News Reviews Articles Buying Guide Sample Images Videos Cameras Lenses Phones Printers Forums Galleries Challenges

Now reading: Sigma says three of its lenses are not fully compatible with the Canon EOS-1D X II 89 comments

Sigma says three of its lenses are not fully compatible with the Canon EOS-1D X II

Published Jun 2, 2016 | Brittany Hillen

Sigma has announced that three of its lenses, the 20mm F1.4 DG HSM Art, 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art and the 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM, aren’t 'fully compatible with' Canon’s newly released EOS-1D X Mark II. When one of these lenses is used with the camera, the resulting images may be underexposed. The company is developing firmware to correct the issue.

According to Sigma, the issue manifests when users choose ‘Center-weighted Average Metering’ or ‘Evaluative Metering.’ In addition, the company recommends users disable lens correction settings in the camera when using one of Sigma’s interchangeable lenses. This includes Chromatic aberration correction, Peripheral illumination correction, Distortion correction and Diffraction correction.

The latter point likely refers to an issue with the 35mm F1.4 Art lens and 1DX Mk II that surfaced last month in which images taken with the pair showed unusual banding around the edges. As SLR Lounge noted, turning off Peripheral illumination correction in-camera fixed the issue, which now appears to be Sigma's official workaround. The camera maker also says that the Manual Override focus function isn’t available with the 1D X II when using its lenses.

Via: Sigma

Tags: lens-news, canon, sigma

Comments

All (89)

Most popular (12)

Editors' picks (0)

DPR staff (0)

Oldest first

Francis Sawyer

And Sigma's EF-to-E-mount adapter doesn't work with Canon lenses. So there's trouble all around.

1 week agopermalink

Dan DeLion

Three good reasons not to buy third party lenses! Canon, Nikon, Sony…, are under no obligation to make future changes compatible with past third party lenses. In fact so doing could inhibit the manufacturer’s introductions of advanced technologies. So, if you buy a third party lens you take your chances. Canon owners can certainly can complain about Canon’s ever changing lens mount that prohibits the use of past Canon lenses on current Canon bodies.

1 week agopermalink

Francis Sawyer

Ever-changing lens mount? What are you talking about?

1 week agopermalink

David Kinston

In our family there are 3 different recent Nikon cameras, from the D7200 to the D750. Tamron, Sigma and Tokina lenses as well as Nikon. Never any issues.

Plainly CANON is the problem! They like making life difficult for their competitors - and we photographers are the ones suffering.

1 week agopermalink

Juck

Wow, what planet do you live on? How is Canon the bad guy here? Making things difficult for their competitors? How very dare they! What is this? Some kind of business?

1 week agopermalink

JhvaElohimMeth

Lol, my 6D is crying...

1 week agopermalink

LO Rivera

@Juck Although, you do make perfect sense, David Kinston has a point. With the third party lenses being just on par or on par with the first party version of the lenses, I can understand why Canon wants to make it "difficult". My Tamron 45 f/1.4 VC is very sharp wide open, I can't say that about my Nikon f/1.4G, I have to stop down to 1.8 to get good sharpness. The first parties don't want you purchasing third party lenses, yet they don't improve their own versions of the lenses, IMO.

1 week agopermalink

Revenant

It's not just Canon. Nikon is notorious for changing communication protocols, and making life difficult for lens makers that rely on reverse engineering. It's a similar situation with third-party batteries.

However, no manufacturer is obliged to ensure that third-party products are compatible with its cameras, unless they have an official partnership. It's up to the companies doing the reverse engineering to keep up with any changes that may be made.

1 week agopermalink

pgb

Those new Sigma lenses must be getting a bit too good. Since these bodies still work with legacy Canon lenses the protocol can't have been changed or is backwards compatible, unless it sees a Sigma lens id.

1 week ago*permalink

Francis Sawyer

It's a stupid move by Canon. With more video cameras coming out with EF mounts, Canon stands to make a bunch of money selling LENSES.

But as time goes on and Canon continues to flail in the weeds, they'll lose even that if they make EF a pain in the ass.

Already we see new cine lenses from SLR Magic being introduced with E mount and not EF.

1 week agopermalink

rrccad

it's really not surprising.

if you look at the lenstypes being reported by some of these lenses, it's a miracle they work at all.

as the cameras get more and more sophisticated with .. if it's this lens I do x and if it's this lens I do y... things will f-up pretty much continually when a camera firsts comes out.

Have to love the tin foil hats that some are wearing though.

Sigma and Tamron "emulate" a canon lens, and report to the camera they are a canon lens. the camera body expects certain things .. and it could even be protocol related with respects to specific lenses. if the lens protocol, wide open t-stop, af synchronization, etc,etc don't match up then all hell can break loose. over time the EF mount has changed it's protocols, added features, etc,etc.

that being said it would be alot nicer if canon would license the EF mount protocol and specifications to tamron and sigma with locked down NDA"s so this doens't happen.

1 week ago*permalink

Donmonte

Same thing happens with my 35mm 1.4 and Nikon D500, it underexposes by a full stop.
Sigma please provide a firmware update.

2 weeks agopermalink

dwill23

SIGMA USERS NEED THE 1DX II!

I want a 1dx2 for the sole purpose of using it's dual pixel AF to focus sigma's lenses perfectly. And I mean 100% of the time, even on faces at the edge of the frame just like my Canon 70d camera. I use this dual pixel af even with canon lenses that have a low F stop or anytime i need critical focus.

I hope canon releases this AF mode for more affordable cameras in the near future.

2 weeks agopermalink

EdwardBingo

I do not longer believe ir 3rd party lens makers. I am waiting for canon to update its 85mm, 1.8 is too soft and makes too much AF mistakes, 1.2 is too slow to focus. Had much hope for the Tamron 85 1.8, but after testing found it to be good in static scenes but inferior to canons 85 1.8 on moving subjects, Tamron had 3 of 10 keepers (it was always behind the subject) while Canons 85 had at least 7 of 10 in AI servo (yes I use 85 in AI servo). I am sure 3d party lenses on Canon do not use the whole protocol of lens/camera communication. That why i keep 35mm IS always on and didn't had any issues in any shutter speed ever, while Tamron users report issues on higher shutter speeds, maybe the camera manages IS work depending on shutter speed on native lenses... All in all, when cameras and lenses progress and will become more and more complex, for (non licensed) third party makers it will eventually be harder and harder to backwards engineer the compatibility and communication protocols.

2 weeks agopermalink

Miron09

the MFT 30 & 60mm lenses Sigma made are excellent. The rendering of the 60mm is matched by the Nocticron only (the latter costs a bit more)

2 weeks agopermalink

dwill23

Sigma beats all the canon glass except for Canon new 35mm f1.4 L II. The 1DX2 has dual pixel AF where you can focus in live view for perfect focus 100% of the time even on the edge of the frame. I use this even with canon lenses in tricky situations as it's always perfectly accurate.....just not as fast.

i almost bought the 1dx2 just for this AF technology but instead bought the canon 35 f1.4 II and saved money until they release this AF tech in other cheaper camera bodies.

2 weeks agopermalink

SushiEater

Canon and Nikon are the one who are playing with their new cameras to screw third party lens manufacturers. I am sure Sigma will update their lenses through
USB FW and everything will be fine. Sigma obviously could not predict what Canon and Nikon would do until they would have a sample camera on hand so they can test all their lenses for compatibility. But instead of denying the problem like Canon and Nikon do they announced it and will fix it soon. And the fix will come to your home computer instead of shipping the lens.
And that is why I trust Sigma more than anyone.

2 weeks agopermalink

rrccad

The sigma 85mm is reported as a 17-35mm 2.8L to a canon camera body.

how is canon or nikon denying the problem? they simply state they do not support third party lenses and/or accessories mounted on their cameras. as a matter of fact, everyone does that.

better take the tin foil hat off and allow some oxygen to get in there.

1 week agopermalink

SushiEater

I am not talking Canon or Nikon denying problems with Sigma lenses. I was talking about if Canon or Nikon had their own problems with anything. For example Nikon denied left focus problem for a while on D800 and oil spots on D600. Canon denied some focusing problems on some cameras, flash problem (not waking up) on some cameras etc....
You can send Sigma 85mm to Sigma and they will fix it as soon as they have firmware update.
Looks like you have some experience with tinfoil hats, I don't. And if you are going to be impolite I will not respond to you.

1 week ago*permalink

vscd

Sometimes the reason is that two different lenses have the same lens-ID in the exifs. For example the Voigtländer Skopar 40mm has the same as the Canon 40mm 2.8 STM. So if you turn on "in camera correction" with a Skopar, you may get the correction of a 40mm 2.8 STM, which won't fit at all.

I don't know if there is a central institution for Lens-IDs, but it causes trouble in some cases.

2 weeks agopermalink

boels069

See:
http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/TagNames/Canon.html#LensType

2 weeks agopermalink

vscd

I know the lists but it seems not be too unique somehow:

http://tf.weimarnetz.de/downloads/exif.jpg

2 weeks agopermalink

rrccad

it's an integer value, the list adds decimals for clarity.

1 week agopermalink

dansclic

Who cares about this ? People paying more than 6000 dollars are not buying sigma lenses I guess ? I wouldn't anyway. Professional photographers do not want to create problems for themselves, So better stick to genuine lenses that will never cause any problem.

2 weeks agopermalink

Astrotripper

Good luck getting a Canon 20mm f/1.4.

2 weeks agopermalink

Henrik Herranen

... or a Canon 50mm lens that has even nearly the image quality of Sigma's 50/1.4 Art.

2 weeks agopermalink

Paul JM

Dansclic, you have no clue mate. There are plenty of people who buy premium cameras and use premium lenses from third party producers. Me included. I greatly enjoy using a Sigma 20 1.4 with a 5 DSR. Metabones have made a substantial business out of matching third party lenses to premium cameras. So while this article may not interest you, your response is, well, just internet white-noise.

2 weeks agopermalink

dansclic

You have missed the point . Happy to know many people are using third party lenses . The point is : like Edward tells here, there will be more and more problems of compatibility . Il there is à problem with a canon body equipped with a sigma lens, who are you going to send your stuff to ? Canon ? Sigma ?
Do you think reasonable people do.have Time to waste dealing with such problems ? No. they don't. I don't take that risk. i,CAN understand people havé another opinion which apparently is not your case.

2 weeks agopermalink

Chris Yates

When it comes to Sigma Art lenses, Canon's become the Perennially underachieving, overpriced underdog. I love my Sigma art lens. beautiful glass, sharp images, amazing build and fantastic to just hold in hand. Absolutely a precision instrument.

2 weeks ago*permalink

Eagle1349

I only shoot Canon lenses, I learned this lesson the hard way. I have a mint condition Sigma lens that I paid a grand for, but I can't even get $300 for it now. Third party lenses in my opinion are not worth the incompatibility issues with Canon bodies as well as the low resale value.

2 weeks ago*permalink

matthew saville

"...genuine lenses that will never cause any problem."

Thanks for making me choke on my pasta. You're hilarious.

1 week agopermalink

sleibson

I regret Sigma's problem but this sort of thing has been going at least since Canon adopted the EOS EF mount for it's digital cameras. I once bought a Sigma lens that only worked on Canon EOS film cameras by mistake. That's when I learned that the 3rd-party vendors had to reverse engineer the Canon EF (and later EF-S) mount. Canon knows the shape of the electro-optical envelope of its EOS mounts and the camera-lens communications protocol and is able to update lens technology with things like multiple IS generations, ultrasonic focus motors, and STM's focus-by-wire. The other vendors can't. They don't know where the edges of the mount's envelope are. As a result, the only non-Canon lenses I buy these days are full-manual lenses with no electronics at all. Yes, I miss out on some really fine 3rd-party glass. I can live with that.

2 weeks agopermalink

Eagle1349

Great explanation, I don't believe you are missing out on anything by not using third party lenses.

2 weeks agopermalink

Mlumiere

When you own a 1dx 1 or 2, I think Canon has a lot of choices about lenses, from fisheyes to super telephoto.

2 weeks agopermalink

Ilia Snopchenko

But not something like a fast 20mm, or a 120-300/2.8 zoom, or stabilized fast primes at 45 and 85mm, or a 15-30/2.8 / 24-70/2.8 lenses with image stabilization, or...

2 weeks agopermalink

Mlumiere

I use only prime lenses

2 weeks agopermalink

Ilia Snopchenko

You do, but there are other people out there as well.

2 weeks agopermalink

Alex Efimoff

Children, behave! 😂

2 weeks agopermalink

Biowizard

There was a time when a camera simply measured the actual light coming in through the entirely passive lens, adjusted for the reported aperture setting (trasmitted via a mechanical lever), and made the perfect exposure on a fixed-ISO sensor (called film).

Frankly, the idea that a LENS needs firmware is appalling. So many lines of computer code trying to compensate for manufacturing shortcuts which, once upon a time, were sorted by decent design, gear reductions and the pitch of helical-cut metal.

Brian

2 weeks agopermalink

NDT0001

Its not at all appalling. Your complaint is like saying modern cars are appalling as they are not purely mechanical like the old days. Being electronic, lenses and cameras now work symbiotically, and the results are far and away superior to lenses and bodies of yesteryear.

2 weeks agopermalink

Random Asian Guy

I also don't find it appalling either, Why would any improvement to a lens be bad? If we don't have the technology to make better designed lens, coating, etc, why would they not make a lens better there they can? Or would you prefer no new lenses get created until there is a new break through with design? Next thing you will say, OIS is cheating.

2 weeks agopermalink

badi

Actually i would say that even the case "when the camera simply measured the light" is cheating ... there was a time when there was not auto exposure at all, and no auto focus at all... also cameras didn't have firmware back then, why is it ok for a camera to have firmware (almost to the level of an operating system, these days) but for a lens it's appalling? :)

2 weeks agopermalink

StefanD

Those old lenses are full of compromises since all challenges to get the best quality had to be solved in the lens design.
Nowadays, the engineers have more choices since some challenges can be solved using software, resulting in better quality or cheaper lenses or even both.
I'm happy with that :-)

2 weeks agopermalink

ButterflySkies

Hope you guys see the irony in your comments when you say electronic controlled lenses are superior and so much better under an article that say "these lenses don't work with this camera because electronics"

2 weeks ago*permalink

NDT0001

@butterflySkies not ironic, the advantages of electronic technology outweigh the occasional incompatibilities which arise. Theres always an alternative tho. Will you ditch your mobile phone and go back to using a rotary phone because it doesn't need power to make a phone call?

2 weeks ago*permalink

ButterflySkies

@NDT0001 What advantages though? In what way is electronic manual focus better than normal manual focus for example? Or electronically controlled aperture vs mechanical aperture as in the case. I've heard electronically controlled aperture can handle higher framerates. But mechanical aperture can still handle todays framerates so its more of a future thing and doesn't benefit anyone now. A phone that doesn't need power to operate? Sure, if I actually used my phone to make calls I would.

2 weeks agopermalink

NDT0001

@butterflySkies lots of advantages where the lens registers to the body and many lens corrections are done by the camera body, like vignetting, chromatic aberrations and distortions etc. Lots of these can be done in post-software but as the lenses talk to the body and give the specific settings its all done in-body without you noticing. It also gives the advantage of smaller and cheaper glass as corrections are software based and not done with extra lens elements. And yes, rotary and non-cordless telephones don't require a power outlet to function, they just need to be plugged into a phone outlet in your house.

2 weeks ago*permalink

ButterflySkies

@NDT0001 Sure, if you compare a don't have and a have vs a don't have there's a clear advantage. But they are optional, you can turn those of. Electronic aperture is not something you can turn off and go back to mechanical, which is OPs main complaint. An off vs on question. Would you like to have vingetting, CA and distortion corrections always on, even written on the RAW files, or would you like to have them off?
Personally I like them off as I do my corrections on the computer anyway.

2 weeks ago*permalink

sleibson

I'm not sure how you get autofocus and aperture autoexposure without electronics in the lens. In the all-mechanical days, your fingers did the focus and aperture setting. As it turns out, lots of people like autoexposure and autofocus, so you pretty much need to smarten the lens with electronics. Now, if you want to use those old, all-mechanical lenses you can! Your fancy latest-model dSLR will accept these lenses and your fingers can do the magic like always. I've got a few manual lenses and they work fine. But if you want auto, then electronics are a must.

As for compensating for lens-manufacturing deficiencies that weren't there in the good old days , that's just not the case. Today's lenses need to resolve much better than the old ones to meet the needs of 20+ Mpixel sensors. Old lenses were designed and built to resolve down to the grain size of film. Even Kodachrome, the gold standard for small film grain, did not have the resolving power of today's top image sensors.

1 week ago*permalink

badi

well... for one, *because electronics* lenses can autofocus and can have IS ... so yes, lenses with electronics are much better from some points of view. There is a long list of benefits, if you really want to go deeper into the talk.
Also one of having firmware instead of simple electronics is that third party manufacturers can fix issues when they come up (this is what the article is about, by the way).

1 week agopermalink

steven gaspari

My sigma 150 macro was fine on my 70d but underexposes on my 80d....I learned to adjust. Took me 5 minutes to dial it in correctly. Life goes on.

2 weeks agopermalink

badi

yeah, it's not like you have to throw the lens away, but if sigma can fix that through a firmware update, it's a nice thing to address it.
And also increase the confidence of public in sigma that they will fix any issues might appear with future camera models.

2 weeks agopermalink

trungtran

Did sigma underestimate the dynamic range of the Canon sensor. No problem here if it was a Sony, you can just push 10 stops in post to correct.

But really, it is too be expected with non OEM equipment that you will have compatibility issues. Same thing everytime I update windows, i find multiple apps no longer compatible and i have to look at alternatives.

2 weeks agopermalink

Yake

Surely this has something to do with Sony and DR, right? There must be a connection. Let's see ... oh yes, Sigma didn't know you can't push a Canon 10 stops. And this is the cause of the exposure error. Glad we figured that out. ;)

2 weeks agopermalink

Alphoid

Yake: I hope you know we'll all quote you on that. ;)

2 weeks agopermalink

AbrasiveReducer

Let's not compare Sigma to Microsoft. That's just not fair. Most combinations of Sigma lenses and various camera bodies work just fine.

2 weeks agopermalink

Digimat

well..at least that peripheral illumionation thing is not a new problem, my 5D3 produces some not so funny things when coupled with the 50 ART.

2 weeks agopermalink

ThatsTheShot

Are you able to elaborate under what circumstances that will result with the "not so funny things" when you couple your 5D3 with the 50 ART? Thanks.

2 weeks agopermalink

Digimat

Sure. Put Lens on Camera with activated PIC -> Camera adds wrong vignetting Correction. That corrections is not that of another lens though and the edged do not become brighter, but darker. two perfectly circular, darker rings are added in jpeg mode.

however, i cant repeat that problem right now, seems it got fixed in recent years through firmware updates.

2 weeks agopermalink

ThatsTheShot

Thank you for that information.

2 weeks agopermalink

mailman30

I've been shooting with that combination for ages without issues

2 weeks agopermalink

ThatsTheShot

Thanks yes I also have that combination and have no issue (not one that is obvious to me anyway, maybe I have not been paying too close of an attention).

2 weeks agopermalink

Jonathan Brady

I honestly don't believe that Canon PURPOSELY tries to limit 3rd party lenses and accessories from communicating with their cameras. I truly don't. What I do believe is that they don't care AT ALL, if they make it to where they don't. Which is fine. They don't guarantee that 3rd party accessories/lenses will work, the 3rd party companies do - so it's on the Sigma's and Tamron's of the world.
But... I do feel like at least a few people at Canon, Inc are LAUGHING THEIR B***S OFF right now! hahahaha!
Having said that... I'm glad my Sigma 50 Art works with my 5D Mark III :-)

2 weeks agopermalink

Samuel Dilworth

“I honestly don't believe that Canon PURPOSELY tries to limit 3rd party lenses and accessories from communicating with their cameras.”

Then you are naive. It is in Canon’s strong interest to have articles like this one appear every now and then. Each time that happens, more people resolve to buy Canon lenses to avoid this mess.

These companies are extraordinarily cynical behind the scenes. They have a 30+ year history of not remotely caring about the user experience beyond its short-term effect on their bottom line.

This doesn’t mean that Canon won’t have a long list of excuses for this behaviour or that some of the managers and engineers will even believe them.

2 weeks agopermalink

Jonathan Brady

You can call me naive, I can call you cynical.
I don't believe Canon engineers sit around reverse engineering the reverse engineering of the 3rd party manufacturers to figure out the weaknesses of their reverse engineering, and then designing new protocols to break the 3rd party companies accessories yet still make their own function perfectly, nay, even better. No, I think they figure out new ways to make their stuff work as well as possible and don't give a second thought to the effects on 3rd party gear. And if something does happen to break, they laugh to themselves and keep on going.

2 weeks agopermalink

Azathothh

Samuel, if Canon/Nikon really wanted every 3rd party lenses to fail on new cameras they could do that so easily.

2 weeks agopermalink

sleibson

I agree with Jonathan Brady. If Canon started to worry about 3rd-party lens compatibility, then there'd be no end to the engineering mickey mouse needed to ensure all those reverse-engineered interfaces worked. In fact, Canon would have to reverse-engineer the reverse-engineered lens interfaces from Sigma, Tamron, etc. Makes no economic sense for Canon to do that.

1 week agopermalink

Francis Sawyer

No they wouldn't. All they have to do is publish the protocol and be done with it.

1 week agopermalink

Azathothh

Publish the protocol and tell their competitors how their cameras really work? Lolz. Sure let's give them all our research and development data! And tell them how to build them with low cost! We will also inform you of our plans for the future regarding autofocus so that they keep up with our future bodies. And everyone will be happy. Right? Glad we can help you.

1 week ago*permalink

Charles2

"the [under-exposure] issue manifests when users choose ‘Center-weighted Average Metering’ or ‘Evaluative Metering.’ "

Is this exposure issue common in general when adapting a third-party lens, for example, a Zeiss M-mount lens to a Fuji X camera?

2 weeks agopermalink

Clint Dunn

For your example, no....M mount lenses do not have any electronics so there is no AE issues with Fuji/Sony bodies.

2 weeks agopermalink

Gesture

Not easy being Sigma. But they are communicating and responding. +

2 weeks agopermalink

dansclic

That is simply marketing. If they do not, they lose customers.
Internet and customer complaints can ruin a reputation quickly.

2 weeks agopermalink

boels069

In-camera peripheral illumination correction should be set to OFF for all third party lenses.
All 3rd party lenses have Lens-ID's corresponsing to Canon lenses with (more or less) the same specs.
See: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/TagNames/Canon.html#LensType

2 weeks agopermalink

temama

Nikon?! I'm really sorry for you. I'm a Sony user.

2 weeks agopermalink

DuxX

Lucky you... you can play now with your lens adapters.

2 weeks ago*permalink

temama

You mean: Adapter? Yes, one is enough. Sigma MC-11, and I can use many of these fancy Sigma lenses with my great Sony A7RII camera. Life is so wonderful!

2 weeks agopermalink

DuxX

Yeah right. One adapter for Sigma lenses and one for Canon lenses. And 50% of all Canon lenses I've tried on A7 with all that clunky AF is almost unusable for any serious work except maybe for portraits in wax museum ;) ... but who cares. Life is good until we have toys for fun ;)

2 weeks agopermalink

temama

Ah. Your attitude to life is so pathetic and wearisome. Where is all the joy? A7 is a nice camera, but A7RII is something amazing! Buy it, and you will become like a new person <3

2 weeks agopermalink

DuxX

No thanks. I ended up with toys 35 years ago. ;)

2 weeks agopermalink

Mark Alan Thomas

temama sounds like he joined a cult.

2 weeks agopermalink

proxy

DuxX... really? and you came all the way here to say it?

2 weeks agopermalink

DuxX

proxy... I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings :)

2 weeks agopermalink

babola

"Ah. Your attitude to life is so pathetic and wearisome. Where is all the joy? A7 is a nice camera, but A7RII is something amazing! Buy it, and you will become like a new person <3"

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

And then there are the delusional ones...

2 weeks ago*permalink

Romasito

DuxX - A7 is slow with EF adapters, yes. But A7R II is much much better - so can't really compare the two ;-)

2 weeks agopermalink

jrn145

"Ended" with toys 35 years ago, yet still behaves like a child today. Interesting.

2 weeks agopermalink

Francis Sawyer

The MC-11 is a failure for not working with the vast majority of the lenses belonging to its standard.

1 week agopermalink

Sardonic G

Don't bother me, I'm a Nikon user

2 weeks agopermalink

Gmon750

Dealing with all of Nikon's recalls, it's no surprise you don't want to be bothered.

2 weeks agopermalink

www.dpreview.com

Editorial content

Product database

Community

About us Work for us Advertise with us FAQ Feedback Interest-Based Ads Privacy Legal

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site


Fast telezoom: Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 sample images Jun 10, 2016	Panasonic introduces splash-proof Lumix G Leica Summilux 12mm F1.4 Jun 15, 2016	Kerlee 35mm F1.2 is 'World's fastest' 35mm for full-frame SLRs Jun 13, 2016	Amazing underwater 4K footage from Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Jun 14, 2016


Canon EOS-1D X Mark II	Sigma 20mm F1.4 DG HSM Art
74 I own it 219 I want it 30 I had it Discuss in the forums	40 I own it 75 I want it 9 I had it Discuss in the forums

Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art	Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM
965 I own it 359 I want it 128 I had it Discuss in the forums	256 I own it 54 I want it 46 I had it Discuss in the forums

Body, Base	In stock	From $5,999.00	Shop now
Premium Kit, Base	In stock	From $5,999.00	Shop now

US Version, Canon	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
US Version, Nikon	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
US Version, Sigma	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Nikon F -...	In stock	$1,427.69	Shop now

US Version, Canon	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
US Version, Nikon	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
US Version, Pentax	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
US Version, Sony	In stock	From $899.00	Shop now
Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Lens for Sigma	In stock	$899.00	Shop now

Canon Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$869.00	Shop now
Nikon Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$869.00	Shop now
Pentax Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$869.00	Shop now
Sigma Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$869.00	Shop now
Sony Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$869.00	Shop now
Canon Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$772.00	Shop now
Nikon Digital SLR Cameras	In stock	$871.99	Shop now


Cleaning The Net by TheGlennPalacio from At The Workplace	Sevens Sevens Too by AnitaPhotos from 7	Barrel Cactus In Bloom by ManInHat from Electric!	Erg Chebbi Morocco by rigi from Wrinkles in Nature