Australian Website Lists Price of Sigma’s 50mm f/1.4 Otus Competitor at $1,350

Screen Shot 2014-02-06 at 3.23.46 PM

We know Sigma’s recently-announced 50mm f/1.4 Art Series lens is supposed to be good, great even. In fact, it’s supposed to be so good that it competes on the same level as the ZEISS Otus that we’ve heard so much about (and may or may not be reviewing as I type this).

The question on everybody’s mind, then, is “how much will this beast cost?” Thanks to an Australian website, we now have an idea.


Assuming the site is legitimate (and even they admit this is ‘anticipation’ since no official word has come out), they expect Sigma’s Otus competitor to run you $1,500 Australian, or approximately $1,350 US. Compared to the Otus price tag of $4,000, that’s downright cheap, but it still isn’t as cheap as many of our commenters had hoped/predicted.

What do you think? Is this a reasonable price given that Sigma has outright said their competition is ZEISS and not Canon and Nikon where this lens is concerned? Or should Sigma set their sights a little lower? Let us know in the comments down below.

(via Photo Rumors)

  • Roger Coelho

    If it is as sharp as they say, it will sell well, but I was hoping it would be much closer to the Sigma 35mm Art lens.

  • Colin Peddle

    Me too. Even on the used markets (that are not fleabay), 1350 translates into about 1100 or so for about the next two years. Still a pretty penny.

  • Poor in Melbourne

    Don’t forget to take at least a couple of hundred off the price just for being Australia. Buying electronics/ camera gear here is always more expensive.

  • David Shepherd

    This is a deal compared to Ziess. NIkon’s 1.4 is about $500 US, but is not a competitor to the art lens of Ziess either. Canon’s 85m f/1.2 is $2500. I hope that the price comes down a bit lower and the 85mm in this family is at this price. That would be ground breaking.

  • BrisVid

    Don’t pay any attention to this price. This company is known for shady dealings. The company has clearly made up the price in an effort to rack up more sales pre launch. I work in a retail store in Australia as well and no one has pricing or a release date yet.

  • Noam

    Camera equipment is always MUCH more expensive in Australia than the USA. So it’s not necessarily an indicator for US prices. When I lived in Sydney, I once paid almost double on a lens. Most Australian photographers I know would prefer to order gear from Hong Kong than Australia.

  • Scott Hart

    No comment on how much it ought to cost, but it makes me feel much better about the $500 I spent on their current 50/1.4 I bought last spring.

  • harumph

    “Is this a reasonable price given that Sigma has outright said their competition is ZEISS and not Canon and Nikon where this lens is concerned?”

    Well, that site obviously just made up that price, but like I said in that previous thread, Sigma saying that they are in competition with Zeiss was just a way to brace customers for a price that’s not at all in line with their previous “Art” lens releases. Look at the price of the 35mm 1.4 Art lens and then look at $1500 for the 50mm? Um, no. Not reasonable. You don’t change the pricing strategy in the middle of your line.

  • pessimisticus

    Let’s hope they don’t discontinue the old one…

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    $1400 from an Australian retail store is about twelve bucks from Adorama.

  • Gavin Lister

    I second this. They often put new release products in without knowing the price. However I wouldn’t be surprised if it something around this mark….it would be unusual of them to guesstimate a too high price as it would be bad for sales and make them look expensive compared to the competition

  • Ian

    It looks like that price includes tax (Goods and Services Tax [GST]) which Wikipedia says is 10%, so the lens is $1362.73 AUS or $1219.92 US according to Google’s conversion

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    Pretty sure they will – they seem to be limiting primes to the Art line, not Contemporary.

    But on the plus side, there should be a flood of them in the used market when the pixel peepers upgrade. Score a bargain!

  • Bob Bobson

    If lenses are so much more over there, why is the Sigma 35mm Art listed at $748 including tax?

  • thunander

    Finally i can throw away my crappy canon 50/1.4.

  • Harry

    Okay, how’s the build/longevity? I hate to say it but I’ve never had a Nikon prime crap out on me. Sigma on the other hand… (Not trying to start a flamewar.)

  • ksporry

    Thats insanely expensive for a Sigma lens. AUD maybe, USD, no fornicating way man! I’ll but a true Nikon or Canon f.4 lens for less, waaaaaaayyyyy less… 3rd party is 3rd party, sigma not equally to Zeiss, no F’ing way thats an acceptable price. If thats the price I’ll get the current one at 1k US less! 1k USD jump is insane, especially for Sigma…

  • Chip Simone

    I have their 35mm f:1.4 Art and its stunning! Finest lens I’ve owned. Cost $850. I hope the 50mm version is closer to it in price.

  • Kaleido Skop

    why no takumar 50mm f1/4? ;)

  • Michael Tetzlaff

    I own the Sigma 35mm 1.4 and love the lens. I was truly hoping to upgrade my 50mm 1.4 (also a Sigma) to this new lens, but at $1300+ USD, I don’t think I would see 3x the quality increase in my images to merit the expense. Hello Sigma, could you please consider pricing the lens closer in price to the other players (Nikon, Canon, etc)? Do so, and I’m totally in.

  • John Melskens

    too expensive

  • JoeNoName

    the new Art series are really well built

  • Steve

    I can’t say buying Sigma lens in Australia is expensive… Bought 35mm before cheaper locally, then I just bought 24-105mm for AUD799, I really can’t find cheaper price anywhere else

  • CameraPro

    Hey there, I’m from CameraPro, we’re the retailer that’s mentioned in this article. Thanks for mentioning this BrisVid, the price is indeed made up. As with all products without finalised pricing, we anticipate an indicative price (which is always slightly higher than what we suspect the actual price will be) and customers are able to place a 10% deposit on the lens to get an early place in the queue. Once the actual pricing is confirmed, we of course offer those with pre-orders this actual price, or an option to cancel if pricing comes outside of expectations.

    To communicate this to customers, we always put a disclaimer (which can be seen on the screenshot) “Pricing listed is anticipation only, where final price and ETA are to be announced. To pre-order now please see notes below.” which then goes on to say “To pre-order, simply checkout using bank transfer option. 10% Deposit is required to secure your pre-order, which can be completed by bank transfer with your order number as reference, or by phone or in-store”.

    As a fellow retailer & direct competitor, we don’t think this necessitates public name calling. We’re one of Australia’s leading Sigma dealers, and we pride ourselves on an ethical approach to business.

  • BrisVid

    I’ll have to disagree. To me, advertising a non-existent product for a random price is not ethical business. As for name calling, nothing personal, I just call ‘em like I see ‘em.

  • Yolan

    I have the Sigma 35 1.4 art, it´s a very good lens, very heavy too, but for 1000 USD (739 euros in France) it´s ok, 1350 for the 50 mm sounds to me that Sigma want´s make us pay the highest price that they can get for the lens, they are following the Zeiss price policy … I won’t buy it , I’ll keep my nikkor 50 1.8 D… Which is fine on my D800E.
    Conclusion : for 1000 USD, it’s a yes, for 1350, it’s a no.

  • Kynikos

    You call that ethical? What a joke.

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    ‘id buy something worse because it has a canon badge on it’

  • Anton Berlin

    We already have a lens as sharp as the Otus. It’s called the Zeiss FE55mm Sonnar and it’s only $1000

  • Jonny

    that lens is a piece of crap, LOL

  • Krijsh

    Actually as an Aussie living in the US for many years I had a relative buy my last Canon DSLR from Ted’s in Melbourne cause it was the cheapest price anywhere in the world, exchange rate parity taken into account.

  • Display_Name

    is it for N and C

  • John Whitby

    Don’t forget the Zeiss is third party also, so that screws up your point there!! Quality is quality, no matter who makes it and I’ll match my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 against any equal spec zoom from Nikon or Canon … they are the only company still producing ALL their lenses in Japan, where the other two went for cheaper production costs in Taiwan, the Philippines, or Indonesia, and their top end lenses are every bit as good as any other. However they do produce budget lenses too, which is obviously their biggest market and seems to be what they are always judged on …. Would you also judge Nikon and Canon on their ‘cheapo’ kit lenses and not their top of the range primes??
    Go take a look at comparisons on Peta-Pixel where the Sigma wipes the floor with the top Sony and Nikon 50mm primes and matches the Otus!!

  • ksporry

    I wasn’t very clear about what I meant (Please don’t catch me just on using the word “3rd party”, when you know what I meant is “budget 3rd party”). My point is, the Zeiss is worth its weight in gold, Sigma is not. My point is that Sigma doesn’t have Zeiss reputation, and therefore cannot charge Zeiss prices until they do. Although I have to admit Sigma has significantly stepped up their game (I think their 35/1.4 Art lens blows away Canon and Nikon variants for the price you pay), they do have a reputation, and they do have to proof they can produce at a consistent Quality, something that’s pretty constant for Canon and Nikon lenses alike. I’m sure there are plenty lenses of budget 3rd party manufacturers that give Canon and Nikon a run for their money, but they charge less than the branded stuff, or a high quality 3rd party manufacturer.

  • John Whitby

    I think you are missing the point here, Sigma are NOT charging Zeiss prices, they are charging about 30% of the price of the Otus, for a lens that is at least 95% as good as it. Your original post poured derision on Sigma as a lens manufacturer, which was totally unjustified and why so many other unblinkered photographers commented against your post.
    As to your point about consistant quality, I can only answer for my own purchases, but all the Sigma lenses I have owned (both 35mm film and digital) have all been sharp and accurate. Maybe I’ve been lucky, but according to forums, many Nikon, Canon and even Zeiss customers have been unlucky, maybe someone should do the numbers!
    The point I’m making is that yes, Zeiss do make incredible quality lenses, but the others are catching up when it comes to their top professional lenses and if Zeiss wish to stay in profitable business, then they will either have to come up with something ultra-incredible, or drop their prices to sit just above their nearest competitors, otherwise cost conscious professionals fighting for business in a shrinking industry economic situation, will defect to more cost efficient makes and models.
    So whilst Zeiss is undoubtedly a high quality manufacturer, I would say Nikon, Canon and Sigma are all of similar ilk nowadays, their budget lenses are just that .. budget, whilst their best lenses are very high quality indeed, you just have to use your brain, decide how much you can afford and buy the best glass that you can, with the money you have. Sometimes that may be reasonably cheap lens, sometimes a lens that is only cheap in direct price comparison, such as the new Sigma 50mm ART against the Otus, and sometimes a lens that nothing else compares to, a prime example being the Sigma 200-500mm f2.8, no-one else makes a zoom lens that comes even close to this beauty, not even for twice the £15k ($20k) rrp.
    The final thing to remember is that you might have the very best camera and lens combination in the world, and still produce crap images, whilst another may have average quality equipment and produce some amazing images … just look at the major competition winners every year!!

  • ksporry

    you sound just like my wife, she also insists on disagreeing no matter what is being discussed…

  • John Whitby

    That’s funny, you also sound like my EX-wife, she always thinks she’s right in everything too!!