New Sigma 35mm f/1.4.

[Jayson]

Anyone interesting in this? I was seriously looking at the Canon 35mm f/2 IS, but this has peaked my interest a little more. They say it comes with a dockUSB for MA on the lens and firmware updates. Hopefully the quality control issues are a thing of the past as this might be my next purchase.

The new Tamron 70-200 also looks pretty slick, but I really am not in the mood to upgrade my current 70-200 f/4 IS anytime soon.

[clemmb]

The new Tamron 70-200 also looks pretty slick, but I really am not in the mood to upgrade my current 70-200 f/4 IS anytime soon.

I have my eye on this one. If its quality is like the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD it just may make a good replacement for my Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD. My 70-300 has been great for the price as long as I do not go beyond 200mm but I need faster. This 70-200 looks like it could fit the bill.

[Kayaker72]

I am looking into it. I actually pre-ordered the 35mm f/2 IS, but that was more to get an early place in line when they are shipped. I may cancel. I am debating about how best to add to my kit to help with my type of "event" photography (family functions, etc). But I keep coming back to a fast 30-35 mm lens.

I am having some trouble wrapping my head around the benefit of IS at 35 mm on a crop sensor camera (I can see benefit on FF). It really isn't enough to let you consistently blur water for waterfalls (here is where FF would benefit). For anything with people or motion, it may not be needed as I typically wouldn't want to shoot less than 1/60th of a second anyway. So, really, the only benefit I am coming up with is low light photography of subjects that aren't moving. I say this being a big fan of IS. But 35 mm seems to be in between the functions where I use IS on a crop sensor camera (15-24 mm to hand hold waterfalls and >35 mm to be able to shoot ~1/60th for people).

That said, I am still impressed by the reviews I've read of the 24/28 f/2.8 IS lenses, and this lens seems to be very similar. And the MTF chart is pretty darn good. So I am tempted, but still evaluating the other options, including the new Sigma option.

[ham]

They couldn't have timed this any better! If it's got a method of adjusting AFMA then I'm sold if it's cheaper than the Canon 35mm.

[acmojica]

I can't wait to see some real world reviews. I've been eyeing a 35mm 1.4 for a while...

[Stephen Probert]

I am very interested. Am selling my 24-70 2.8L and want to shoot weddings with this and my 85mm 1.8 with two FF bodies. I am vacillating due to the focusing issues the Sigma 85 and 50 seem to have based on TDP reviews of those lenses. I think my alternative choice would be the Canon 1.4, not the 2. Can probably get used for almost the same price.

Anyone know when it is supposed to ship or if anyone has an early copy reviewed?

[Busted Knuckles]

with the smaller photo site on the crop sensor, there is more camera motion blur for any given movement. or at least I think that is how it works.

I am looking into it. I actually pre-ordered the 35mm f/2 IS, but that was more to get an early place in line when they are shipped. I may cancel. I am debating about how best to add to my kit to help with my type of "event" photography (family functions, etc). But I keep coming back to a fast 30-35 mm lens.

I am having some trouble wrapping my head around the benefit of IS at 35 mm on a crop sensor camera (I can see benefit on FF). It really isn't enough to let you consistently blur water for waterfalls (here is where FF would benefit). For anything with people or motion, it may not be needed as I typically wouldn't want to shoot less than 1/60th of a second anyway. So, really, the only benefit I am coming up with is low light photography of subjects that aren't moving. I say this being a big fan of IS. But 35 mm seems to be in between the functions where I use IS on a crop sensor camera (15-24 mm to hand hold waterfalls and >35 mm to be able to shoot ~1/60th for people).

That said, I am still impressed by the reviews I've read of the 24/28 f/2.8 IS lenses, and this lens seems to be very similar. And the MTF chart is pretty darn good. So I am tempted, but still evaluating the other options, including the new Sigma option.

[Rocco]

I have my eye on this one. If its quality is like the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD it just may make a good replacement for my Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD. My 70-300 has been great for the price as long as I do not go beyond 200mm but I need faster. This 70-200 looks like it could fit the bill.

I had the exact same experience with my 70-300mm. I loved the VC, and was more than pleased with the lens 200mm and shorter. Too bad really, everything about that lens felt like quality.

Sent from my HTC VLE_U using Tapatalk 2

[Nessimelle]

The new Sigma will be interesting, maybe even better than the Canon and Nikon equivalent (just looking at the MTF values though): http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012...der#more-10609

[Steve U]

FM are talking this lens up. Very impressive