What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

News Sigma 20-200mm f3.5/6.3 DG

Yep, for the huge range that stretches just into ultra-wide territory it could be the best travel zoom ever made.

First super-zoom to break the 24mm barrier and the first FF mirrorless Contemporary zoom and Contemporary lens that isn't an I-series.
 
Now I'm thinking about switching my 20-60 and 70-300 for the 20-200. I don't know how much I would miss the 200-300 range, but most of the time I use it below 200mm.
 
I would prefer normally the 28-300mm range for super zooms. The review of Christopher Frost sounds very promising. Best super zoom available. But do not expect the same image quality as with your 20-60 and 70-300. It is still "only" a super zoom.
 
I was initially excited to see this, but then saw that it does not have OIS. I really value the Dual IS I get from using stabilised Lumix lenses on the S5II.
 
Looks very interesting. A very versatile lens, and I love the fact that it starts at 20mm (not 24, or worse, 28).

If this lens matches the optical performance of the M43 Olympus 12-100... it could be the ideal do-it all landscape/travel lens. It is difficult to tell from the initial reviews, which seem quite positive.

I wonder if Richard Wong will review the lens? Having bought two lenses in the past thanks to his amazingly thorough video reviews, I would certainly trust his judgement :)
 
dirk said:
I would prefer normally the 28-300mm range for super zooms. The review of Christopher Frost sounds very promising. Best super zoom available. But do not expect the same image quality as with your 20-60 and 70-300. It is still "only" a super zoom.
Click to expand...

The additional 8 mm on the wide are the main reason I even consider it. The 20 to 28 mm range is the only reason I still have the 20-60. I'm barely using it, because I have the 28-70 sigma. But 28 and even 24 mm are sometimes not enough. At least for me, 20 mm are enough almost always.

Quality wise, it seems good enough to what I've seen.

I'm only thinking, if I would miss the longer range or the close focusing on the long end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top