Sigma 24/2 and 90/2.8

Wētāpunga wrote: Well, the a7c is marginally cheaper than the a7iii in NZ. I'm sometimes tempted by the size (better to take on bicycle) and unlimited video recording times. And I've got some small, compact lenses. But then I reason it's a very expensive way to take a camera with me on bike rides and to get 30+ minutes of recording time. Sure, which is why I qualified my point at the start about new lenses. And for NZ, the small and thin used-lens market meant a lot of the good lenses were never, or very rarely, available for sale. I've never seen a 100/2.8 Soft Focus or 100/2 for sale. And I was up to 2019, trying to collect 'classic Minolta lenses'. I really did like my Minolta 50/1.4 though.

Wētāpunga: I ride my bicycles and motorcycles every week and carry my Minolta Alpha 7 or sometimes, A7R (Or even my Fujica G690!). I don't think it's an issue; you just have to be well prepared. I usually also have a small tripod with me.

I do agree re limited 2nd hand market here though. I bought a Minolta 100mm f2.8 Soft Focue off eBay a while back. It was in fabulous condition and was the cheapest of all on eBay at the time. All we have here is a broken one that has been advertiosed for about a year but hasn't sold. My eBay purchase was about NZ$500 incl freight and it included the manual, a lens bag and the std hood.

However, I was looking through a pile of lenses in an Auckland 2nd hand shop and found a bit of a grubby Minolta AF 24mm f2.8. I offered $90 and that was accepted. I knew it worked as I'd fitted it to my Minolta Alpha 7 in the shop. I was happy to put my 28mm aside and I haven't used it since.

Yep, I also have the AF50mm f1.4 and that's a stunning lens (except for that useless little slide in hood).

Sadly, the cost of freight from Europe and the USA has become almost ridiculous and eBay's 'Priority Shipping Program' offers nothing on top of normal freight/mail, yet adds 15% to my cost! If an item I'm interested in has that as the shipping option, I email the seller and advise that it's a rip off designed only to make extra $ for eBay and, if they would offer me a better freight service: I'd bid. That usually works.

My current task is to update all my 5 contact lenses for D lenses. I'm doing that gradually.

Kilkry wrote: It's 100e more expensive than the A7iii in Sweden, has a worse vf and no front dial. I kind of get why people say "this smallish lens would do well with the A7c" because the A7c is a bit awkward with larger lenses.

I just checked NL and Germany and assumed it was EU wide - sorry..
TBH I find the A7c a bit, well, I don't know. I like the A6x00 series cameras with their smallish APS-C lenses (some could benefit from an update) but full frame lenses quickly become awkward. The 16-35/4 on an A7c would be unwieldy while the 10-18/4 (or Tamron's new lens) are perfectly fine on the A6x00 bodies. But if you want full frame and small, the A7c with a small lens makes sense.

Kilkry wrote: That's an interesting point; distortion profiles for more mainstream lenses would appear in Lightroom and C1 and such rather soon I guess, they'd need for someone to volunteer for Darktable & lensfun. (I should learn to do it one day). And yes, it seems 28mm is rather singled out and excluded.

I use RAW therapee and like it. It has lenscorrection but it lacks some of the more recent lenses

Wētāpunga wrote: Likewise the a7c seems to be a niche product as well, and I don't get the sense it has been a big seller to Dyxum members.

I see it pop up here and there - nobody is announcing it, but people are buying it. In the US the A7c is US$100,- more expensive then the A7 III - I think that is fair, but it means some people will opt for the A7 III because of price. Over here (EU) the A7c is cheaper, maybe more Europeans are buying the A7c.

Idleidolidyll wrote: Sigma lenses never had a fabulous reputation until quite recently but I've always liked what they offered. A real sleeper is their 24mm f2.8 macro Super-Wide II in both SRT and AF format (they made them for all the main mounts in the day). These great wee lenses focus down to about 6" and have very interesting out of focus highlights. You do have to be a little careful with the AF version because, like many AF Sigmas of the vintage, they may not 'talk' to your camera correctly and getting the chip updated isn't easy nowadays. I have both AF and MF versions

It long has been considered an alternative to the Minolta 24/2.8. A really cheap alternative. There were some copies with an old chip, but it seems most were working fine. Also, some had problems with the screw-drive slot. It was discussed at length back in the day and the lens database page has a link to this thread but I am sure there are more.

Wētāpunga wrote: Now when I switched I had so much more choice with the Sony and 3rd party lenses. If I wanted a fast, high-performance zoom, it was there. If I wanted something small and compact but still with exceptional image quality, it was there. The number of options at each focal length are completely unlike what we had with the A-mount. Plus we have coverage for a lot of focal lengths we didn't have before.

I disagree - to an extend. There were a lot of small great lenses in A-mount: The Minolta 100/2 is not that much bigger then the Sigma (and a full stop faster), the 135/2.8 and the 24/28/50mm primes were also quite small - compare the A-mount 50/1.4 to the FE-mount 50/1.4. Also, there are only two AF 28mm lenses in FE mount, there are five in A-mount. But I know what you mean, there are more lenses designed after 2000 in FE-mount

And for the reason I came here. Seeing several reviews of the 90mm I still think it is a difficult sell. It is small and sharp, but it has a lot of distortion, has a slow aperture and is quite expensive. It really is a niche lens. I guess that proofs Wētāpunga's point: there are more (niche) options in FE-mount - as long as it isn't 28mm

Edited by addy landzaat - 12 September 2021 at 11:32

Sigma lenses never had a fabulous reputation until quite recently but I've always liked what they offered. A real sleeper is their 24mm f2.8 macro Super-Wide II in both SRT and AF format (they made them for all the main mounts in the day).
These great wee lenses focus down to about 6" and have very interesting out of focus highlights.
You do have to be a little careful with the AF version because, like many AF Sigmas of the vintage, they may not 'talk' to your camera correctly and getting the chip updated isn't easy nowadays. I have both AF and MF versions

I own 35i & 45i Sigma lenses. I hoped that over time one lens would be my fav over the other and sell one of 'em. It turns out over time that both have their own sweetspot in IQ & redering, and I like to swithch between them every other week or so. The small size and premium build is a big plus for me.

I've owned the 65i for a few months, but did not get the grips on this focal lenght, sold it.

Owned the FE1.8/85 for 2 years, liked it for it's way of drawing portraits, not much else. The 90i is a lens I would buy and give it a run for it's money

I think that 90mm has fierce competition - the several 85/1.8 lenses are (also) good, cheaper and not that heavier. The Samyang 75/1.8 is about the same size as the Sigma 90/2.8 but cheaper as well. 90mm is also a bit long on APS-C, but I guess the 65/2 is the competitor for the 75/1.8.

But yes, the size is where Sigma is hoping people will be buying it. I guess it will match the A7c nicely.

I don't think I'm in the market for either. The small size of the 90mm looks attractive but I already have two 85mm lenses so this doesn't give me anything compelling.

I might have been interested in a 28mm option. That would slot better between my 21mm and 35mm. And as Addy has already pointed out, 24mm primes are a bit of a crowded market currently.

I like the shift to making smaller and lighter lenses. I balked at getting any of the first E-mount lenses Sigma produced because of their size and weight.