PetaPixel

Sigma’s Game-Changing 18-35mm f/1.8 Zoom Lens to Cost Just $799

sigma1835mma

Sigma shook up the camera world back in April by announcing its new 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens — the world’s first zoom lens with a fixed maximum aperture of f/1.8. It turns out the revolutionary lens will have a revolutionary price tag as well: the company announced today that the lens will cost just $799.

sigma1835mmb

By comparison, Canon’s 16-35mm f/2.8 II lens (FF) costs $700 more at $1,499, its 17-55mm f/2.8 EF-S lens (crop) costs $1,060, and Nikon’s 17-55mm f/2.8 lens (crop) costs $1,450. Sigma’s new offering will be both significantly faster and significantly cheaper.

sigmalens2

As we reported a couple of months ago, the lens will be designed for APS-C format cameras, and will be the equivalent of a 27-52.5mm f/1.8 lens when used on a crop sensor body. All existing zoom lenses in this range max out at an aperture of f/2.8, so Sigma’s new offering will allow photographers to capture more than an additional stop of light.

In addition to the game-changing aperture, the lens will also feature a rubberized connector, a new lens hood, a new lens cap, a new AF/MF switch, a snappy AF motor, a manual focus override option, a brass mount, and a rugged build. Photographers will also be able to fine tune the lens using Sigma’s innovative USB mount and calibration software.

If you have $799 to spend on a new lens, you’ll be able to pick up a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM starting in early July 2013 for Sigma and Canon mounts. Nikon, Sony, and Pentax mount versions will be released some time afterwards. You can also preorder the lens today over at B&H.


 
  • Xentro

    We need a x-mount version of this lens. I would be first in line !

  • Tommy Sar

    Argh!! Why did I sell my Pentax?!!

  • Matthew Neumann

    “By comparison, Canon’s 16-35mm f/2.8 II lens costs $700 more at $1,499, and Nikon’s 16-35mm lens costs $1,360.” – and both of those are full-frame lenses. How is that comparison relevant whatsoever? Of course the prices are going to be way higher than most any lens designed for APS-C.

  • Choen Lee

    It is the constant f/1.8 that lifts the eyebrow(s).

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Hi Matthew, Just added Canon’s 17-55mm as well for a crop frame lens comparison. The point was to show the other options available for photographers who want a large aperture and a similar focal range.

  • Sporkguy

    SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!

  • Johnson Chiw

    How about a speed booster of APS-C lens to m43 and put this lens on. I think will be great!

  • Lee Young

    Sorry but this is definitely not revolutionary, if at all.

  • Trythe1

    If only I had the money! :(

  • Joel Ruiz Cantisani

    Yeah, but the Sigma isn’t an option for full frame photographers. So that’s still an unfair comparison. If Sigma makes an ultrawide f/1.8 for full frame I’ll be all over it.

  • Ross Campbell

    Neither is your dumb ass comment.

  • Horst Wrabetz

    why is that so?

  • Ross Campbell

    Some of the comments in this lame thread remind me of that great musician Jethro Tull and the song ” Thick as a Brick ”

    This lens is a godsend for APS-C cameras, why bother upgrading to an FX body .. what for? This lens will blow away anything that Nikon, Canon, Sony have to offer, Sigma have done their homework and provided a fast f/1.8 aperture in the focal length that a lot of DX users have been asking for a long time … and with a very fair price.

  • Tobias W.

    In the end, you will get what you pay for. Let’s just wait and see how well this lens fares once it’s available.

  • Geert VdW

    You sure have a point. I once compared a Nikon and a Sigma 28mm lens on a try-before-you-buy basis. Allthough the Sigma was a lot cheaper, i went for the Nikon. Being able to compare the brands side to side, It was just too apparent how cheaply the Sigma was made. You get what you pay for indeed…

  • 9inchnail

    Everybody knows that but if you can’t afford the pricier lenses, your options basically are: buy the cheap Sigma or buy nothing at all.

  • Bobll7

    Nope, those are APS-C lenses also. So the comparaison is valid.

  • Jordan Butters

    This has been priced at £800 in the UK, so $1,250!

  • Ivan

    Great! Next, 35-70mm f/1.8 (f/2 would do as well).

  • Stan

    Because FF sensors have better resolution if you’re into that sort of thing.

  • David

    I believe you meant to write the Nikon 17-35. That is Nikon’s ƒ2.8 lens. The 16-35 they make is an ƒ4, isn’t it?

  • Ian

    I might’ve hung on to my 7D (my final crop camera) if I had known this was coming

  • David

    How do you figure the Nikon 17-35 and the Canon16-35 2.8 lenses to be APS-C lenses. Sure, they will work on those formats, albeit as longer focal lengths, but they were both designed for full frame.

  • David

    Well Ross, there are a lot of reasons to upgrade to full-frame if you think about it, but that’s another debate i suppose. As for whether this lens will “blow away” the big boys, that remains to be seen, doesn’t it? Just because it shoots a little over a stop faster does mean that it is sharper or holds better color or contrast than the Nikon or Canon lenses or that it will be built as ruggedly. We will have to wait and see, but generally you DO get what you pay for.

  • Samuel

    Yes it is

  • E

    We’ve been asking for a wide-angle zoom that starts at 18? 18! It isn’t wide enough to be a wide angle zoom, and not long enough for a standard zoom. Sure it’a fast, but the range is awkward.

    If it’s optically exceptionally good it could be a substitute for a couple of fast primes I guess.

  • Steven Wade

    No, not as longer focal lengths, but as a smaller field of view. The focal length is still the same.

    People who want that focal length now don’t have to shell out the money for an f2.8 lens and get this one.

  • Steven Wade

    So you can go out and buy a constant f1.8 zoom lens for either crop or full frame right now?

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    You’re right. Thanks David :)

  • Sammy

    You should be comparing it to nikon and canon’s 24-70 2.8 as the full frame equivalent and the 17-55 2.8 as the cropped equivalent. Not to wide angle full frame lenses.

  • Andrew Goodlad

    That must always happen though. Why the surprise?
    Might aswell pay £200 more and get a trip to the US to pick one up :)

  • David Portass

    This looks such an awesome lens, I do still wish they’d put a mount seal on it. I know that’s not an issue for most but would be a nice to have.

  • Mantis

    And honestly, if you shoot in RAW you can always make those little adjustments later that make the difference negligible.

  • Mantis

    Dude is trolling.

  • Rob S

    You can still use the lens on a FF body but you are going to have some vignetting. Considering how many pictures I see with vignetting added in post, that might even be a feature. And don’t forget that full frames still represent a small portion of the overall market dominated by APS-C.

  • JoeNoName

    speeboosters work on fullframe lenses.

  • InkaKola

    Will this lens work with SONY NEX?

  • harumph

    This lens is a godsend for cropped sensor shooters, I agree, but it’s definitely not a reason to avoid upgrading to full frame.

  • Victor

    You can’t innovate more my ass canon and nikon!

  • JoeNoName

    obviously, buy the LA-EA2 adapter :) Or any Canon or Nikon adapter with autofocus.

  • templebox

    Not necessarily true, if I put my 17-70 on my full frame it’s not vignetting, it’s literally a black ring around the the APS-C sized square

  • Matthew Neumann

    They can be used on an APS-C camera, yes. That doesn’t make them APS-C lenses. They’re full frame lenses. The sigma is not. If you use it on a full-frame camera you’re throwing away 1/3 of your sensor. No point.

  • ikea

    No one in their right mind is going to buy a f2.8 full frame ultrawide zoom to use on their APSC camera over a f2.8 APSC midrange zoom. They are completely different beasts. I would eliminate the price comparisons with the FF ultrawides completely.

  • NoPentax?

    original announcement didn’t mention Pentax mount, so you may not be kicking yourself just yet. B&H preorders don’t show Pentax. Sigma probably don’t sell enough pentax lenses to continue supplying that mount, I’m just making assumptions here, but i wouldn’t be surprised if there are less and less lenses available for them. It would be a shame though, they make great cameras. I do hope it is released as Pentax mount, I would consider getting the next Pentax high end body if it’s any good.

  • http://www.ameridane.org/ thingwarbler

    Heck, if Sigma can do this, then you’d hope they can come up with an affordable alternative to Canon’s new lamborghini — the 200-400 f4 at $12K. If’d be wonderful if Sigma would make a version of that lens at, say, half the price — apparently they are fully capable of doing so…

  • Willi Kampmann

    MFT version, please Sigma please? I don’t care about the size or anything, just change the the mount!

  • Joel Ruiz Cantisani

    That is true, I actually have a Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 from my 7D days that I seldom use on my 5DmkIII, but I wouldn’t buy the 18-35 now that I’ve gone full frame. I wish Sigma would release a new ultrawide for full frame with this new quality and philosophy. I really love my 35mm f/1.4 :D

  • PAC

    That used to be true but now with sigma’s Art range It does not seem to be the case anymore.SLR Gear has already reviewed the lens and it is as sharp or sharper than any fast standard zoom on any format on the market and very good build quality. And with Canon or Nikon I don’t think we are getting what we pay for because sigma is proving we should be paying a lot less for great quality!

  • Zos Xavius

    looks like its going to be in K-mount! at first I wasn’t that excited about this lens, but now at this price I’m actually very interested!

  • Yonaphoto.com

    Imagine this lens on a speed booster ;)