size consistent across the range – unlike Olympus with their 37, 46, 52 and 58 sizing range requiring a multitude of step-up rings
Dannecus
4 months ago |I really wish I could get one just to encourage Sigma’s venture into M43. But like everyone above F2.8 is just not enough, also they are not native M43, but APS-C lenses, designed for Nex and ported over, so too big compared to say the 20/1.7 or 45/1.8.
Sigma – we are waiting to buy your product, but you have to design for M43, which means smaller than APS-C designs and larger apertures to give us shallow DOF on a smaller sensor. This collection ticks neither box. As a few above have said, the latest Oly 17/1.8 is not liked, so there is a great opportunity waiting for a third party maker to come in there with a great 35mm equivalent, give us 17/1.4 and they would fly off the shelves. There are repeated calls for long tele primes and super wides, opportunity. Sigma… balls in your court.
adaptor-or-die
4 months ago |They were designed for Sigma’s Merrill fixed compacts, not NEX, NEX is a port as well. The newest Olympus primes cover a focal plane that is as large as APS-C as well, that’s not really a bad thing? The new metal tubed Sigmas should be smaller than the plastic barrel versions, which are not as over-sized as stated. So many of the complaints seem to be by people reading spec lists and looking at images, not actually using the lenses in question.
The 19mm is maybe twice the length of my Lumix 14mm [which is smaller than the 20mm Lumix pancake.] The weight of all three PAN 14mm, Sigma 19mm, Sigma 30mm are slight and so bundle onto PEN bodies, do not feel, look or handle “over sized”
All my OM legacy primes are heavier and require the length of an adapter. So, the Sigmas slot in well. Sure my 14mm is the smallest, but it’s also a Wide Angle lens and on the street the 30mm and 19mm are excellent for candids.
Wanting them brighter will simply make them cost more, weigh more, and they will be larger to boot …
Tulio
4 months ago |Looks like only Samyang are doing real lenses for real Video/Photo professionals are realistic prices.
Matthias
4 months ago |There should be a button “don’t know yet”
First I want to see some tests of the Tamron zoom…
Dummy00001
4 months ago |> the Tamron zoom.
Depends on price. Really. We have already two super-zooms and the “only” problem with them is the price. But I voted for it anyway.
Runner up – the 60mm Sigma. It is indeed rather interesting proposition, even though I’m not a huge fan of the focal length.
The 19mm and 30mm Sigmas. It’s hard to be excited about the sub par lenses (as m43 goes). But then, they are dirt cheap. Who knows, it might be eventually an impulse buy for me. I think there is much more justified enthusiasm about them in the SAR camp ( http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/you-will-love-this-four-new-e-mount-lenses-from-sigma/ ).
woof woof
4 months ago |It depends what you mean by “sub par.” I don’t know if you mean sub par in build quality, image quality or specification.
I’d agree that the f2.8 aperture is less sexy than f1.4 but if they were f1.4′s they’d be different lenses selling for different prices. Right now they are what they are and the actual image quality seems to be pleasing people who’ve parted with money.
Dummy00001
4 months ago |“I don’t know if you mean sub par in build quality, image quality or specification.”
- Bit too dark. I would have preferred at least f/2.0.
- Bit too large. Me want more pancakes.
The problem of the Sigmas is that they are now being compared to the peers: Oly’s 2.8/17mm, Panny’s 2.5/14mm and 1.7/20mm. I can easily see me paying more for the Oly’s 17mm – instead of the Sigma’s 19mm – only because the former is a pancake.
P.S. Also I personally find the 30mm on 43/m43 to be a very odd focal length. I still own the 43 1.4/30mm and use it very very rarely: for most common settings it is either too wide or too long.
woof woof
4 months ago |I see, although I think “sub par” is a poor choice of words.
It’s possible that these lenses are primarily for larger image sensors and that may explain the focal lengths but being f2.8 isn’t bad in itself. Plenty of manufacturers make lenses that aren’t f1.4, or f0.95 for that matter, because it allows them to produce lenses that offer customers more choice. In this case it probably allows Sigma to produce lenses that are cheaper and possibly more compact and / or lighter than the f1.4 choice would be.
Would you get a f1.4 AF lens for the price of these f2.8 Sigma lenses? If you can then your comments are more valid but if you can’t you should at least accept that although these lenses aren’t for you they may be for someone else. If they’re not Sigma wont sell any.
Camaman
4 months ago |No 75-300 on the list?
I would like the Tamron as an overall lens but I am annoyed at the 28mm on the wide end. Whey you are city sightseeing you’ll be shooting 4 picture panoramas all day long to get the coverage.
The Sigma lenses are boring. Primes should be faster. Not much use for them other that they are supposed to be sharper if you print a wallpaper.
marsupial2go
4 months ago |Gotta go way cheap on the Tamron price. Nothing technically special about it. Its appeal would be a much lower cost than the existing two offerings in that focal/ƒ range. Go low and Tamron could have a winner.
Gato
4 months ago |I’m not big on primes, but I will consider the Sigma 60, based on price and image quality. I’m looking for a really sweet portrait lens and this could be a contender, along the the Olympus 60 and 75 and the Panasonic 35-100.
OldAlaskan
4 months ago |The MTF curves for the Sigma 60mm are very impressive (if true)!!
Jeff
4 months ago |These lenses are obviously much better than anything Nikon or Canon could make. How do you m4/3 guys live with yourselfs, knowing that your system is so much better than the overpriced CaNikons? It’s just not fair.
OlyDude
4 months ago |The 60mm could be a nice walk around telephoto.
tooma
4 months ago |I bought the Sigma 35mm 1.4. What a lens! It is the only non nikon lens I own. At 1.4 it is so sharp and retains so much color and contrast. Skin tones are beautiful. I prefer it to the nikon 24mm 1.4 35mm 1.4 and the 50mm 1.4G. This Sigma lens has raised the bar.
Tooma
Steven
4 months ago |They are way too late. I think most of the people do have their m4/3 Lens Setup, so why spend a lot of money on something that might be marginally better. And from my experience I would also go with the camera manufacturers lenses!
KI
4 months ago |I dun’t think he’s a troll… I share his view on these lenses. the only interresting one for me is the tamron if it’s priced right.
james70094
4 months ago |That’s not me, it’s Jeff again.
james70094
4 months ago |That’s not me, it’s Jeff again.
james70094
4 months ago |Couldn’t even get it right, Jeff just loves stealing my user name because I am so important in his life.
woof woof
4 months ago |Who’s a fan boy?
Just in case you mean me or even if you don’t, could I ask you to either grow up or step away from the keyboard?
It begins with "J"
4 months ago |You’re making up for the mum and dad who ignored him in his infancy (i.e last year).
Trolling is sad enough by itself, but masquerading as someone else to do it – well, it almost defies adjectives. The most pathetic, snivelling coward I’ve encountered on the internet.
Jeff
4 months ago |Fantard