Sigma 85mm f/1.4 lens size specs

---

I fear I run the risk of sounding like all the iPad prognosticators I grow extremely tired of hearing, but I have a little more data on the upcoming 85mm f/1.4 lens from Sigma.

I was really interested in actual dimensions and weight on this lens for better comparison "on paper" with comparable lenses by Nikon and Canon in terms of handling. In response to a post I made on another forum, I was handed a link to lens specs that do include physical dimensions, but still nothing on weight. Here, we see the Sigma measures 84.7mm in diameter, and 87.6mm in length. Weight is listed as "TBD." One might guess that some materials are still not settled upon with finality, which could affect lens weight.

We can now see the Sigma is somewhat larger than the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 lens (80mm diameter and 72.5mm long) even considering Nikon's dimensions apparently do not include the lens mount flange. And Sigma comes in considerably smaller than Canon's f/1.2 hog, which measures 91.5mm diameter by 84mm long.


This Sigma lens, along with their previously introduced 50mm f/1.4 lens (shown at left), seem targeted to hit Nikon and Canon at points in their lens line where they are weak. Nikon recently introduced an upgraded 50mm f/1.4 lens, and canonrumors.com reports rumblings that Canon is about to follow suit with a 50mm f/1.4 update of their own. Would either company be likely to make a move on this type of lens without non-OEM competition?

How the Sigma lens will compare optically is a completely open question, since virtually nobody, save possibly for a few chosen souls covered by NDA, has shot with one yet. The added bulk of the Sigma compared to the Nikon lens may be explained by the HSM focusing motor, and will very likely be justified by better performance of the AF. The size reduction compared to the Canon offering will also with near certainty be accompanied by improved AF and MF performance at the paltry cost of 1/3 stop of light gathering power. (The f/1.2 max aperture serves Canon better in terms of bragging rights and profit margin than it does users in terms of usable lens aperture.).

While I enjoy and appreciate the faster apertures and (often) better optics of fixed lenses compared to their zoom counterparts, I don't own any right at this time and choose to rent them as needed, as Robert's Distributors in Indianapolis is a readily available source for me. I am normally reticent to go with non-OEM optics but Sigma has my attention with the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.4. It is impressive to me that Sigma is competing directly on lens build quality and performance and not just on price. Their 50mm is actually pricier than Canon's and about the same price as Nikon's. The Sigma 85mm will pleasantly surprise me if it comes in much below $1000.00 US, which would be lower than Canon's price and roughly the same as Nikon.. Whether or not I end up buying one or both of these lenses, I appreciate Sigma's mixing it up in the fixed-length marketplace.

Sigma 85mm f/1.4 update

I heard back today from Sigma on my information request about their upcoming 85mm f/1.4 lens. They told me that can't give more detailed information at this time on precise dimensions and weight of the lens, so I still can't do a direct comparison with the Nikon and Canon equivalents of this lens.

However, they did burst my bubble somewhat by stating this lens will NOT be compatible with a teleconverter. I was salivating a bit at the prospect of a single lens/converter combo that could obviate my need to periodically rent Canon's 85mm f/1.2 and 135mm f/2.0. If there were a matching 1.4X teleconverter, this lens could be both a very fast 85mm and a 119mm (which is close enough to 135mm).

Such is life. Hopefully Sigma will change their minds on this and issue a compatible converter, but I will continue to breathe normally in the interim.

Sigma 85mm f/1.4 HSM. Sweet.

---

Sigma, long a competitor in the pro-sumer zoom lens market, has also shown it is not afraid to mix it up in the higher-end lens market. For several years they have had well-reviewed versions of 70-200mm 2.8 and 24-70mm 2.8 lenses. They have also pushed into fixed-length (see this post on why I hate the term "prime" - except when it's used properly) lens markets with 300mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4 and others. Soon (thought no date was given), their newest entry in their "fast and fixed" line will be the 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens.

In Sigma parlance, "EX" refers to the special finish and higher build quality on its higher-end products, and DG refers to a lens suitable for full-frame digital and film cameras (as opposed to "DC" lenses, which are only for "crop-sensor" cameras, such as Nikon D300 or Canon EOS 7D, to name a few). HSM refers to focus driven by Hypersonic Motor.

I have multiple times rented the Canon 85mm f/1.2L USM (both the original and the "II" versions) lens for specific occasions when I wanted insanely thin depth of field or was working in ridiculously low light, such as a local college dance group that seems fond of performing in near total darkness. The Canon is a great lens optically, but it handles like a shot put. In addition to being larger and heavier than seems necessary, both manual and autofocus are slo-o-o-o-o-o-o-ow. The "II" version improved handling compared to the original, but only incrementally. Sigma's new lens is shown here in a photo provided by the company, apparently in Canon mount. Based on the known dimension of the mount flange, this lens appears to by noticeably smaller than Canon's big-ass 85mm, while only being a measly 1/3 stop slower. I would also say it is somewhat more compact than the Nikon 85mm f/1.4.

Way back in the day (late '80's), when I was a Nikon shooter, I owned a Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 for a couple of years. This was also a great lens optically, though I could never master getting basketball action shots reliably in focus with it at f/1.4. I may not do a whole lot better with that today, as that is very sparse depth of field. Nikon's current autofocus version of this lens appears to be the same basic design, though it uses the old-style body-driven "screwdriver" type AF rather than the newer, more reliable "hypersonic" style motor. Sigma's new lens will almost certainly be a faster, more accurate, and quieter alternative for Nikon users.

Do I sound like I'm looking forward to getting my hands on this lens for a test drive? Well, yes, I am. While Canon OEM zooms are my bread and butter, I do like a fast fixed-length lens at times for certain purposes, and am not married to Canon glass only. Sigma's 50mm f/1.4 lens is very attractive to me, though I've not sunk the bucks into one yet. It is well-reviewed around the 'net, but for my work, the 50mm is more of a "would be nice" than a "must have." That scale may slide once there is a sustained improvement in the economy.

With it's greater reach, the 85mm could rate as a "must have" for my work, particularly with the aforementioned dance/stage events, and also with high school/college diving and dog agility events, both of which involve fast action under dodgy indoor lighting and usually a ban on electronic flash.

Sigma's press release does not specify if the 85mm is compatible with a 1.4X teleconverter. The lens would almost definitely be a "must have" for me if it was 1.4X-ready, as that would essentially give me a dual-duty lens that would also replace a 135mm f/2.0 lens, which is another lens I rent on a recurring basis for similar events. I have an inquiry in with Sigma at this time. Not surprisingly, information on exact release date and price are not being disclosed at this time, though I was told June is a target for release. I also asked about precise weight and dimensions of the lens for direct comparison with current equivalent Nikon and Canon lenses and if the Sigma 85mm to get a better idea of the handling and flexibility of the Sigma. I am told answers on these questions may come by Monday.

I'll let you know.

Prognostication From A Dark & Smelly Place

---

I should probably start this entry by stating a few things that I am NOT. I am not an oracle or a psychic. I am not a Canon fanboy and am not in the Canon inner circle or connected with the company in any way. I am not a Canon evangelist or a Nikon detractor. (I have a spreadsheet calculating the cost/benefit of a switch to Nikon to prove that.)

Recently, a mole at Best Buy revealed new UPC product database entries had been created for the Canon G11, S90, and 7D. That a G11 was eventually coming is a no-brainer. The "G" series has updated on a more-than-annual basis for years.

The S90, on the other hand, is thought to be a much more counterintuitive development. I have to take other web posts at their word on this, since I do not follow developments surrounding this type of camera. But, if we accept that the S90 prediction was either based on fact or an exceptionally lucky guess, the 7D gets added credibility, as well as a blogospheric tornado of speculation on it's specifications.

To amalgamate the myriad estimations of 7D capabilities, the new camera will most probably:

• be anywhere from 12 to 21 megapixels.
• have one, or perhaps two, digic IV processors or debut a Digic V.
• do HD video up to 1080p.
• have a 3.9 framp-per-second shooting rate.
• or, maybe, 8 fps.
• or 5 fps. Who knows?
• slice.
• dice.
• chop.
• make julienne fries.
• cost about $2700.00 (body only).
• or around $1700.00.
• have built-in pop-up flash. Or not.
• employ an APS-C 1.6x crop sensor.
• Oh, never mind. It's full-frame.
• have 15 focus points.
• No, make that 19 focus points.
• why not one meeee-lee-uhn focus points?.
• give you oral pleasure.
• ISO 50 to ISO one meeee-lee-uhn.
• have weather sealing comparable to EOS 1D MkIII.

The preceding list, delivered with tongue causing a rug burn on the inside of my cheek, goes to show how useless any speculation, including my own, truly is. As the old saw goes, "Anybody who knows isn't talking, and anybody who's talking doesn't know."

But what the hay? Speculatin's fun.

I went on record with an email to my friend Ron Wise over a week ago with the following predictions for the 7D:

• 16-ish MP with one or two sRaw modes
• up to 1080p video
• motor at least 6.5 fps
• 1.3x crop
• "real" ISO ratings to 6400, with "cheats" up to 25K
• one CF and one SD card slot

As I read this a week later, I find I still agree with myself. Nothing there is a particularly earth-shattering or out-of-the-box prediction with the possible exception of the 1.3x crop. I haven't seen that prediction anywhere else on the web. And like every other prediction out there, I pulled that out of a very dark and smelly place. But it still sounds right to me. And here's why:

I think Canon has realized (or should realize) that the advanced amateurs at whom the 10D thru 50D series has been aimed are just about played out on 1.6x crop sensors. Nobody who has shot with or even looked through a 5D has not pined for a larger sensor. Another 1.6x sensor is not going to excite like an upgraded 1.3x sensor would.

Also, as I recall, the 10D debuted at about $2000.00, and the 50D is now listing for $1199.00. That's at least a 40% deflation in price in a relatively short few years, which has to cut deeply into profit margin. If, as some have suggested, a 60D is also about to be released, the expectation will be for a big boost in features at the same price, or an incremental improvement for at least a slightly lower price. Video capability of the Rebel T1i notwithstanding, the current 50D is a significantly more solid-built camera with many more features than the Rebel for not a lot more money. Canon surely wants to introduce a new pro-sumer toy that can command a larger profit margin. 1.3x crop on the sensor will help with this.

Releasing a 60D simply does not make sense to me. Releasing a 60D alongside a 7D would be market-diluting lunacy.

The sleeping giant through all this 7D rumoring is the surely-impending update in the 1D line. But lately I've been wondering if it is still going to be a "line" at all. Without a doubt, the Nikon D3 is the camera to beat right now. And Nikon has apparently abandoned any kind of crop sensor on it's pro cameras. Would this not put pressure on Canon to do the same?

I suspect we have seen the last EOS 1DS camera. The next pro camera will be full-frame and the APS-H sensor format will go by the wayside for pro Canons. That's another reason I think the 7D will be 1.3x crop. It will essentially fill the niche that will not be filled by a successor to the current 1.3x-crop 1D MarkIII (at least in my fevered imagination).

Were I CEO of Canon, engineers would have been tasked many months ago to design a camera with the fullest flexibility for any pro shooting situation. Need to shoot a full-bleed magazine cover or a portrait suitable for extensive retouching and uber-large reproduction? Shoot 25-30 megapixels with motor speed of around 5 fps. Shooting a fast paced sporting event where most of your work will display half-page or less in print or on the web? Drop down to about 12MP resolution and crank away at 10 or 12 fps.

Essentially, to regain it's competitive leg up, Canon should strive to deliver a camera that combines the Nikon D3 and D3X into one machine, and do it at around the price of the D3. In today's economy, few professionals have the luxury to specialize only in high-end commercial work at the expense of fast-paced editorial photography. And top-line cameras should not force professionals to pay top-dollar for a "specialist" SLR.

The Vivitar 285HV is better than the old 283, right?

---

If you read my last post, you know I'm in the midst of a "Mission to banish AA's." Experimentation is ongoing, and results will be reported in a day or two. I've already gotten a result that surprised me with the AA Alkalines that is causing me to reconsider my testing method.

In the meantime, a question that might rightly enter the mind of a reader would be, "Why do you use the old Vivitar 283 and not the 285HV, which is readily available new?"

This is a question I have been asked more than once while on assignment. Simplest answer is that 283's are what I have. They last nearly forever, and when they die, more lie in wait on eBay and in used departments of your better camera shops, both brick-and-mortar and online. I think I've owned at least two of them ever since my sophomore year of college. At one point, I had seven of them in perfect working order. These days I have four that work flawlessly, one that works "well enough", and three on the autopsy table for spare parts.

The 285HV is a very good flash. Always has been. I've owned several over the years, but only have one right now. The venerable Strobist has recommended it highly, and I agree. It has the distinct advantage of being a currently (or at least very recently) in-production flash unit, so I assume there is a warranty on new units, and repair and replacement is easier without resorting to eBay.

Another very important advantage to the 285HV is that it has a much safer sync voltage right out of the box. Very important note here: Only the newer 285HV models have the lower sync voltage. Older 285 (non-HV) models you may find on the used market most likely have sync voltage in the 300V range and can and probably will send your 40D or D40 to an early grave, or at least in for an expensive repair.

Two other significant advantages to the 285HV are the zoom head and the variable manual power settings. I will discuss both and indicate why, for me, the 283 is still the better option.

Zoom head: A three position zoom head on the 285HV adjusts the beam angle to cover 35mm, 50mm, and 105mm lenses (based on full-frame SLR viewing angle). This is pretty handy. The 105mm (Tele) setting gives you extra reach for subjects viewed with long lenses at a distance, which is sometimes a necessity. The 50mm (Norm) setting is good for efficient bouncing from the ceiling or from an umbrella. The 35mm (Wide) setting is gives good coverage for general use and prevents vignetting. This setting closely mimics what you get with the 283 with no modifier.

To get the same functionality from a 283, you need the lens kit LK-1 and the Lens Filter Adapter, which holds the LK-1 lenses. Extra accessories are extra dollars, although both are readily found on eBay for about 10 dollars each, sometimes less. The advantage is that the Lens Kit has the ability to vary the angle of coverage to a far greater degree, from 20mm to 135mm. If I need wide coverage, I'm probably bouncing from the ceiling or from an umbrella, but I often use the 85mm or 135mm lenses to increase the reach of a unit placed on a stand in the back of a room or to concentrate the light and allow surrounding areas to go dark (useful for lighting up a speaker in a dark room while still allowing his/her PowerPoint slides to remain visible in the image).

The added flexibility overrides the disadvantage of having to buy and carry extra accessories, in my view.

Variable power: You know, it's nice that the 285HV, unlike the 283, has variable power built-in, but it has LAME variable power built-in. You get 1/2, 1/4 and 1/16. Dat's it. Hummingbird shooters or others interested in extremely short flash duration probably want to tune it down lower than 1/16. Maybe LOT'S lower. And how did 1/8 power get thrown under the bus, anyway?

Again, the 283 is proves to be more flexible, but also at the expense of another accessory. The Vari-power module VP-1 (find it cheap on eBay) allows continuous adjustment of power from Full to 1/64 power. The downside is that, frankly, this is a rather poorly designed accessory. While useful, it has no clickstops or other capability to "lock-in" a power setting. It's just a dial that rotates freely and can easily get pushed higher or lower if the flash is hand-held (not so much an issue for lightstand use). Also, in my tests with several different 283's, you don't actually get 1/2 power at the 1/2 power setting. You need to go down near to 1/4 power to reduce the power by half. So watch your image preview/histogram or use a flash meter to test power settings, and don't assume that adjusting from 1/4 power to 1/8 power is a one f/stop adjustment.

Brave 283 hackers can use various Radio Shack potentiometers or resistors to gain control over the power setting as well. That's fodder for another post.

On thing I dislike about the 285HV: I don't use the color coded auto modes very much, but sometimes they are the handiest way to easily and automatically fill in the foreground of a multiple light set-up. The 285HV gives you 4 modes to choose from. At ISO 400, the corresponding apertures for these modes are 4.0 (yellow), 8.0 (red), 16 (blue) and 22 (purple). Blue and Purple are pretty much useless if your working distance exceeds about 4 feet, so that leaves Red and Yellow. Yellow requires f/4.0, which is just a bit too wide for my taste. 5.6 gives me just a bit of extra depth of field and is more comfortable for me. My next option with the 285HV is red mode, which calls for f/8.0. That's not bad, but the red mode consistently overexposes with my unit, so it's more like f/11. That's a 3 f/stop jump and dumps a LOT more flash power, leading to longer recycle times and more dead batteries.

Behavior of my five 283's is consistent across the board, but I have no way to be sure if my sole 285HV is normal or "special."

The 283's bottom two modes are f/4.0 (yellow) and f/5.6 (red), and are both consistent with their respective apertures in exposure. This is my personal preference, but "red mode" on the 283 is a better fit for the way I work than any mode on the 285HV.

Mission to banish AA's, part I

---

I truly HATE AA batteries.

I frikkin' hate them with a PASSION.

The treehugger in me hates them because I have to collect them in a milk jug and unload them for proper disposal at a special recycling event that only happens twice a month in these parts.

I hate them because they cost money. And any and all cost savings are vital in this economy.

And most importantly, as a professional photographer, I hate them because the performance sucks. I get approximately 30 to 40 good flashes with decent but far-from-stellar recycle times before the flash unit begins to slow to an annoying degree. I hang with a set of batteries for 20 or 30 more flashes to get my money's worth or until recycle times begin to put me in serious danger of missing a "money" shot. Then I break out another 3 dollars worth of batteries, fumble with an awkward exchange, and start all over.

The Quantum 1 battery is an obvious solution. Quality flash performance for about 120 to 170 flashes (or perhaps MANY more, depending on how you flash) and then take it home and recharge practically for free. But there's that awkward cable going down to your belt. It gets pinched in my rotating flash bracket. It ends up caught on the petals of my lens shade and is visible in the picture. It beats AA's, but still has it's annoyances.

In a "There's got to be a better way" Google search, I turned up a pre-wrapped, pre-wired five-AA NiMH cluster intended for radio control model airplane servos. I found a pair of such packs rated at 6V and 2300mAh on eBay for about $15 including shipping. Even if this works well, there will still be days I need to use the Quantum 1 for extended shooting without fussing with battery swaps, but I thought these units would be worth a try for shorter, lighter assignments.

A little research in RC model forums confirms my assumption that the five cells in this cluster are 1.2 volts each to make up the 6V usually found in a set of four 1.5V AA's. Obviously this cluster will not fit in the usual battery compartment on my Vivitar 283's but a Quantum style "battery replacer" module can't be hard to whip together.

I'm going out on a limb a bit by posting a blog entry on this experiment which, for all I know, will be an abject failure. But hey, the failures teach us too, right? This will be the first of at least two and possibly three posts on the subject. My immediate challenge now will be to find a way to charge the packs and adapt them for use in the Vivitar 283 (should be easy enough) and to test the performance. If that goes well, I will document a mod I'm planning to the 283 that will allow quick and easy transition from powering the flash with this battery pack to powering it with the Quantum 1.

I may then follow with a couple of related posts on topics like "Why the 283 and not the 285, which is readily available new?" and "OK. You've convinced me to go with the 283. How do I keep it from destroying my digital camera?"

Stay tuned.

Big doin's at PocketWizard

---

There was some chatter on the Paul C. Buff forums recently that PocketWizard would make a big announcement soon. Like I usually do when I hear such a thing, I religiously checked their website for several days and when I keep seeing same old same old day after day, I gave up checking one or two days before "THE EVENT." (Seriously, I must have pinged the Canon website for 60 consecutive days, but gave up on it exactly two days before the 5D Mark II announcement.)

The event in this case is the announcement of the MiniTT1 transmitter and FlexTT5 tranceiver radio flash triggering devices. The news here is that these units allow TTL flash operation over wireless RF channels, which will be much more reliable than the about as expensive but dicier infrared wireless systems marketed by Nikon and Canon. For starters, this system is for Canon only, but Nikon-compatible gear is on the way. I won't re-hash features of the units here, as they are covered very well at the Strobist blog.

Personally, I've never been particularly happy with the consistency of results I've gotten with TTL flash equipment. Being an old hand (a VERY old hand) with manual operation of Vivitar 283's, I'm more pleased with the results I get working in "old school" manual. Therefore, I nearly said "big deal" at the news and went on with my day.

But, fortunately, I read on.

These units have the capability of operating in what is called "Hypersync" mode. This is of high interest to sports shooters like myself because it MAY allow using higher flash sync speeds with studio flashes triggered by these units. The power of my AlienBee's B800 units are "just enough" for some of my arena lighting situations, so the ability to cheat the shutter speed upward to cut out a little more ambient light could prove huge in certain situations, such as the IUPUI Natatorium (below).

The manual for these units says mileage may vary with different flash equipment and different cameras. Therefore, I will need to finagle a test situation to figure out if I can squeeze, for example, 1/400 or 1/500 sync speed with my Canon 40D (1/250 stock sync speed), but every single click upward on the shutter speed is a win-win in helping to cut back the ambient light to eliminate ghost imaging in arena situations. And if I read the manual correctly, it will work my my existing PocketWizard Plus II's. This is extremely cool, as it will keep the cost of adoption down by only requiring me to purchase a MiniTT1 transmitter. I may be interested in a FlexTT5 tranceiver later, but that can wait since my interest in TTL operations ranges from limited to non-existent.