Upload & Sell: Off
| p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Pre-order new Sigma lenses (14, 24-70, 135 & 100-400) |
Regarding OS. A lot can be said about why it should or should not be there. But my guess is that it came down to price. When a manufacturer releases a lens with IS/VR/OS it's expensive. So expensive that a lot of people can't afford it. And worse, the forums fill up with complaints about price, haha! So Sigma will see increased sales, overall, without OS. That's my guess.
Price is absolutely a valid reason not to include IS in a lens. "Because no-one needs IS in an xxx f/xx lens" is not.
Why would you be delighted that it doesn't have IS? What's the downside to having it?
Cost is the major one. It's also something else that can break - I dropped my Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro a very short distance and the IS broke, in a way that also meant I couldn't even shoot without IS. Finally it's extra glass in the optical path which has a small impact on the T-stop etc.
I think every long lens should have IS these days. It's fantastic to have the option to shoot at longer shutter times with long lenses when necessary.
Pretty much every long lens does have IS now, but for some reason nobody makes a stabilised 135mm prime (but you can get a 24mm with IS), go figure