Sigma's new 200mm f/2 DG OS Sports looks like a pretty wild lens. A 200mm prime at f/2 is rare, and it's going to give a really shallow depth of field with that long focal length. It seems like it could work well as a long portrait lens, for indoor sports, or even landscapes when you want that compressed look.
From what I've read, it's built like a tank, has strong stabilization (Sigma says up to 6.5 stops), and uses their fast HLA autofocus motor. The optics are designed for sharpness and smooth bokeh, plus it's fully weather sealed with a solid tripod collar. It's definitely a big, heavy lens, but it looks like one of those specialty tools that gives you a very distinct look you wont get with a zoom.
Sigma 200mm f/2 DG OS Sports Specifications:
Focal Length: 200mm
Aperture: f/2 (max), f/22 (min)
Lens Mount: Sony E, Leica L
Format Coverage: Full-Frame
Angle of View: 12.3°
Minimum Focus Distance: 5.6 ft / 1.7 m
Magnification: 0.13x (1:7.6)
Optical Design: 19 elements in 14 groups
Aperture Blades: 11, rounded
Focus Type: Autofocus
Image Stabilization: Yes
Tripod Mount: Removable, rotating collar with 1/4-20 thread
Filter Size: 105mm (front)
Dimensions: 4.7 x 8 in / 118.9 x 203 mm
Weight: 4 lb / 1800 g
My preorder is in. I wish it would take the TCs, but not a deal killer and for my purposes, I do not need higher than 15fps. It seems like Sigma did a great job on this lens at what is relatively a good price.
Sounds awesome, I just wish it took TC's. I am really surprised to hear it doesn't even take TC's on L mount. I feel like thats a big missed opportunity.
Not surprising, it reminds me of the subject isolation I used to get with my Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS. That lens was a lot heavier at 2520g. Even the Fuji XF 200mm f/2, which is designed for APS-C, comes in at 2265g. Interestingly, all three lenses are about the same length, around 205mm.
I didn't see any reviews. Is it compatible with TCs?
Gorgeous lens - everyone is asking, as usual, if it will take TCs...no is of course the answer. And given that is the question we all ask with any Sigma telephoto (I have the 70-200/2.8), I'm guessing Sony will not see fit to correct that business decision haha.
Dave Sanders wrote:
Gorgeous lens - everyone is asking, as usual, if it will take TCs...no is of course the answer. And given that is the question we all ask with any Sigma telephoto (I have the 70-200/2.8), I'm guessing Sony will not see fit to correct that business decision haha.
I only asked because PetaPixel had originally claimed the lens worked with L-mount teleconverters, but that turned out to be incorrect. Apparently it's not compatible with teleconverters at all. (Sony or Leica versions)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Not surprising, it reminds me of the subject isolation I used to get with my Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS. That lens was a lot heavier at 2520g. Even the Fuji XF 200mm f/2, which is designed for APS-C, comes in at 2265g. Interestingly, all three lenses are about the same length, around 200mm.
It's an objectively better lens than the Canon as well. And that's before you get to things like AF speed and accuracy and the oh-so-helpful OSS. I took our eval copies at work to shoot drop-in ice hockey and club cheer practice over the weekend, and they were flawless. It reminded me of shooting hockey and gymnastics with the DIIn and a rented 200/2, except my keeper percentage was through the roof on the a1II and a9III. The only real advantages to the seventeen year-old Canon now are the greatly recessed front element (fewer opportunities to accidentally scratch that big piece of glass), the drop-in filter (so much cheaper than 105mm filters), the fact that it'll adapt decently to anything mirrorless, and you can use EF extenders.
Sounds like the TC confusion is not just a PetaPixel issue. Fro has this comment pinned to his review video. "Quick note, you can use a sigma tc, not Sony. But Id never ever ever use a tc on a lens like this." And when asked he says "In the notes it says TC from sigma. Thats what it says. I dont know about L mount tc. But again. Id never dummy this lens down."
&lc=UgzF7_vqDjfgASQBZ7V4AaABAg
Edit:
Looks like Sigma may have messed up in some of their releases information, pcmag has a note saying "This review originally stated that the L-Mount edition of the 200mm F2 DG OS Sports works with rear teleconverters. This was based on information provided to us by Sigma, which was incorrect. The 200mm F2 does not work with rear teleconverters, regardless of mount." https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/sigma-200mm-f2-dg-os-sports
I wonder how much difference there is between 150/2 and 200/2? It's hard to argue the practicality of a zoom (let alone FPS and AF restrictions) but I guess the Sigma pops a lot more .
.