Jonathan Brady wrote:
This image makes it seem like it's not enormous but other pictures make it look like a cannon (with 2 n's).
In this picture it looks smaller than sigma’s 85 1.4 art, and I’d imagine it’s smaller still than the 135 1.8. Probably going to be the heaviest of the 3 however
Darn it's massive for its spec... and I wonder why?
It's same size as the gargantuan Mitakon 135mm F1.4... but I don't recall having issues with vignetting. I mean yes it's present, but hardly a problem.
DavidBM wrote:
Where is the info about 105mm front filter coming from?
Sans hood it doesn’t look that big...
It's printed on the lens. Look for "105mm 1:1.4 DG CircleWithALineThroughIt 105". That circle with the line through it means the filter size (I believe) and 105 is the size in mm.
Not even giving this one a second look if it's available in FE mount. Not with the ergonomics of a Sony body behind it. That focal length lends itself to being hand-held, anything this front heavy is a recipe for disaster.
thrice wrote:
Not even giving this one a second look if it's available in FE mount. Not with the ergonomics of a Sony body behind it. That focal length lends itself to being hand-held, anything this front heavy is a recipe for disaster.
But the tripod collar lends itself to being used on a monopod....
Anyway I actually find that with a large enough lens the balance problem actually goes away as the lens makes up the majority of the total weight and the camera barely matters. I've been using the FD 300/2.8 handheld recently and your basically carrying the lens with one hand and aiming the camera with the other.
Matt Grum wrote:
But the tripod collar lends itself to being used on a monopod....
Anyway I actually find that with a large enough lens the balance problem actually goes away as the lens makes up the majority of the total weight and the camera barely matters. I've been using the FD 300/2.8 handheld recently and your basically carrying the lens with one hand and aiming the camera with the other.
Indeed. The only lens that I ever tried that was a nightmare to balance was the older FD 300mm 2.8 (the fluorite one that was black not white). That thing all the weight was on the big front element so grabbing it by the lens body was not good to keep it balanced.
The elephant in the room is that Sony is yet to introduce a 1051/1.4 and if the IQ and rendering of the 105 Art is best in its class which I suspect it will be, the 105 Art will be great value. The specs of the weight is still unknown and Sigma is very reluctant to release them until the last moment. Just take a look at the specs on B&H site as often the weight of Sigma lenses are not detailed.
If the 105 Art matches the AF speed/accuracy with face/eye recognition equally to that of the natives it will be popular.
LBJ2 wrote:
IMO, the included tripod foot is a good indication this lens will require a little extra muscle aka multi-layered carbon fiber.
In addition the pivot point on the foot is quite far forward. Might be quite front heavy in addition to being generally heavy.
I don't think there's any questions the optics will be stellar. But handling might prove to be an issue for some.
Presumably the huge front diameter means at there will be very little swirl or cats eye, this may be the point of it. After all if you have a behemoth to get 1.4/105 then it has to be amazing at 1.4..
DavidBM wrote:
Presumably the huge front diameter means at there will be very little swirl or cats eye, this may be the point of it. After all if you have a behemoth to get 1.4/105 then it has to be amazing at 1.4..
Great point! Are you getting one to complement your Batis 135?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Great point! Are you getting one to complement your Batis 135?
It’s a bit tempting! I have slower lenses - batis 85 and 135 - for portable dual duty portrait and general use.
I have thought that one AF (for eye AF) super fast lens for use at home or on specific portrait sssions might be good. Was thinking maybe the GM85
But this would even more more extreme. I don’t need superfast af lenses at all fls between 80 and 135 (guess I don’t *need* any) but 105 might be the one...
DavidBM wrote:
It’s a bit tempting! I have slower lenses - batis 85 and 135 - for portable dual duty portrait and general use.
I have thought that one AF (for eye AF) super fast lens for use at home or on specific portrait sssions might be good. Was thinking maybe the GM85
But this would even more more extreme. I don’t need superfast af lenses at all fls between 80 and 135 (guess I don’t *need* any) but 105 might be the one...
I highly recommend the GM 85 for that David. It's hard to believe, but it's pretty compact and light next to the Sigma versions.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I highly recommend the GM 85 for that David. It's hard to believe, but it's pretty compact and light next to the Sigma versions.
Yes and I do love it’s wide open look.
I guess the factors against is that I have a nice portable AF 85 I’m not letting go of (and ZM for landscape) so the fast lens doesn’t have to be portable, and a 1.4/105 will have a very different look from most of what I have.
But I’ll be waiting for samples. It’ll need to look mighty amazing to justify the probable 1.3kg...
