[frank]

Frank, thanks for posting.

 

Bulky, you're saying? Any design suggestions, how Sigma can get the constant f/4 into a smaller tube? Pass it forward to them...  But I have to say, I don't want to re-buy my 77mm filters for 82mm, so that's a dealbreaking thing for me, too. As for weak corners: Apparently not that much weaker than the genuine lenses, when comparing PZ results of 24-85 and 24-120/4 VR.

 

Also, not everybody's a friend of extending tubes. Anyway, I'll save my money for a 85/1.4 in the quality level of their 35/1.4 

 

When compared to the Nikon/Cannon counterpart, 215g increase in weight, and 82mm vs 77mm in filter size. These two numbers made me say that the Sigma is "bulky". 215g increase in weight is significant, I think. In absolute numbers, I also think ~900g is too weighty for a constant f4 and standard zoom lens.