(FT5) This is the new 30mm f/2.8 Sigma lens for Micro Four Thirds!


43rumors reader “Fabrys” discovered the prototype of the first Sigma Micro Four Thirds lens! it is the 30mm f/2.8. See Fabrys photo-stream on Flickr (Click here).That lens has been displayed months ago but it was marked as Sony E-mount lens only. Now it seems like Sigma has chosen to “adapt” it for Micro Four Thirds too! If I remember it right this is actually a macro lens!
There are no other info about price and availability.

Just a reminder. Sigma is part of the Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds coalition and already offers a nice amount of Four Thirds lenses:
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Sigma 18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 Sigma 24mm f/1.8 Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 Sigma 55-500mm f/4-5.6 Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Sigma 135-400mm f/4-5.6 Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6

  • It is strange that they did not include plans for Samsung NX mount. The Samsung NX register distance is significantly longer than M4/3 and Sony E, that may be why:


    • reverse stream swimmer

      It’s still only a prototype, or have you seen any price tag yet?
      It shouldn’t become any issue to shave off the mount sufficient millimeters to fit the Samsing NX mount, as expecting Sigma already to have built in some design slack into the design. Future options to account for Pentax and Canon, as well as for Optical Stabilization.

    • Samsung NX already has a native pancake 2.0/30mm lens. And from the image above, the Sigma appears to be not a pancake.

      It can be had for ~200€. I doubt Sigma could manage to sell its 2.8/30mm even cheaper.

      IMO, there is no point for Sigma to release this particular lens for NX.

  • Boooo!

    Who is going to buy that lens and why? Oh Sigma, you fail so badly.

    • henrik


      • Ardi GF2


        I will not consider anything slower than F2.0. You’ve failed, Sigma.
        I’m saying that as an owner of Canon-mount 30mm F1.4, a copy with spot on focusing.

        • +1. Including being owner of a Canon mount 30mm 1.4.

        • camerman

          Most great photos taken in the history of photography have been taken with an aperture greater than 2.8. As the for the 2.8 sigma lens, a real 2.8 lens is better than a 1.4 lens that doesn’t exist. If one is a photographer more than a collector, one should get whatever he or she can get…considering none of us can make a lens for ourselves, I’d say the 30mm 2.8 is pretty fantastic.

    • Anonymous

      I might actually buy it IF it was a macro. But apparently it’s not…

    • What’s wrong with a prototype that no one tried yet?

      • I guess:

        1) Not THAT fast.
        2) Weird 60mm equivalent focal length in m43.

        • Fast speed is not always important. When I use a lens, I think about the shots I can get. not the one that I can’t.

          FoV : 60mm quiv is atypical, but nothing a skillful photograph can’t work with

          For the rest, its all about what this lens brings and at what cost. If it has outstanding contrast, color rendition, resolution, etc. all of which shows in large prints, there would be arguments for a steep price.

          • Oh, I’m not saying you can’t get shots with this lens. Sure you can. The question is, would we buy it? As things are now, it just makes no sense…

            • Or better said: we just don’t know yet.
              At f2.8, the panleica macro 45 is certainly not a boring lens.

    • +1 Seems to miss the point of being an independent third-party maker of lenses: fill meaningful gaps.

      • jake

        is that not a macro lens?

        if so, it is a cool lens but other wise it is a waste.

    • Chris K

      Is it indeed a macro? If so, people who want a cheap macro lens will buy it.

    • Nathan

      Super Fail.
      Everyone’s clamoring for f2 and faster, they fail at f2.8. Even F1.8 would have gotten people excited, f1.7 or faster and they wouldn’t be able to keep them on the shelves.

      But 60mm equiv at f2.8? What’s it for?

  • Andrew

    Shame its not as fast as their four thirds primes… It’d have to be priced pretty competitively I think; like $300 or below. I think its nearest comparative m4/3 lens would be the 20mm f/1.7. Maybe 20mm is too wide sometimes, but, I’d much rather move the camera to get a similar frame (although not identical to 30mm) rather than lose over a stop of light with this Sigma.

  • It’s too huge and heavy, you can already tell.

  • Gianluca

    Useless lens….

  • So basically it’s the FF equivalent of a 60mm f/5.6 (DoF eq.)? No thank you, Sigma.

    • +1

    • Ben

      Yes, whyyyyyy!!!?????

      A waste of glass and plastic…

    • if you use the fl & dof equiv on all ft/mft lenses, it all seems to look less good on paper :-)

  • Nobody wants this lens…

  • Miroslav

    Not that I need this lens, but the good news is Sigma will certainly produce lenses for m4/3. There were many lens manufacturers who “joined” this spring, but no one has shown any mockup or prototype up to now, let alone announced a lens.

    • agree on that, at least another native mount for mft, and maybe later on native designs

    • Agreed also, but rebranding APS-C lenses for m43 is not the way to get m43 users hearts and minds…

      • its the easiest route to offer native mft mount. At least things as AF and EXIF can be included. I think quite a bunch of mft users are using mainly legancy lenses, and i am sure quite a few of them prefer certain FF lenses above any of the current mft offerings. Maybe Sigma has a few jewels too suitable for gettin a mft mount transplantation.

  • Olympius

    I had a feeling that Sigma was NOT going to take micro 4/3 seriously, and instead make E mount lenses, then offer them in a 4/3 mount. This lens pretty much demonstrates that is exactly what they are going to do.

    It is nice to have another macro choice for micro 4/3 however, as currently there is only the Lumix 45mm f/2.8.

    For macro enthusiasts, this could be a useful lens, especially if it’s priced right.

    – Olympius

    • Mr. Reeee

      It’s too short to be very useful as a macro lens for anything other than static objects. Forget shooting critters with it. I’d like to see a 100mm macro.

      Luckily we can adapt manual lenses rather than wait for more quality native M4/3 macros like the PL45mm.

    • Miroslav

      It’s not that bad if m4/3 ends with adapted lenses for NEX – we would certainly be left with better part of the glass. If someone reworked that 16mm F2.8 Sony pancake for m4/3, I guess it would be better than Olympus’ 17mm F2.8.

      • the 17 is underrated imo

      • hlb

        I own both. The Sony pancake borders on the psychedelic — IMHO, anyways. I predict it’s going to be a trip viewing the world through that lens on an EVF!

  • A useless lens which confirms my initial thoughts: Sigma is not going to design anything specifically for m4/3. It will keep bringing to market clones of the NEX lenses, where they can compete for quality. What’s next? A cheap stabilized 50/1.8 or a crappy 16/2.8?

  • Narretz

    I dreamt tonight about the GF7. Sadly, it was just an updated GF1 with more buttons and no evf. I want some rumors! ;)

    P.S. Who would buy this lens?

  • nobody

    What am I supposed to do with a 60mm f5.6 equivalent lens?

    Very poor choice, IMO :(

    • reverse stream swimmer

      – Or, if you could put this Sigma Macro on the Nikon 1 system with the CX mount: 82mm f/7.6

      – For Macro it’s doable, for a low light saver lens, I understand some are disappointed.

      I share the joy to see Sigma producing lenses for the MFT. They will learn, and hopefully see some symbiotic advantages of producing lenses for both the Sony and Olympus/Panasonic mounts.

      • Even if its not for macro. There is so many thing to look for in a lens, some people on this forum only value speed and suffer a bad case of inferiority complex to FF, I am afraid.
        I can think of contrast, sharpness, resolution, behavior of the AF (speed, noise), price/compromise. Will it have a special character, a je-ne-sais-quoi?

        Ok fine. You can forget about wacky shallow DoF effects. We all know about that compromise…

    • “What am I supposed to do with a 60mm f5.6 equivalent lens?”

      How about taking some pictures?

      • Darko

        Sigma lens 30 mm f 2,8 is 60 mm f 2,8 FF equivalent. You can’t change us who love FT/MFT. What is the purpose of your posts here, except to be a PROVOCATEUR!

  • Jim

    Any prime lens for m43 needs to be F2 or faster (unless over 100mm)!

    • I will repeat what I have already posted.
      (edit : answer was meant to Darko /)

      1) Shallow DoF is *not* always desirable in photography and there is intrinsically nothing wrong with 60mm equivalent. For instance, 60mm is just right when taking photos medium to large sized painting canvas. That example was on top of my head. Put on a 60mm equiv fixed focal length and use it as a walk around, I am sure you will get some keepers.

      2) That lens, at such specs, does not allows much of a shallow DoF, we all know that, unless of course its a macro. But its about the shots you can take, not those you cannot. For the perpetually “insecure of not having enough versatility just in case”, I suggest to walk around with a big Lowepro backpack loaded with the whole collection, back up batteries and back up bodies.

      3) Most importantly : We DON’T know how good the lens will be. It could be super sharp or contrasty, have great colors, silent fast AF, everything but speed. There are reasons why it could be worth a lot and/or be a bargain. We just don’t know yet. Even if its a cheapo, if the price is right, why not? Not every one needs European branded.

      4) Even if I was not among those of us who loves FT/MFT, my arguments stands. For general information, I am am early adopter (G1) and now have GH2 ;-)

  • Jack

    boring…there is already an slrmagic 28 f/2.8 so 30 f/2.8 is kind of useless. without af the slrmagic one is half the size with round aperture. how about a 30mm f/1.8 that would be a different story


  • fun

    There will be the same situation like for old 4/3. It is not serious target for Sigma. They will produce lenses for APS and copies of the same lenses for m43. Not real alternative. Too big, too slow, wrong focal length.

  • Maley

    The 35mm f3.5 macro for FT was popular and very cheap but also very good performing, dunno why u all hate this lens. Could be a nice option for macro shooters.

    • Georgi

      35mm macro is my favorit lens it is very sharp with very good contrast

      • GreyOwl

        And not to heavy either. :-)

    • Mike

      35mm is already short for macro, but 30mm is too short. And the 35mm had 1:1, I don’t think the Sigma will deliver this.

  • Another (rather) slow prime.

  • dan scott

    wow a 45 f4.2 standard lens on the nex, a 60 f 5.6 lens on mft, excited and DROOLING all over

    edit: i’m talking field of view here, of course it’s a f2.8 in terms of shutterspeed… just in case a wiseass feels the need to correct

    • jake

      get it some people do not want uslessly shallow DOF of FF f1.4.

      sometimes, especially for macro , deep enough DOF withou stopping it down too much is needed.

      so if this one is a macro lens I think it may be an interesting lens Sigma makes some really outstanding primes recently such as the 85f1.4HSM , 150f2.8OSHSM(I have Sigma 85f1.4HSM and it is a better lens than my Nikon AFS85f1.4G).

  • Brod1er

    There is good news here – Sigma is the first third party manufacturer to offer AF lenses. However…….

    As stated above, adapting existing lenses on the cheap means they are innsppropriate, too slow and unnecessarily large/heavy. Given the slew of great new lenses from O&P, this approach is a waste of time. Voigtlander, Samyang and even (gasp) SLR Magic get it!

    More good news – Sigma may encourage O&P to reduce their prices.

  • Mar

    It’s a good news for nex since it desperately needs new glass.
    If you look at it like that, it’s a 22mm f2 lens eqivalent on m43 – quite nice.

    • Brod1er

      No it’s a 60mm f2.8 (with f 5.6 FF DOF) on mft. It’s a 45mm f2.8 (with f4.5 FF DOF) on NEX. APSC and NEX are only 2/3 stops larger than MFT. FF sensors are well over twice the area of APSC (x2.33) and x3.55 MFT (x3.27 in the case of GH1/2)

      • Mar

        No, it’s a 22-23mm f2 equivalent on Nex.

        If you put this lens on Nex (30mm 2.8), you will get the same coverage and depth of field as if you had put a 22-23mm f2.0 lens on a m43 camera.

        Nex also has better high ISO, so that 1 stop difference is irrelevant.

        • Brod1er

          Yes I see what you are saying but you are not quite right on the f stop equivalency. as I described above, there is only a 2/3 stop difference between APSC and MFT. On this basis it is a 22mm f2.2, so it is still nearly a stop slower than the Panasonic 20mm in DOF terms. It remains f2.8 (1.5 stops) slower in terms of light gathering. As you say this is offset by the better high iso NEX performance. However this doesn’t help if you want to shoot at base iso. The lens is also larger than the MFT lenses. As you say “quite nice” in the NEX context, but not that great relative to more developed lens systems inc MFT.

    • Brod1er

      Yes I guess it’s better than nothing for NEX. but it underlines the poor lens options for NEX generally if this poor lens gets them excited. I believe a 60mm macro is on the way from Sony, which will make a much more useful macro focal length. For non macro use, I would take the Panny 20f1.7 on a mft camera in preference to this 30mm on NEX. If I didn’t like the 20, I could choose the 25 f1.4 also. Both are smaller and faster (and probably better quality) than the 30mm Sigma on NEX.

  • Daywalker

    Very boring lens.

  • Bob B.

    If it is a macro lens…AND it is inexpensive….it makes sense. That definitely fills a hole in the MFT lens offerings. I can see it selling IF it is priced correctly.

    • Do

      Yes, if it is similar to the Zuiko 35mm/f3,5 in terms of both price and quality, I would buy it because together with the Oly 45mm/f1,8 it would make a perfect couple that would be more versatile but still much cheaper than the PanaLeica 45mm.

  • Michael Devitt

    A funny thing, the APS-C sensor is slightly bigger than 4/3 but it makes much larger lenses to produce. The 4:3 aspect ratio makes difference ;).
    Good news, Sigma is entering mirror-less market segment and with CDAF their lenses will be finally FF/BF-trouble-free. Looking forward to f1.4 offerings.

  • jeff

    I had high hopes that MFT could replace my full frame and APS-C cameras. I’m just an amateur and I’d accept a slight drop in image quality for a compact and light system but the lenses are a constant and repeating disappointment for me. There seems to be yet another f3.5-5.6 zoom every week with no sign of a fast standard zoom and the primes that appear don’t fit my wish list, this being the latest pointless lens as far as I’m concerned.

    • Digifan

      Well Jeff, if you are an amateur it shouldn’t really matter to you.
      I’m what they call a pro (make money of my results), and I’m using (m)43 since 2005/2006.
      M43 sensors could be better I agree, but if I can live of it with the occasional renting of a 35mmFF than it should be sufficient for the masses.
      In real life there’s so little difference between output of APS-C and m43 it’s virtually irrelevant.

  • Simon

    As said before: recycling APS-C lens design doesn’t really show any serious commitment, as most focal lenghts are kind of useless with 2x crop factor.

  • zwagner

    I hate to +1 all these comments, but there’s no way around it. When I shot a Nikon D300S, my entire stable of lenses was Sigma, and there were some real gems to be found. Sigma has the capability of making quality glass that is usually cheaper than the ‘big guy’s’. So I was highly anticipating their offerings in the MFT market, since I now shoot an EPL-2, and will continue shooting MFT for the foreseeable future.
    Unfortunately, this is a disappointment. IF this turns out to be a macro lens, and IF it turns out in addition to be very, very reasonably priced (as some have already stated), then things are a little different. But even still, the lens should still have a wider aperture.
    I too am getting anxious with the trend of O&P to continue releasing slow zooms. Even something like the Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4 (though perhaps in a different focal range) would be welcome. A relatively fast zoom (of course a straight 2.8 would be better), and it’s macro. Come on Sigma (and O&P), we’re dedicated to this system, the stable of regular lenses is solid, now give us the goods!
    I think O&P might be surprised how quick a fast zoom would fly off the shelves, even if it was expensive, and if you added macro to that zoom… look out. I think Sigma’s missing an opportunity to be the Zeiss of the MFT market.

    • Mr. Reeee

      f2.8 would indicate this being a macro lens. Most macros are f2.8, f3.5 or f4 for the longer lenses.

      It appears Sigma thinks they’ll win customers… and our money… simply by putting M4/3 mounts on their existing lenses, they’re mistaken. I’ll tolerate a bulky lens if it’s exceptional, unique, or both. Forget about middling AND big.

  • Leendert

    Sigma: Please make a small m43 version of the ‘old’ Sigma 400mm F5.6 macro!

  • Alfons

    I knew they would end up doing lenses for APS-C and adopting them to m43! Only on the mirrorless world there are already so many sensor sizes that they need at least two different lineups of lenses to cover different crop factors.

  • mahler

    So, we have 20mm, 25mm, 30mm primes then.

    Why is no manufacturer brave enough to develop some fast(!) telephoto primes (50mm, 70mm, 100mm).

    To me this not very fast Sigma prime is more or less superfluous.

    • john

      noktor has a 50mm f/0.95 prime for video. i have one and works well on my GH1 for concerts. for 100mm I am using a Contax 100mm F2 and works like a chime

      • mahler

        Sorry, but aren’t we talking about native m4/3 lenses here? Of course there are a lot of fast telephoto legacy lenses out there, but that is not the point.

    • Mr. Reeee

      85mm, 105mm, 135mm, 180mm or 200mm all at f2.8 would do.

      For manual lenses, Voigtländer has an excellent 75mm f1.8 Heliar that’s only a few mm longer than the Nokton 25mm. The few reviews I’ve seen have been very positive.
      I’m using a Pentax SMC Takumar 105mm f2.8 in that range.

  • F2.8.. Yawwwwn.

  • SteB

    It’s a very odd focal/length max aperture lens for Sigma to go for, unless it is a macro lens. There’s quite a few other popular gaps that would be much better filled. I would have thought that Sigma could do well for themselves by producing intelligent adapters for mirrorless cameras. What I mean by that is adapters that allow some sort of electronic control of lens functions from the camera for other lens mounts. After all a lot of Sigma’s work must involve back engineering their lens interface with that of different cameras. Barring any patent problems I doubt any other manufacturer is in a better position to know and understand the lens control protocols of the various camera manufacturers.

  • Jojo

    Although Sigma has produced those lenses you list in 43rds fit, I’m not sure they still do. For example Sigma UK lists the 10-20/4-5.6 as being the only lens currently available in 43rds:

    So have Sigma dropped 43rds, or is it a question of production batches and stock? Anyone with firm info?

  • wishful

    I want a pancake mFT-macro. 25 mm (50mm equiv), f2.8 will do.
    I’d use it as prime.

    30mm bulky thing is useless

  • Ab

    Sigma is not going to win any hearts with worked over APSC designs. This looks to be bigger than the OIS 45mm f2.8 from Panasonic… To me that means Olympus could design a 50mm equivalent Macro or a 100mm equivalent macro at f2.8 and still be smaller…

    A bit silly, and compounds the problem with NEX, and most mirrorless APSC, lenses are too big.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.