Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 announced

profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
yes, f/1.8 all the way through. useless for me, but definitely an interesting lens regardless.


http://nikonrumors.com/2013/04/18/its-real-sigma-18-35mm-f1-8-dc-hsm-lens-announced.aspx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NikonRumors+%28NikonRumors.com%29&utm_content=FaceBook

Apr 18 2013 1:51AM
17 5
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
too bad 18-35 on a crop camera is fucking worthless haha
Apr 18 2013 2:16AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
in my opinion, so is 17-50, which ns seems to love so much...
Apr 18 2013 2:57AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
17-50 is a much better range, i couldnt tell you how many times ive been shooting 24/35 on my 17-50 and been so stoked to shoot 40-50mm. and 1.8 isn't even one stop faster than a 2.8... these days you don't even need a lens below f4.
Apr 18 2013 3:01AM
1 1
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
o.O
Apr 18 2013 3:02AM
0 0
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
i mean debatable for photography, i wouldn't really be able to say for filming... a stop or half a stop can make a difference imo
Apr 18 2013 3:04AM
1 1
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
but i do agree with this. sorry for the triple post.
Apr 18 2013 3:05AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
a stop or two of light these days is a small iso change, most NEW cameras can do iso 4000 + so NEW lenses at 1.8 is meh to me. I also never run my aperture below f4.
Apr 18 2013 3:07AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
isn't it a stop and a half faster? 1.4, 2, 2.8
and that's definitely debatable about not needing a lens faster than f4. i personally don't, but i shoot mostly landscapes. i wouldn't want to shoot a concert at f4
Apr 18 2013 3:07AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
yes. youre right. my b but still... this lens is also gonna be $1k+ im thinking
Apr 18 2013 3:09AM
0 2
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
i mean you're right on that, but just because you don't do something doesn't mean its not applicable to anyone.
Apr 18 2013 3:10AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
Sorry for the dub post but i shoot urban @ f4 all the time, iso 6400 ha yes having a faster lens is nice too but for $300 for 17-50 2.8 vs $1k+ for 18-35 1.8 isnt worth shit to me
Apr 18 2013 3:11AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
I didn't mean to say its not acceptable for anyone else, just expressing my opinion.
Apr 18 2013 3:12AM
1 0
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
No, I know I was just throwing that out there. And yeah, its probably going to be very spendy and not worth the money, especially for a crop camera. Interesting lens regardless
Apr 18 2013 3:15AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
i can also see people buying this who want to achieve a shallow dof at wide angle...
Apr 18 2013 3:16AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
Yeah, thats what we need more of, shallow DOF shots...
Apr 18 2013 3:32AM
2 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
It's 1-1/3rd stop faster actually.

But anyway, pretty cool they're incorporating this technology into a lens. No that I care, because it's pretty worthless for that focal range, but oh well...
Apr 18 2013 5:43AM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
I could see it having uses for astrophotography, widest f/1.8 lens available isn't it? Imagine it's not going to be cheap though.

What was it that made it hard to make f/1.8 zooms in the past?
Apr 18 2013 8:15AM
0 0
profile picture
Tikayt
Posts: 1031 - Karma: 1,543
With that f/1,8 you can shoot nicely in low light but also offers greater lightning dynamic range.
Leica best lenses are at f/1 ... quite magical I guess but true.
Apr 18 2013 1:51PM
0 0
profile picture
CrotchKiller
Posts: 9037 - Karma: 6,943
widest 1.8, but you could just buy the Arri 16mm 1.3 instead! haha
Apr 18 2013 1:55PM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
With that kinda money you could fucking but stars, let alone photograph them, and wow that's a heavy lens.
Apr 18 2013 2:15PM
0 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
The Noctilux is actually f/0.95...
Apr 18 2013 5:04PM
1 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31054 - Karma: 29,240
seriously Evan? For video it's MORE crucial to have faster glass than photography, you can only lower your shutter speed so far and don't have access to flashes as common as photographers do.
Apr 18 2013 7:27PM
3 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,089
Meh bump iso every new camera has great I so performance
Apr 18 2013 7:37PM
0 1
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31054 - Karma: 29,240
I've been cornered down to iso 3200 f 1.4-2.0 1/30th at plenty of weddings, aka stuck with my 50 and nothing else. I hope you're trolling
Apr 18 2013 7:40PM
1 0
profile picture
MatRich
Posts: 4789 - Karma: 1,813
How can you say something so retarded and not receive a shitstorm.

We dont all shoot on full daylight ski hills. Wedding receptions are dark, dark places. Documentaries and films often require the light or the look.

I could have never gotten the light I got here at f4. It would have looked like trash. Im at 2.8, iso 1600 and I pushed my shutter speed to 1/40th instead of 1/50 for the extra light since my subject wasnt moving. I would have been cornered with a f4 lens.

Accordeon dans la rue from Mat Rich on Vimeo.

Apr 18 2013 8:06PM
4 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
price: $799, little less than what i was honestly expecting
http://nikonrumors.com/2013/06/14/the-simga-18-35mm-f1-8-dc-hsm-lens-price-announced-799.aspx/
Jun 14 2013 11:17AM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
holy shit, 800$? At that price I can't see it being that good optically, but you never know, also is it really ring type hsm? or a shitty micromotor. This just got me a lot more interested
Jun 14 2013 11:36AM
0 0
profile picture
jeano
Posts: 333 - Karma: 104
what the fuck sigma nobody with a fucking crop sensor needs this lens!!!! WHY NO FF I NEED THIS!!!

imagine a fucking 24-70 1.8!!!!!
Jun 14 2013 11:40AM
1 0
profile picture
CrotchKiller
Posts: 9037 - Karma: 6,943
Lol
Jun 14 2013 11:49AM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 720
Holy fuck that's really affordable.

And it seems to be crazy sharp: http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1609/cat/31

This will be a massive hit like the Tokina 11-16.
Jun 14 2013 2:20PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
effectively a 28-56mm f1.8?

mehhhh
Jun 14 2013 4:28PM
0 0
profile picture
Bmo.
Posts: 4907 - Karma: 2,667
.
Jun 14 2013 10:49PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Also, Evan thinking there's no use for lenses faster than f4 haha...



Jun 15 2013 10:28AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)