[Klaus]

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-first...ed-summer/

 

It is about time for Sony to receive some serious heat regarding their pricing.

[Ayoh]

Agreed. Although I think it will be a 35mm 1.8 rather than the rumoured 1.4 as this is an obvious gap in the line up. Also I don't see how a FF 35mm 1.4 from Sigma can be half the size of the Sony without serious performance compromises

 

Sigma should also make a 24-120mm as this is highly sought after.

 

And I hope they dont make another 50mm..

[JJ_SO]

Why should Sigma go for slower glass than the already existing 35/1.4 Art? Mind you, "being compact" is not the biggest strength of Sigma's lenses  more "delivering outstanding performance".

[toni-a]

Sigma had autofocus problems in Canon and Nikon world let's see if it still persists in mirrorless world.

Wonder why Sigma isn't strongly present in MFT world

[Klaus]

If you are referring to front/backfocus - these do not exist in mirrorless land EXCEPT for RSAs ( and even then it's depending on the system).

[Ayoh]

Well they can also sell a 35/1.8 to other APS-C and m43 systems and still have a compact lens that makes sense for those systems. A 35/1.4 for FF would be unnecessarily large and expensive for APS-C/m43 and would make no economic sense. Sigma doesn't really make lenses for only one mount - they typically achieve low cost with large volumes over many systems. Thats why a 35/1.4 doesnt make that much sense, but i could be wrong.

 

Also despite all the internet mania about copy variation, my copy of the Sony Zeiss 35mm/1.4 is very good (bought from overseas with no exchanges) - instant silent AF, sharp, smooth bokeh, nice build. If you wait for sales it can also be had for ~$1500 AUD so Im not sure how a Sigma would offer much of a benefit over this option

 

 

Why should Sigma go for slower glass than the already existing 35/1.4 Art? Mind you, "being compact" is not the biggest strength of Sigma's lenses  more "delivering outstanding performance".

[thxbb12]

If you are referring to front/backfocus - these do not exist in mirrorless land EXCEPT for RSAs ( and even then it's depending on the system).

 

What is RSAs?

[Rover]

Residual spherical aberrations, the cause of focus shift.

 

P. S. Maybe Sigma can release a smaaaaaaaaaawwww 35/2 and thus plug the perceived gap in the FE lineup. After all, this is one of the most widely expressed complaints about the status of the lens family......

[Brightcolours]

I very much doubt that RSA will be the issue causing missed focus images with mirrorless cameras.

 

Anyway, some mirrorless cameras miss focus consistently when the lens focusses coming from one end, not the other end of the focus range. This points to inaccurate back steps after the contrast AF saw that best contrast has been passed.

 

Other cameras (like Sony MILCs) seem to totally miss focus without a real clue as to why sometimes.

 

And some focus just fine.

[Klaus]

Brightcolors ... you speak in mysteries.  In conventional scenes I have never used a mirrorless camera that wasn't able to lock on.

It's a different topic for sports and available light but then I've used DSLRs that fail to do so here as well.