Tuesday, April 04, 2023

So much news. Sigma introduces two (or three; depending on your formats...) new lenses. All of which will be very, very popular.



 Today Sigma unveiled two lenses I want and one lens I'd like to have but don't really feel the need to rush out and buy. So, let's cover them in order of their value to me. 

The first two lenses are part of Sigma's i-Series. This "series" is a collection of smaller, lighter but no less potent single focal length lenses that are built entirely of metal and glass, have aperture rings and are beautiful to look at and happy to hold. So far I've purchased the 24mm f3.5, the 35mm f2.0, two of the 45mm f2.8s, the 65mm f2.0 (don't buy this one if you want to continue to think your other lenses are worthy...) and the 90mm f2.8. The 90 and the 24 are tiny. Definitely the kind of lenses you want in your travel kit. The 35 and the 65 blow away their competitors when it comes to sharpness and good optical behavior. 

There are also a couple of lenses in the i-Series that I don't own because, well, I'm not interested in the mix of features, etc. One is the 20mm f2.0, another is the 24mm f2.0. I have lenses that cover these focal lengths and they work just fine. Why duplicate for the sake of owning the complete catalog?

Every one of the i-Series lenses that I have purchased and used is wonderful. The 24mm 3.5 at f5.6 is perfect. The 45mm is full of character when used wide open but bite-y sharp when used at medium apertures. The 65mm might as well be a standard Leica SL lens. The 90mm is sharp right from f2.8 on down and is nice and small. But I've always been pining for one lens in particular and it's finally arrived. It's the 50mm f2.0. 

The 50mm, according to the specs, is not a budget "nifty-fifty" lens but a more modern version with 11 elements in 9 groups. If features aspherical elements and an HR element as well so it should be highly corrected and very usable at f2.0. The lens is about half the size and weight of its sibling, the 50mm f1.4 DN DG lens. So, it's a combination of balanced features that I think will be great for people like me who want a really well corrected 50mm "standard" lens but don't need the higher speed aperture and really don't want the size and weight of a big "Art" series lens for walking around and casually making photographs. 

The i-Series lenses are beautifully made; even down to the metal lens hoods and the metal, magnetic lens caps. All of the lenses I've bought in that system have been sharp even wide open with the exception of the 45mm f2.8. But the performance of the 45mm is not faulty. It was intended to be a lens with a different look profile when used at its widest aperture and especially when used in close. As in portrait photography and closer still life situations. It was designed to have residual spherical aberrations wide open with a more mellow look intended. And it really does work. In fact, I like it so much that when an additional one came bundled with a used camera I decided to keep it and have a low cost back-up for the first one.

But the new 50mm was designed by Sigma, in my opinion, to have 99% of the performance of the faster Art series 50mm from f2.0 onward and what you gain from giving up the stop of widest aperture is all about handling and usability for people who need mobility combined with high image performance. Yippee. That's me. 

I had considered buying the new Leica 50mm f2.0 Asph but I'd heard rumors about Sigma's intention to fill the gap in the i-Series between the 45mm and the 65mm and decided to wait and see what they would introduce. I'm happy I did. I have no doubts that the Sigma 50mm f2.0 will be just a good a performer as the Leica; or for that matter, the Lumix 50mm f1.8, but I gain an aperture ring on the lens barrel and a handling format that's familiar and comfortable for me. And, if you are industrial design sensitive you also get a lens that's a good visual match for any other i-Series lens purchases. 

Many will compare the new Sigma 50mm to plastic Canon, Sony and Nikon lenses and grouse about the premium price but looking at the optical design one has to realize that it's a more capable and more expensive product.  Of course, we could all make great photos with old, used lenses from the 1970's but I think that might be beside the point.

The second Sigma lens in my "wanted" list is the 17mm f4.0. My reasons are starkly utilitarian. I sometimes am asked to shoot interiors, exteriors and industrial landscapes that can benefit from a wider angle view. I've used a variety of wide angles over the years and the choices are usually demarcated between costly zooms or overly fast primes. Each comes with their own set of compromises.

Zooms are good at some (but not all) of their focal lengths and worse at others. I know some are highly corrected but like the super fast, wide primes, the best tend to be big, heavy and expensive. I can't figure out why I would want, for example, a 20mm f1.4 lens but in fact I bought one a couple of years ago and hated using it. There was no advantage to me, for the kinds of situations I use wide angle lenses in, to a super fast aperture. And optical engineers have indicated that each stop of increased speed requires 4x the precision of manufacturing to execute at the same level as a slower lens. 

The idea of a 17mm with "only" an f4.0 maximum aperture seems like a very good idea to me. The lens can be made smaller, lighter and much less expensive while delivering (at like apertures) at least as good performance as a faster lens of the same focal length. 

The 17mm, and lenses like it, are ones that I almost always use with a tripod so the slower aperture is meaningless to me. In fact, in most use scenarios I am much more likely to be using such a lens at f8.0 in order to get maximum depth of field. Maybe even f11. Combine that with smaller, lighter and cheaper and you have a great compromise for casual ultra-wide angle users like me.

I was surprised that the cost of the lens was so reasonable. Only $600. So, maybe a barebones kit for a traveler or someone who just wants to lighten the load might end up being the 17mm, the 50mm, and the 90mm. A lot of range for the money and at a lighter weight than would have been possible before. 

The final lens is a different animal. It's not an i-Series lens but is instead a "Contemporary" lens from Sigma. And it doesn't cover full frame; it's made for APS-C camera and also Micro4:3 cameras. The lens is the 23mm f1.4 which translates in full frame language to the every popular 35mm focal length. A favorite of so many streets shooters. This lens joins three other Sigma Contemporary prime lenses that have all been high performing favorites of APS-C oriented photographers. Those lenses are the 16mm f1.4, the 30mm f1.4 and the (absolutely awesome) 56mm f1.4. While these lenses aren't the smallest available for the format I can comfortably state that they have great optical qualities --- based on my experience with all three. While I'm not one of the rabid fans of  the 35mm experience I'll probably add the 23mm f1.4 to my inventory for all those times I want to take advantage of the charms of the Leica CL cameras. I have two of them and am impressed with the images every time I use them. 

It may be that 23mm on the smaller frame will work differently for me than a 35mm on full frame. Who knows? It may even become a favorite. But it's way down on the list of things I want to pay for right now.

Even though we've become very L mount-centric around here I should make it clear that all of the lenses mentioned here are also available in the Sony E mount. That expands what is available for the Sony A7 series and a6000 series camera quite nicely. It gives Sony users more choices. And very good ones at that.

For me the 50mm is the top priority. I'll get a lot of use from it. But I'd love it even more if the focusing ring gave me repeatable distances and had a distance scale on it. I'd love the option to zone focus when needed. But....that's what the older "legacy" lenses are for, right?

Now, where is that Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Planar I had around here? 



Monday, April 03, 2023

OT: Healthy Photographer, Happy Photographer.

Strong enough to lift and entire Leica CL up to my eye...

It's hard to work or play if you don't feel good. And it's easy to get side-tracked by medical issues if you don't stay on top of them. Recent studies indicate that exercise helps not only to prevent sudden medical events like heart attacks and strokes but can also reduce the risk of developing dementia by up to 40% !!!

People often argue that they "hate" to exercise but I can't imagine that living with excess body fat, low energy and the aches and pains caused by being sedentary is any bit more fun. Or that unchecked decay is any less time consuming or less expensive than exercise.

On the advice of my swimming coaches I added a bunch of strength training to my weekly exercise "diet." I've extremely happy with the results. My swimming has improved as has my overall energy level (although I've never been mistaken for a person with "low energy.").  I added three days of strength training at a local gym to my usual five to six days of swimming workouts. And, of course, I still try to get out and walk as often as possible. If work interferes I just try to reschedule the work. Or cancel it altogether...

I wondered at 67 how much benefit I would see from both the exercise and the healthy diet that B. and I try to maintain (admitting to an occasional pizza or hamburger...) so I was pleasantly surprised by the second part of my annual physical with my doctor today. Last week I endured all the blood tests, stress testing, an EKG and a bunch of other measures. Today was the "hands on" part of the physical as well as a review of the results from all of last week's testing. I'm happy to see that I've lost 4 pounds in the last year, my BMI is now 23. My A1C is normal and my cholesterol is at a happy ratio with low triglycerides.  All testing looked good and the machines that test for things like body fat, conductivity etc. calculated my "metabolic" age as being: 50. 

While I don't believe I can turn back the clock or that I've found the fountain of youth I do know that it's much better to spend whatever time I have left to practice photography in the best health I can and with the energy that comes from being pain free and unencumbered by largely preventable maladies. Knowing that I'm on the right track also helps me sleep well.

Once again, I know a lot of you are already doing pretty much what I do to stay in shape, but for the folks who are on the fences I can't emphasize strongly enough that the prevention provided by aerobic exercise and strength training (coupled with good eating habits) is more valuable than all the money or other treasures I can conceive of. Given the choice of being poor but healthy or rich but infirm I'll choose the former any time. Best of both world's? It's something to aim for...

P.S. It's not enough to show up. You have to do the work.