List of new Sigma DSLR lenses rumored to be announced in 2014

I created a list of all rumored Sigma DSLR lenses that are expected to be announced in 2014 (most likely at the 2014 Photokina show):

Recently Sigma released some excellent lenses like the 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM A and 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A and it will be interesting to see if they can keep the momentum in 2014.

Via Valuetech

This entry was posted in Sigma and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • sd

    Unfortunately if the 18-35 is anything to say. There’s going to be massive shortages and massive delays for all the lenses. No way they could of afforded a new factory to produce this many lenses without production delay/shortages.

  • Bastien Chong

    At least it will make Nikon and Canon move their *** to make something to compete… quality AND price wise…

    • Guest

      If you don’t comment, people will not know how poor of you. 😉

      • Gly

        Is that why you’re ashamed of posting with your name attached to your comment? A$$H011E !!!

      • Oak

        If you didn’t comment, people won’t know how stupid in English you are. 🙂

  • King of Swaziland

    As much as SIgma has stepped up their game lately. There is no way they introduce all these lenses between now and the end of 2014 (or I’ll eat my hat).

    • Johnny Dough

      Fried or steamed?

      • King of Swaziland

        However you like.

        P.S. I don’t actually own a hat, so I feel pretty safe.

        • Herman

          But you do have a crown?

          • King of Swaziland

            I had to pawn it to afford my 412th wedding.

    • longzoom

      Let us do not push them too hard. Sigma made a reputation, so quality control is all we need on the first place.

  • Mike

    24-70 f/2 & 135 f/1.8. Wow. Come to daddy…

    • HD10

      I will skip the 135mm f/1.8 (already got the Zeiss 135mm f/2.0) but would definitely be wanting the 24-70mm f/2.0 OS.

      Sigma, make this soon!

  • Ranger 9

    Did the rumors specify what mounts? A 24/1.4 would be an interesting option for mirrorless systems, even if bigger than average…

  • Mike D

    I mentioned several years ago that Nikon would be developing new cameras and lenses for other systems (e.g. Coolpix, V1, etc.) and, as a result, would not place sufficient engineering, manufacturing and management resources to expand their lenses for Nikon F DSLR systems. I didn’t forecast that Sigma would become a leader in optics for Nikon, Canon, and Sony mount DSLR bodies. Basically, Nikon left a gaping hole in its lens lineup that gave Sigma a fantastic opportunity.

  • sperdynamite

    I have the 35mm 1.4, and it’s the real deal. So what’s going on here? Either Nikon/Canon are overcharging like crazy, or there is something left out of the Sigma. Has anybody done a tear down comparison?

    I’m hoping they do a 50mm 1.2 personally, and after that 135mm 1.8 I think i’ll be set.

    • Isaac Alonzo

      I’ve been thinking about sigma dropping a 50 and 85 1.2 just to shake things up and watch the prices go down

    • If you compare it to Canon, Nikon and Zeiss versions, the Sigma has more glass and also FLD glass (which is supposedly comparable to Fluorite).

      In short, the Sigma 35 1.4 definitely seems optimised for close distances and it has very good colour correction. So under test conditions, such a lens performs really well, just like how macro lenses perform amazingly well on test charts.

      In the real world, if you’re shooting at close distances with a wide aperture, you’re going to have very little in focus due to shallow DOF and out of focus things will be so out of focus that it won’t matter how much the absolute sharpness is. If you’re shooting far away things, we typically stop down because out of focus foregrounds aren’t always pretty. So the differences between these lenses aren’t going to be all that significant.

      At any rate, Sigma has done a fantastic job with these lenses… the 8-16, 12-24 (Mk I more than Mk II), 18-35 1.8, 35 1.4 and 150 2.8 OS are better than the competition.

      • sperdynamite

        My question was more relating to how is Sigma able to undercut costs so much, as opposed to the Canikon versions. I shoot it wide open at distance and in close ranges and find it performs pretty well. I do weddings so thin DoF is where we live. I do find it lacks for contrast somewhat, but, I’m usually shooting digital so, not a problem.

        • Yeah I don’t know the actual reasons behind Sigma’s pricing for this particular lens but Canon and Nikon are definitely making people pay for their names too. Samyang has released excellent lenses that are much cheaper than C and N versions too.

        • Remedy

          First of all Sigma is not an overgrown corporation with hundreds of decisive executives that eat money. It’s a family company ran entirely in Japan. They are just passionate about their work and are committed to deliver great product at reasonable price.

          • Mike

            Supporting a pro network (NPS), advertising in stadiums and TV commercials and paying Asston Kutcher big bucks does not come for free. While I enjoy Sigma’s pricing and own the 35 1.4, Nikon has a huge back end (no pun intended) to support. If Sigma started doing all that, you can bet your first born that prices would rise to compensate. It’s not just about the product that goes into pricing. Salaries, advertising, support programs are paid with it too.

          • Mike

            Supporting a pro network (NPS), advertising in stadiums and TV commercials and paying Asston Kutcher big bucks does not come for free. While I enjoy Sigma’s pricing and own the 35 1.4, Nikon has a huge back end (no pun intended) to support. If Sigma started doing all that, you can bet your first born that prices would rise to compensate. It’s not just about the product that goes into pricing. Salaries, advertising, support programs are paid with it too.

  • johnny

    I like current Sigma products, but their AF & OS mechanism tend to broke easily. They got to improve them first.

    • Remedy

      That’s EXACTLY what they did with this new lines of lenses.

      • salesman

        Have you hearde Sigma 35mm A F/1.4 focus problem? youtube should have some videos.

  • DonSantos

    The 24-70mm f/2 will be revolutionary. 24-70mm F Freaking TWO!! and with optical stabilization too.

    • And wish they put the same effort in to making primes 🙂

      • Cinekpol

        7 out of 9 rumored lenses are primes, and you complain?

        • Was talking about the construction rather than the number of lenses. You need to take pills for that overactive inference gland of yours lol

          • Genkakuzai

            Considering how excellent their new 35mm f/1.4 is I wouldn’t be worried about that.

          • fjfjjj

            You need to take pills for that overactive rudeness.

          • I wish there was a pill I could recommend for you to increase your IQ lol

  • MdB

    24mm f1.4 and 135mm f1.8 OS would be awesome! They just need to do an ‘Art’ update to the 85mm f1.4 and I can comfortably go all-Sigma… While also not feeling like I’m locked into one system mount 🙂

    • mist3rf0ur

      If their 24mm is anything like their 35mm 1.4, I’ll be all over that on day one.

  • madmax

    The near future is mirrorless and short flange lenses. Sigma is making excellent lenses, of course, but I´d don´t invest in new DSLR lenses, except when absolutely necessary.

    • Cinekpol

      “The near future is mirrorless and short flange lenses” – not at all. Mirrorless will still be niche part of the market – you see sales stats from last 2 years? DSLRs outmatch mirrorless 10:1 and there’s very little overall growth outside of Japan. Also Sigma repetitively complained that sales of mirrorless lenses are underwhelming because people using mirrorless mostly stay with kit lenses.
      Perhaps you wouldn’t invest in new DSLR lenses because you have very limited needs, but many people need or want a fully-fledged photographic system, and that’s something mirrorless simply does not offer (nor wants to offer).

      • madmax

        Fully fledged system? Very limited needs? Don´t make me laugh! I just don´t want to carry a bulky, heavy and conspicuous system everywhere. Most people doing travel and adventure photography are in mirrorless now. Most people in street photography also prefer mirrorless.
        DSLRs are living fossil. Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung and Fuji all are 100% mirrorless. Sony also will abandon SLT soon.

        • Dpablo unfiltered

          And at some point people will stop listening to vinyl records. Right?

          • madmax

            Right. Also some people is doing photography now with collodion plates. And some people still eat human flesh in New Guinea..

        • Photo-Jack

          Go shoot with your cell phone! This doesn’t have a mirror and is even lighter, available up to 40+ MP! Leave us DSLR shooters alone.

          • madmax

            Hahaha! What a nervous reaction, my friend!
            I didn´t tell you what kind of equipment should you use! The question is buying new lenses for APSC DSLRs is nonsense right now and for FF DSLRs your investing maybe could survive 5-10 years.

        • I’ve also sold all my regular DSLRs. I really can’t think of anything that a manufacturer can put in a future high-end DSLR that would make me want to buy one. Having a small mirrorless for simple shooting means I now have space to carry a real high-end camera when I travel. Full-frame or otherwise, DSLRs can’t match the same quality.

          Professionals will likely stick to DSLRs even when FF mirrorless comes along. People who do photography courses are still being taught only how to slap on a 24-70 or a 70-200 on a DSLR and shoot with strobes at f/11-f/16. It’ll be a very long while until educators like that will actually learn a new system like mirrorless.

      • I agree, mirrorless is more like a second camera system. Not many people buy mirrorless as their primary camera system. People like to have a compact solution, but when quality matters, they still take their DSLR.

        • madmax

          Please, enlighten us about why DSLRs are the option “when quality matters”. There is nothing in mirrorless that make their image quality to be inferior to DSLRs.

          Do you prefer the image quality of a low budget DSLR camera, let´s say Canon Rebel T4 or the image quality of a Fuji EX1, both with kit standard zoom lens?
          Maybe you think this comparison is not fair: what about a Canon 60D, medium budget camera?
          Oh! I see… You are only speaking about full frame last generation cameras! Let´s wait a little and make a fair comparison with FF cameras of Samsung, Sony and Fuji then.

          • Correct, full frame cameras and fast tele lenses. Both do not exists in mirrorless and when they do, I may change my mind. The latest sales data seems to support my opinion – mirrorless is not what everyone hoped it would be. Of course this may change in the future. I am not going to even mention the price – mirrorless companies have a serious issue their. Just look at the Nikon 1 and the upcoming Olympus E-M1. Way too expensive for what you are getting. For the price of E-M1 you can almost get a full frame DSLR (Nikon D600).

          • Oh come on admin, I know you have some Fuji X-gear. Unless you’re a professional shooting sports, wildlife or fashion, why do you need full-frame sensors or fast teles?

          • I was talking in general. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Fuji X gear, but I still have my DSLR setup and I cannot imagine completely eliminating it. At least not for now.

      • Whatever the sales have been in the last 2 years, if you’re investing in lenses for the long term what matters is the future.
        Who wins in the end is not even a concern. Mirrorless is a very big market.
        Also, for lenses like the said 300 2.8, etc. a mirrorless version is not going to be particularly smaller. Appeal to mirrorless users might drop if manufacturers release STM versions of the same lenses but that will likely take many years.

  • Nishi Drew

    These rumors don’t actually come from anywhere yeah? This is really just a list of all the “Wish I could get a XXX lens for cheap” from forums. Sigma has proven themselves with excellent lenses and I love the 35mm, but if Sigma wants to up their game and actually make these lenses worth getting over Canikon counterparts then they need to work on weather sealing, otherwise those would-be-pricey anyways super telephotos won’t be as worthwhile

  • TinusVerdino

    Not a single DC lens (aps-c) Is Sigma focussing on Full frame?

    • Cinekpol

      last year was for DC, so next year for FF. Makes perfect sense.

      • TinusVerdino

        only to people who make up sense

  • Nejko

    a 24-70 f/2 would be a MONSTER of a lens.. most likely to be a stabilized f/2.8.. but still.. if it is around the price of the Tamron.. and with recent Sigma optics.. might just get myself a zoom lens 🙂

  • plan3s

    Meanwhile, at the Nikon labs:

    “Sigma making gud lenses? herp derp lets release new useless expensive small flash and 18-140 kit for a milion dolla.”

  • Camaman

    Sigma 24-70mm f2 with Speed booster on future NEX APS-C with IBIS and sensor shift focus… 24-70mm f1.4
    Yep that might be dream, but not a pipe dream anymore…

    • Dpablo unfiltered

      Oh, if they do that it will already be an APS lens, so…

  • David Portass

    24-70 f2 definitely interests me but please Sigma, put at least a mount gasket on.

    Also would appreciate an f2.8 wide angle full frame zoom to compete with Nikon, Canon and Tokina, the current 12-24 is a nice enough range but f4.5-f5.6 is not really fast enough for low light event work (fine for landscape though)

  • Alfons

    24-105mm F4 would be nice.

    Already missing my 12-60mm (24-120mm eq.) Olympus lens. Best standard zoom ever.

  • El Aura

    This looks very much like a wish list of lenses the big guys (Nikon and Canon) have but Sigma doesn’t (with the exception of the 300 mm f/2.8), with a f/2 zoom thrown in as an extra. Not that any of the lenses would be unlikely (except maybe the 24-70 mm f/2 which would be huge) to be released by Sigma, but Sigma releasing only lenses the others already have and an exact duplication of long exotics range (300/400 mm f/2.8, 500/600 mm f/4, Sigma already has an 800 mm f/5.6) seems a bit too coincidental.

  • Sahaja

    A 24-70 F2 DG would be big and unweildy. Are you sure it is not a 28-70 F2 or a 25-50 F2?

    • Sahaja

      I meant 24-50 F2

  • aekn

    Gotta love the bottle of water photobombing the lenses!

  • wong

    I want new Sigma A 85mm F/1.4 🙁

    • Phil

      Second that. Make it as good/better than prime 35mm f/1.4


    Sigma 24-70mm f/2 OS HSM

    Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG OS
    Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG

    Sigma, hear my plea. Smile upon us.

    The 50mm F1.4 needs to be updated to fit in with the 35mm and 85mm F1.4 lens, but I already have the current version and am very satisfied with it.

  • Hadarmil

    Me want more aps-c lenses! Forget FF glass! Us poor, miserable crop sensor wielders have been mostly ignored by the big boys. Ultra telephoto! Ultra wide! Large apertures for all(aps-c)!

    If they make a 2.8 300/400mm lens for crop that consequently weighs less than the FF equivalent (a lot less) I’d mortgage my kidneys for it.

  • Peter

    If Sigma makes a good 135/1.8, might lower pricing on that 200/2.

  • Peter

    If Sigma makes a good 135/1.8, might lower pricing on that 200/2.

  • bigcountryaus

    instead of the 24-70 f2 OS, why not make 17-70 f2 OS?

  • phil

    I only want 85mm f/1.4 II with quality of 35mm f/1.4 & consistent focus!

  • Brian

    Well they sure got this one right: “a new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 lens is also a possibility.” Now really hoping to see the 300 and 400 f.2.8

  • kurogoma

    A|85 is more reasonable than A|135.
    If rumored A|24 use 82mm filter size, maybe it will have nice sharpness and bokeh.

  • Werner

    Since two years or so, SIGMA has ths best lenses, better than Canon or Nikon (120-300, 24-105, 180mm Macro). Definatly.

  • RIT

    How many people here that talk about their Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 actually mean their 12-24mm f/2.8, which is a markedly different lens?
    Sigma’s 35mm f/1.4 is great wide open (eg for star field shots) with little to no coma, it’s ok for Infra red without too much central bloom and overall it’s my sharpest lens with least c/a. I view c/a as at least important as resolution, which is why I chose Nikkor’s f/1.8 over their f/1.4 85mm.
    So I’d be very interested to see how Sigma’s new 24mm f/1.4 Art lens performs but feel a 20mm might be a better length to have alongside a 35. I’ve got a Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 D lens which has served me well for over 20 years but can definitely be updated.
    Interesting to hear people’s problems with focusing the Sigma 35 Art, it took me several hours to fine tune mine and I’m still not convinced it’s right.
    Having just read the review on the D810 which bought on another attack of Nikon Acquisition Syndrome I might have to send all my lenses back to their manufacturers for calibration once I get it!!

  • Back to top