Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Sigma 8-16mm at PMA

Expand Messages
  • Roger Howard
    Did anyone make it to PMA, and if so did you stop by the Sigma booth? I caught mention of an 8-16mm rectilinear for APS-C cameras on Kenrockwell.com:
    Message 1 of 10 , Feb 22, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Did anyone make it to PMA, and if so did you stop by the Sigma booth? I
      caught mention of an 8-16mm rectilinear for APS-C cameras on
      Kenrockwell.com:

      http://kenrockwell.com/tech/pma/2010/index.htm

      Anyone know anything more? Approx. pricing? f4.5-5.6 isn't exactly
      spectacular, so not going to be of much use in some situations, but many
      have sold plenty of good lenses with comparable max. apertures.

      - Roger


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • guillaume_fulchiron
      ... Non distorting lens ? 121,2° diagonal angle of view ? Humm, I d be curious to see some pictures shot at 8mm. If it s rectilinear it should be really
      Message 2 of 10 , Feb 22, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Roger Howard <rogerhoward@...> wrote:
        >
        > Did anyone make it to PMA, and if so did you stop by the Sigma booth? I
        > caught mention of an 8-16mm rectilinear for APS-C cameras on
        > Kenrockwell.com:
        >
        > http://kenrockwell.com/tech/pma/2010/index.htm
        >
        > Anyone know anything more? Approx. pricing? f4.5-5.6 isn't exactly
        > spectacular, so not going to be of much use in some situations, but many
        > have sold plenty of good lenses with comparable max. apertures.
        >
        > - Roger



        Non distorting lens ? 121,2° diagonal angle of view ? Humm, I'd be curious to see some pictures shot at 8mm. If it's rectilinear it should be really amazing.
        I own a Tokina 116 and @11 it is already very impressive.

        Oh, Michel, looks like you will need to heat your saw again... ;-)

        Cheers,

        G.
      • Greg Nuspel
        Here is some info http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022011sigma8mm16mm.asp [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Message 3 of 10 , Feb 22, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Here is some info http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022011sigma8mm16mm.asp





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Roger D. Williams
          On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:28:05 +0900, Roger Howard ... This lens can now be ordered in Japan, although the price hasn t been announced.
          Message 4 of 10 , Feb 26, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:28:05 +0900, Roger Howard <rogerhoward@...>
            wrote:

            > Did anyone make it to PMA, and if so did you stop by the Sigma booth? I
            > caught mention of an 8-16mm rectilinear for APS-C cameras on
            > Kenrockwell.com:
            >
            > http://kenrockwell.com/tech/pma/2010/index.htm
            >
            > Anyone know anything more? Approx. pricing? f4.5-5.6 isn't exactly
            > spectacular, so not going to be of much use in some situations, but many
            > have sold plenty of good lenses with comparable max. apertures.

            This lens can now be ordered in Japan, although the price hasn't been
            announced. "Coming shortly," I would say.

            It certainly expands the wide-end reach of APS-C cameras.

            Roger W.

            --
            Business: www.adex-japan.com
            Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
          • Bjørn K Nilssen
            ... Sounds a bit like the Olympus 7-14mm/f4 I use on 4/3 :) When it comes to aperture I think it s better with a lens you can actually use at full aperture,
            Message 5 of 10 , Feb 26, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              On 26 Feb 2010 at 23:37, Roger D. Williams wrote:

              > On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:28:05 +0900, Roger Howard <rogerhoward@...>
              > wrote:
              >
              > > Did anyone make it to PMA, and if so did you stop by the Sigma booth? I
              > > caught mention of an 8-16mm rectilinear for APS-C cameras on
              > > Kenrockwell.com:
              > >
              > > http://kenrockwell.com/tech/pma/2010/index.htm
              > >
              > > Anyone know anything more? Approx. pricing? f4.5-5.6 isn't exactly
              > > spectacular, so not going to be of much use in some situations, but many
              > > have sold plenty of good lenses with comparable max. apertures.
              >
              > This lens can now be ordered in Japan, although the price hasn't been
              > announced. "Coming shortly," I would say.
              >
              > It certainly expands the wide-end reach of APS-C cameras.

              Sounds a bit like the Olympus 7-14mm/f4 I use on 4/3 :)
              When it comes to aperture I think it's better with a lens you can actually use at full
              aperture, like f4 on mine, than a f2.8 lens that needs to be used at f5.6 to be sharp at
              the corners ;)
              According to the specs/fov for Samyang on 4/3 shown on this list, that 7-14mm rectilinear
              lens actually gives me a wider fov than I could get from the Samyang fisheye!

              --
              Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
            • Roger D. Williams
              On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:32:47 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen wrote ... That happens to be a remarkably fine lens by all accounts, although I think it
              Message 6 of 10 , Feb 26, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:32:47 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...> wrote
                (referring to the pending Sigma 8-16mm zoom lens):

                > Sounds a bit like the Olympus 7-14mm/f4 I use on 4/3 :)
                > When it comes to aperture I think it's better with a lens you can
                > actually use at full
                > aperture, like f4 on mine, than a f2.8 lens that needs to be used at
                > f5.6 to be sharp at
                > the corners ;)

                That happens to be a remarkably fine lens by all accounts, although I
                think it will probably prove to be in a higher price bracket than the
                Sigma. We shall only know when Sigma publishes a price. And of course
                speculation about lens quality is just that right now. I would be very
                surprised if Sigma equaled Olympus, though, I must admit.

                > According to the specs/fov for Samyang on 4/3 shown on this list, that
                > 7-14mm rectilinear
                > lens actually gives me a wider fov than I could get from the Samyang
                > fisheye!

                Let's think about that. 7mm on 4/3 equals 14mm on standard full-frame
                cameras. The Samyand 8mm fisheye has been demonstrated convincingly
                to me as the effective equivalent of a 10mm full-frame fisheye on
                ASP-C (Nikon) or 15mm full-frame fisheye.

                But the field of view of a 14mm rectilinear lens is considerably less
                than that of a 15mm fisheye on the same full-frame sensor. So I think
                that this splendid Olympus lens is unlikely to give you the wider FOV.

                The overwhelming disadvantage of the 4/3 format at the present state of
                the art is higher noise levels and lower dynamic range. The comparisons
                between cameras in the graphs plotted at the DXO site are quite
                revealing and well worth inspection, since dynamic range is so
                important to us. This is why I love my Fujifilm S5 Pro despite its
                lower pixel count. Again, the graphs at DXO are revealing.

                Roger W.

                --
                Business: www.adex-japan.com
                Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
              • Bjørn K Nilssen
                ... According to a previous post here from Aleksandr Milewski on Feb22: - Actually, on APS-C (per Jeffery Charles outstanding review) it has an - FOV of about
                Message 7 of 10 , Feb 27, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 27 Feb 2010 at 14:47, Roger D. Williams wrote:

                  > > According to the specs/fov for Samyang on 4/3 shown on this list, that
                  > > 7-14mm rectilinear
                  > > lens actually gives me a wider fov than I could get from the Samyang
                  > > fisheye!
                  >
                  > Let's think about that. 7mm on 4/3 equals 14mm on standard full-frame
                  > cameras. The Samyand 8mm fisheye has been demonstrated convincingly
                  > to me as the effective equivalent of a 10mm full-frame fisheye on
                  > ASP-C (Nikon) or 15mm full-frame fisheye.
                  >
                  > But the field of view of a 14mm rectilinear lens is considerably less
                  > than that of a 15mm fisheye on the same full-frame sensor. So I think
                  > that this splendid Olympus lens is unlikely to give you the wider FOV.

                  According to a previous post here from Aleksandr Milewski on Feb22:
                  ->Actually, on APS-C (per Jeffery Charles' outstanding review) it has an
                  ->FOV of about 90x135, and about 80x108 on 4/3. The APS-C FOV is about
                  ->equivalent to a 15mm fisheye on full-frame 35.

                  According to Olympus the 7-14mm have 114 degrees fov, as opposed to 108 on the Samyang.
                  PTgui usually says around 110 degrees though, but still about the same or more than the
                  Samyang.
                  What would the fov be for the new Sigma 8-16?

                  > The overwhelming disadvantage of the 4/3 format at the present state of
                  > the art is higher noise levels and lower dynamic range. The comparisons
                  > between cameras in the graphs plotted at the DXO site are quite
                  > revealing and well worth inspection, since dynamic range is so
                  > important to us. This is why I love my Fujifilm S5 Pro despite its
                  > lower pixel count. Again, the graphs at DXO are revealing.

                  I often do HDR anyway, shooting at ISO100, and I don't really mind a little "grain".
                  But I'm sure the Fuji is great too.

                  --
                  Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                • Roger D. Williams
                  On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:00:34 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen ... Yes, this was the information I was relying on. ... Manufacturers like to claim the
                  Message 8 of 10 , Feb 27, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:00:34 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                    wrote:

                    > According to a previous post here from Aleksandr Milewski on Feb22:
                    > ->Actually, on APS-C (per Jeffery Charles' outstanding review) it has an
                    > ->FOV of about 90x135, and about 80x108 on 4/3. The APS-C FOV is about
                    > ->equivalent to a 15mm fisheye on full-frame 35.

                    Yes, this was the information I was relying on.

                    > According to Olympus the 7-14mm have 114 degrees fov, as opposed to 108
                    > on the Samyang.
                    > PTgui usually says around 110 degrees though, but still about the same
                    > or more than the
                    > Samyang.

                    Manufacturers like to claim the diagonal FOV (this fooled me in the
                    Samyang 8mm specs)... The figures quoted are for H and V, of course.
                    If the figure quoted for the Olympus is the diagnoal FOV then there
                    is no discrepancy and the Olympus effectively has FVO that is that
                    much narrower. But I've not measured it, so this is (I hope) at least
                    an educated guess.

                    > What would the fov be for the new Sigma 8-16?

                    No-one knows yet. (RSN?)

                    >> The overwhelming disadvantage of the 4/3 format at the present state of
                    >> the art is higher noise levels and lower dynamic range.

                    > I often do HDR anyway, shooting at ISO100, and I don't really mind a
                    > little "grain".

                    Ah, I prefer "pseudo" HDR from a single exposure, and that really tends
                    to bring up the grain in the shadows... <wry grin> The Fuji suffers least
                    from this in my limited experience.

                    > But I'm sure the Fuji is great too.

                    It works for me.

                    Roger W.

                    --
                    Business: www.adex-japan.com
                    Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
                  • Bjørn K Nilssen
                    ... AFAIK diagonal fov is used only for fisheyes? This is the official specs: http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/dslr_ZUIKO_DIGITAL_ED_7-14mm_1_4_0.htm But in
                    Message 9 of 10 , Feb 27, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 27 Feb 2010 at 23:16, Roger D. Williams wrote:

                      > On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:00:34 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                      > wrote:
                      >
                      > > According to a previous post here from Aleksandr Milewski on Feb22:
                      > > ->Actually, on APS-C (per Jeffery Charles' outstanding review) it has an
                      > > ->FOV of about 90x135, and about 80x108 on 4/3. The APS-C FOV is about
                      > > ->equivalent to a 15mm fisheye on full-frame 35.
                      >
                      > Yes, this was the information I was relying on.
                      >
                      > > According to Olympus the 7-14mm have 114 degrees fov, as opposed to 108
                      > > on the Samyang.
                      > > PTgui usually says around 110 degrees though, but still about the same
                      > > or more than the
                      > > Samyang.
                      >
                      > Manufacturers like to claim the diagonal FOV (this fooled me in the
                      > Samyang 8mm specs)... The figures quoted are for H and V, of course.
                      > If the figure quoted for the Olympus is the diagnoal FOV then there
                      > is no discrepancy and the Olympus effectively has FVO that is that
                      > much narrower. But I've not measured it, so this is (I hope) at least
                      > an educated guess.

                      AFAIK diagonal fov is used only for fisheyes? This is the official specs:
                      http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/dslr_ZUIKO_DIGITAL_ED_7-14mm_1_4_0.htm
                      But in PTGui it shows sligtly less fov. About 85 degrees hfov in portrait mode vs 88
                      degrees as found in EXIF.

                      > > What would the fov be for the new Sigma 8-16?
                      >
                      > No-one knows yet. (RSN?)
                      >
                      > >> The overwhelming disadvantage of the 4/3 format at the present state of
                      > >> the art is higher noise levels and lower dynamic range.
                      >
                      > > I often do HDR anyway, shooting at ISO100, and I don't really mind a
                      > > little "grain".
                      >
                      > Ah, I prefer "pseudo" HDR from a single exposure, and that really tends
                      > to bring up the grain in the shadows... <wry grin> The Fuji suffers least
                      > from this in my limited experience.

                      Like this one ? ;)
                      http://www.worldwidepanorama.org/worldwidepanorama/wwp1207/html/BjornKareNilssen.html
                      With exaggerated grain. Far too slick with noise removed IMHO.

                      --
                      Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                    • Roger D. Williams
                      On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:40:44 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen ... That does not accord with my experience. The FOV, a single value without
                      Message 10 of 10 , Feb 27, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:40:44 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                        wrote:

                        > AFAIK diagonal fov is used only for fisheyes? This is the official specs:
                        > http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/dslr_ZUIKO_DIGITAL_ED_7-14mm_1_4_0.htm
                        > But in PTGui it shows sligtly less fov. About 85 degrees hfov in
                        > portrait mode vs 88 degrees as found in EXIF.

                        That does not accord with my experience. "The" FOV, a single value without
                        qualification is more likely to be the diagonal than either the H or V FOV.

                        >> Ah, I prefer "pseudo" HDR from a single exposure, and that really tends
                        >> to bring up the grain in the shadows... <wry grin> The Fuji suffers
                        >> least from this in my limited experience.
                        >
                        > Like this one ? ;)
                        > http://www.worldwidepanorama.org/worldwidepanorama/wwp1207/html/BjornKareNilssen.html
                        > With exaggerated grain. Far too slick with noise removed IMHO.

                        Beautiful panorama. And I agree. That plasticky, too-smooth look is really
                        off-putting. One of the things I like about my little Pentax K-x is that
                        noise is quite low and when it does appear is more "grainy" than cameras
                        where it tends to look like a coat of many colours laying on the ground.

                        Roger W.

                        --
                        Business: www.adex-japan.com
                        Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.