TakenWild wrote:
Translation: Sigma "90mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary" L mount version has 11 lenses in 10 groups, 9 diaphragm blades (circular diaphragm), minimum shooting distance 0.5m, maximum shooting magnification 1: 5, filter diameter 55mm.
Size φ64x59.7mm, weight 295g
Smaller AND lighter than the 65mm, I almost can't believe it. I've typically avoided AF primes in this FL because they end up being larger than I like to carry around, but this might make me reconsider my kit if the AF is good.
I anticipate nice OOF rendering. I'd be happy if they follow the 45's forumula even at the expense of some sharpness, but I doubt it. Probably more in line with the 65mm. The smaller size (..and hopefully no double outlining like the 85mm 1.8) would make it a buy for me.
I can also see some 90mm contax fans buying this one.
If the specs that Nokishita published are legit, that's a very attractive lens for my purposes. Again another 'if', but if it is a member of the 'i' series and has the same build and ergonomics, I'm in. The 0.5m MFD is great, that would make it a very versatile lens for me.
This quells my 65/2 lust a bit, but does nothing for my urge to get the 24/3.5...
Sony SAM 85/2.8 + LA-EA3 combo weighted 335 grams on my scale. They’ve since been sold. The Sony was the classical five element Sonnar formula also found in the Contax G 90/2.8, though without the T* coating of the latter.
Sigma used to make a 60/2.8 E-mount APS-C lens, now they follow up that and the tradition of 90/2.8 and similar short tele lenses which includes quite a few lenses from Zeiss, Leica and Voigtländer.
My guess is that the new Sigma 90/2.8 will be rather well corrected for SA to make sure, that AF works and in particular eye-AF. Focusing a 90/2.8 properly is even more critical than a 45/2.8.
Dave Sanders wrote:
If the specs that Nokishita published are legit, that's a very attractive lens for my purposes. Again another 'if', but if it is a member of the 'i' series and has the same build and ergonomics, I'm in. The 0.5m MFD is great, that would make it a very versatile lens for me.
This quells my 65/2 lust a bit, but does nothing for my urge to get the 24/3.5...
Nokishita is not SAR. It has an amazing track record. I don't remember it ever being wrong.
bjornthun wrote:
My guess is that the new Sigma 90/2.8 will be rather well corrected for SA to make sure, that AF works and in particular eye-AF. Focusing a 90/2.8 properly is even more critical than a 45/2.8.
That's a very good point. However, a 90/2.8 lens yields less blur than a 65/2 at same distance to subject, so perhaps Sigma will leave a bit more SA in the design....Ok, that's my personal wish.
Dave Sanders wrote:
If the specs that Nokishita published are legit, that's a very attractive lens for my purposes. Again another 'if', but if it is a member of the 'i' series and has the same build and ergonomics, I'm in. The 0.5m MFD is great, that would make it a very versatile lens for me.
This quells my 65/2 lust a bit, but does nothing for my urge to get the 24/3.5...
The 24/3.5 feels almost like a Leica R or Zeiss ZF lens mechanically. No other AF lens I’ve owned has had this gorgeous old school build quality. The aperture ring has metallic sounding «cluncks» each time you turn it, holding it next to your ear.
bjornthun wrote:
The 24/3.5 feels almost like a Leica R or Zeiss ZF lens mechanically. No other AF lens I’ve owned has had this gorgeous old school build quality. The aperture ring has metallic sounding «cluncks» each time you turn it, holding it next to your ear.
I surely didn’t kill any lens lust there.
Hahaha dammit, you did not! it's currently $50 off here in Canada too, making it comparable to the US price. My 45 needs a friend or two...
MAubrey wrote:
Wow. That's shorter than the Contax G 90mm Sonnar (63mm) and only slightly heavier (240g) before an adapter is added. I'm sold.
It's compact indeed, especially for an AF lens with 11 elements.
Compared to the excellent Leica 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit (without adapter) it's about 115 grams lighter and 23mm shorter! With an adapter it's 33mm shorter!
I was hoping Voigtlander to release a compact 90mm, but if the Sigma turns out to be good, the size is going to be hard to beat.... really excited to see it.
55mm is the standard filter for the CZ Sonnars. 295g compares with CY Sonnar 85/2.8 (on which Sony's plastic filter thread SAM 85/2.8 was based) at 260g; CY Sonnar 100/3.5 at 286g. All need a hefty ~100g adapter (at least Sony EA3 or similar).
Dimensions of 64mm x 60mm compare with Sonnar 85/2.8 at 47mm x 61mm and Sonnar 100/3.5 at 61mm x 63mm. MFD of 0.5m compare with Sonnar 85/2.8 and Sonnar 100/3.5 at ~1m.
But the biggest changes might be (besides Sigma's glass) the 11/10 versus the classic Sonnar 5/4; and the 9 blade aperture rather than the 'stop sign' inducing six blades of the early lenses.
So summing up: same weight region (lens but not mounted weight!), same dimensions as 100/3.5, same filter thread size, MFD twice as close, modern aperture system, ~twice as many elements and no need for adapter. A lot of boxes ticked right there. I bet it's great wide open.
Really excited for that 90mm. Looks like a perfect everyday portrait/landscape lens option and will fit perfectly in a compact 24/45/90 trio.
The size is exactly the same as Sony’s 28mm f2 (albeit 95g heavier). I had that lens previously and it was a very good size paired with Sony bodies. Being a 90mm at that size, is amazing.
The 90 is exciting, but I'm also very curious about the 24/2. If they can bring it in around the size of the 35/2 without a lot of compromises, it could be my ideal lens at that focal length.
