Just announced: Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art

[Jan Anne]

Will be available in Canon, Nikon and Sigma mounts:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8757902625/sigma-announces-24-35mm-f2-dg-hsm-art-for-full-frame-camera

[arthurking83]

my ideal lens

Will wait for some actual usage experience .. but for all intents and purposes I've already committed myself to one.

[tommiejeep]

Interesting and surprising.  The 940gms and 82mm filters are off putting, and since I have the 24 1.4 Art, 35 1.4 Art and 16-35vr, I'll take a pass.  I really expected the 85 1.4 Art, maybe the 24-70 f2  OS Art and hoped for the 135 1.8 OS Art.   Wider, 18/20-35 would have made me more interested.    Sigma is certainly a player these days  .

I can see situations for the zoom would really be a plus but if I geared up for every situation I would need a pack horse, not just a Sherpa     
Tom
If the new lens really competes with both the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 (?) is Sigma shooting themselves in the foot? 

[arthurking83]

Interesting and surprising.  The 940gms and 82mm filters are off putting, and


....   I really expected the 85 1.4 Art, maybe the 24-70 f2  OS Art and hoped for the 135 1.8 OS Art.   ....

Considering how large and heavy the 24-35 f/2 turned out, would you really expect a 24-70 f/2 to be any smaller.
In fact, if you scaled such a lens up(and maintained some decency in performance .. you could easily extrapolate a 95mm filter and possibly about 1500gms for such a lens.

rumours can be a lot of fun, but this end result from Sigma shows the futility of their existence

I doubt that this lens would really take away from their 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 lens sales too much.
I assume those with the money to burn may probably end up with the lot anyhow.

ps. 135/1.8 is also one I'd like to see come to fruition too.

[Erik Lund]

If your interest is a zoom with this range, then the old 20-35mm AF-D 2.8 is a steel.

It's fairly sharp and almost without distortion, no mustache or barrel distortion here...
Super IR performance also!

[tommiejeep]

Yup Eric, I was recently offered a very good copy locally at a very good price.  Turned it down for the same reasons.  I sold my 14-24 2.8 (as new, lost about $100) because I just was not using it.  Great lens and enjoyed it but better use for the money than the odd day out with the lens.  Now that I am using wides more I may regret it but .... size and weight are becoming more and more factors  .
Tom

[pluton]

I won't need this lens, as I'm already swimming(drowning?) in wide angle lenses, most of which have aperture rings.
However, this new 24-35/2 zoom gives me faint hope that maybe, someday, they'll produce one of my fantasy lenses, a 50-100, 60-120 or some such zoom of nice quality and at least f/2.8 aperture...T/2.8 would be better.

[PedroS]

 

Don't know... I'm old and closed mind regarding Sigma...
They are doing a great effort to bring new and good gear. But still the same price to pay... size, weight and resale value.

It's a very short zoom, in fact, it's almost not a zoom.

On this range (well in fact a broader one) I use a trio, that is light and, from my point of view, produces very good images: the new AFS 1.8 20mm, 28mm and the 35mm. They are quicker but not so practical, thought.

[Roland Vink]

However, this new 24-35/2 zoom gives me faint hope that maybe, someday, they'll produce one of my fantasy lenses, a 50-100, 60-120 or some such zoom of nice quality and at least f/2.8 aperture...T/2.8 would be better.

Tokina made a 60-120/2.8 manual focus zoom many years ago. The closest Nikon equivalent are the AIS 50-135/3.5 and Series-E 75-150/3.5 (only half a stop slower than f/2.8 )

[Roland Vink]

It's a very short zoom, in fact, it's almost not a zoom.

It might be better to consider this a 28/2 lens with some flexibility in framing either way. The zoom range reminds me a little of the Tokina DX 11-16 which has a similarly short zoom range although it's a wider zoom.

[Jan Anne]

SLRgear.com just reviewed this lens:
√http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1804