An APSC 16-45mm f/1.8 would be a proper 24-70mm for us crop sensor users. I wonder if that will ever be possible without weighing the same as a fire extinguisher.
28-45 is really a weird choice. Still love my Sigma 65mm F2 DG DN which is also kind of an abnormal focal length - but it is so crisp and lets me keep a little more distance while shooting streetart at night. Together with the Sony 20mm F1.8 for architecture and more interesting perspectives they are a perfect match for my A7III. I feel no need for a zoom-lens right now and also love how little to no distortion prime lenses have ❤
+1 for that lens combo… those (along with the Samyang 135 1.8) are some of the best value primes on the market. And the size is perfectly paired to a mirrorless body
A small quibble: "floating element" does not usually refer to an element that can clunk around. That element is like that because of image stabilization. It does kind if "float" in the way you are thinking; but the term "floating element" is historically something completely different: an element that shifts forwards or backwards at different rates than the other elements during focusing. Such elements have to be _extremely precisely distanced_ and don't wobble or clunk.
Don‘t. Talking from experience…Sony‘s camera support - or better lack there of - is a let down. And they continue to exclude third party lenses from features, e.g breathing compensation, high speed frame rate shooting etc..
Lumix S5II is a better camera for photographers, if you want to get into maximum nuance and a company that frequently upgrades the body firmware like stacking LUTS! Use LUTs to cook your own JPEGs to taste. A camera Ansel Adams would love!
That is a chunky lens! Not on the radar for me (APS-C only) but impressive, including the weight! Another enjoyable video, nonetheless, thanks, Arthur.
this can be a good combo with 85mm (replacing 35 in 35/85).. I have 35/85 combo, but sometimes I have problem with 35 that not enough wide to capture group in small space, cramped space. this 28-45 will solve that.
@@luismoracmyk but the internal zoom is what really I love. It feels more robust compared to extended barrel zoom. I wish this 28-45 has no dust issue like 24-70 DGDN v1
I have the Sony a9ii camera and do use it for a lot of my day to day stuff including static high speed photos and birds in flight etc. This lens i think would be a good match for the a9ii, especially given what the a9ii was made for!! Thanks for reviewing Arthur and greetings from the south coast uk
I have the Sigma 28mm 1.4 and 40mm 1.4. They are based on their cinema lenses for dslr and upgraded to L mount for mirrorless. They are both exceptional quality optics. So the new lens appeals as it's two in one and the 40mm is large as it is anyway. These focal lengths are very favoured by me and perhaps the new lens is aimed more at videography due to the short range. Sigma just do mad and weird things occasionally and sometimes utterly brilliant too. The image quality I get for the low cost is phenomenal to me. I come from medium format film mostly and before that 4x5, but these digital cameras today are now superb imaging tools and I am very happy to switch. More madness is good in my book.
Long ago I owned a (full frame) Tamron 20-35, one that received raving reviews and was quite expensive, but turned out rather disappointing, mainly because of lens flare and ghosting. The same would probably happen if Sigma chooses to build a 24-45 or 20-45 lens. Mathematically this combination doesn't seem to work if you want to avoid flare, barrel distortion, vignetting etc. For that reason I fully understand and appreciate Sigma's choice. They have built a lens that doesn't compromise anywhere across the focal range. The 28-45 range makes more sense than you might think.
If it were 24-35 it would be an excellent social event lens, hitting 24mm, 28mm & 35mm. As it is, I would still need to carry a 24 1.4 so it’s a hard pass.
Strange. If I were a wedding photographer, and was based on the full frame, this is exactly the lens I would need. Just like i think Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f1.7 must be in MFT environment.
I'm mixed on this, the throw is short. But at weddings probably 28 gives enough-ish width (certainly when you have to photograph like 4 people who suddenly want their group shot taken), while 45mm gives you a tight enough crop for run and gun and portraits. Probably they really quickly should put out a 45-85mm partner for this. Still, apart from being MFT, the Lumix Leica 10-25 1.7 is a much more versatile lens (it's just that you are then stuck working on a G9).
That is a M4/3 lens! That is in no way giving you similar results to this. The M4/3 crop factor is 2, so really that is equivalent to a 20-50mm f/3.4 on full frame.
@@Eikenhorst yes, understood, I've used it. And a FF 20-50 would be preferable. And the lens is f1.7 with a DOF equivalent to f3.4, it is still an F1.7. I am simply making a comparison of useful focal lengths and in this case 28-45mm is a weird one.
Thank you. I recommend trying this with a modern Sony body that has the most advanced auto focus like an A7CII or A7RV or even a A9iII to see if it can keep up with the AF speed of those systems. The A7C is no its target market IMHO. That is what I want to know that I did not learn in this review. Everything else was great. Take care.
Follow up: You should compare it to Canon’s RF 28-70mm f/2 L since that is a lens I hear that Sony is looking to release later this year. The Canon version is 1430 grams. The Sony 135mm f/1.8 is exactly the same 950 grams but physically smaller. I use that lens on a A7RV and A1. Take care.
Sigma - I'm starting to love this company. They seem to adhere to various photo needs. Compact lenses? You got it. Super fast primes/zooms? Got it too. Add to that the consistency in design (not stupid white/bright colors) - aperture rings, buttons and what not. Pricing is also fair. I have a 24/3.5 (chosen by size) and it's great, thinking about 90/2.8.
17mm zoom range isn't much. I'm not sure what the advantage is over a prime. I would rather have two small and light primes. but a 35 to 85 f1.8 portrait zoom would be cool.
til this day some of my best pics were with a sigma art canon lens mounted to my a7sii. i cant tell you why. but man it was perfect. with a canon body my pics were good to. but that combo was just different
To answer your question: anyone who wants a setup which is half this size...ie normal. The Nikon Z 28-400mm isn’t much bigger! This clearly shows what is possible with lens design, either a short focal length range with a large aperture or visa-versa, but not both.
Renders very nicely with dimensionality, but it needs more CA's to really make the 3D effect. Very sharp for the next generation 90mp sensors probably.
woah!!! looks like they used the same glass that they made the 18-35 with "chefs kiss" perfection ... there's good reason the 18-35 is the best zoom ever made ... this lens is now on my fathers day wishlist lol .. GREAT REVIEW AS ALWAYS
Primes are for those situations where you can control the scene, eg walking towards or away from the subject. As you cannot alight from a vehicle to shoot lion, hippo or crocodile, we here in South Africa 🇿🇦 use zoom lenses. And that awesome 24-105 f4 L from Canon does it all, except when you need a reach north of 600mm. Then the 200-800 should suffice.
Just way too big. I use primes to carry a light setup. Rather take a 28 and 35 or 50 and switch once in a while than carry this beast. Nice for professionals though
I wonder if a prime 35mm 1.4 can be used instead of this heavy 28-45mm 1.8. I understand 35mm is not 28mm and not 45mm but I think 35mm 1.4 prime with few steps back and forth can do pretty much what this lens can do in lighter and brighter body. I think if Sigma made 20-50mm or 20-60mm 2.8 kind of like Tamron with longer end, I would be all over it.
So.. Some things to clear up. The Sigma 18-35 f1.8 was never for sony e mounts. Also there are absolutely no f1.8 zooms for the sony e mount ecosystem either, this is the first. A little weird that you didn't mention this as you've always been a Sony APSC channel. Sometimes it just feels like creators are just pushing out any type content now, and the information isn't always there anymore.
Very special purpose lens. Not really wide angle and not really great for portraits either, something in the middle with very high aperture. Maybe good for some indoor things (indoor architecture with few light) or some outdoor things at night.
Not really. 28mm is usually not quite wide enough from hotel rooms, suites for bridal prep shots, there's no real need for f1.8 as the light is sufficient when opening up blinds/windows. Hardly any zoom or compression for that lens. I don't see the value at all.
@@danieldreams222 you are not probably good at photography if you say this :-D . Love my Sony 20 G on wedding shots. Simply you need to know how work with it
Nice and light too! 😅 Would never do this. wrong compromise for a zoom. Barely any range. Barely goes wide. Mostly wide-normal.... Weighs about at much as a toaster oven. I don't really consider 1.8 to be a bokeh monster at anything with those focal lengths.
I bought my 18-35mm sigma for $600 in 2017. If this is the "spiritual successor" to that, why in the ever loving crap is its more than TWICE that price now?!?! Holy frick.
FF lenses are typical double or even triple the price of APSC lenses. Cost aside, I think the manufacturers understand that FF shooters are more willing to fork out a bigger chunk of cash for lenses hence they jack up their profit margins within that niche.
An APSC 16-45mm f/1.8 would be a proper 24-70mm for us crop sensor users. I wonder if that will ever be possible without weighing the same as a fire extinguisher.
That lens would be so popular if they made it and at a small-ish size.
If there was one like this, many other lenses would not be sold. I don't think this is intended!
it can be done but only F2 onwards
would be too big. if you want an apsc zoom take the 18-50 already available 2.8 is more than enough
Tamron 17-70mm would be a better fit. But this would be cool on a apsc body
28-45 is really a weird choice. Still love my Sigma 65mm F2 DG DN which is also kind of an abnormal focal length - but it is so crisp and lets me keep a little more distance while shooting streetart at night. Together with the Sony 20mm F1.8 for architecture and more interesting perspectives they are a perfect match for my A7III. I feel no need for a zoom-lens right now and also love how little to no distortion prime lenses have ❤
they cant do 24-70... they have to preserved longevity for 24mm 50mm etc
Between this Sigma 28-45 and Sony 35/1.4 I would take Sony on any day. There isn't even any question about it.
+1 for that lens combo… those (along with the Samyang 135 1.8) are some of the best value primes on the market. And the size is perfectly paired to a mirrorless body
A small quibble: "floating element" does not usually refer to an element that can clunk
around. That element is like that because of image stabilization. It does kind if "float" in the way you are thinking; but the term "floating element" is historically something completely different: an element that shifts forwards or backwards at different rates than the other elements during focusing. Such elements have to be _extremely precisely distanced_ and don't wobble or clunk.
I am actually tempted to buy a sony camera just for this lens.
It comes in L Mount too if you would like a proper camera ;-)
Don‘t. Talking from experience…Sony‘s camera support - or better lack there of - is a let down. And they continue to exclude third party lenses from features, e.g breathing compensation, high speed frame rate shooting etc..
Lumix S5II is a better camera for photographers, if you want to get into maximum nuance and a company that frequently upgrades the body firmware like stacking LUTS! Use LUTs to cook your own JPEGs to taste. A camera Ansel Adams would love!
Sigma also released a 24-35 f/2.0 for full frame soon after the 18-35 f/1.8
A 20-45/2.0 and a 45-135/2.0 would be a dream combo. I could take the weight and expense happily.
Sigma need to revive their old 24-135mm lens. I would be perfectly happy if it were f/2.8 all the way.
Best we got is 35-150 F2-2.8 so actually 16-35 F2 zoom would be perfect to complement that xDDD Then for wildlife some 150-600, and you good xD
My neck and my back needs them
0:01 sigma sigma sigma!!!!!!!!!! WHAT THE SIGMA 🗿🗿🗿🗿
Thx for the review, it's really unique lens!
I'd like to see the comparison with prime lenses to see if the difference is dramatic.
That is a chunky lens! Not on the radar for me (APS-C only) but impressive, including the weight! Another enjoyable video, nonetheless, thanks, Arthur.
I just got the viltrox 27mm f1.2 and I wonder how it will compare to the 28mm focal length in this sigma he’s using. In terms of sharpness.
this can be a good combo with 85mm (replacing 35 in 35/85).. I have 35/85 combo, but sometimes I have problem with 35 that not enough wide to capture group in small space, cramped space. this 28-45 will solve that.
18-35mm 1.8 makes much more sense
@@luismoracmyk but but 45mm reach is as closer to 50mm feel. This combo is like carrying primes of 28, 35, 50ish, & 85….
@@luismoracmyk but the internal zoom is what really I love. It feels more robust compared to extended barrel zoom. I wish this 28-45 has no dust issue like 24-70 DGDN v1
Sigma is kicking butt. Good job! I would have appreciated seeing the camera settings for each shot you presented, especially exposure settings.
I have the Sony a9ii camera and do use it for a lot of my day to day stuff including static high speed photos and birds in flight etc. This lens i think would be a good match for the a9ii, especially given what the a9ii was made for!! Thanks for reviewing Arthur and greetings from the south coast uk
You are right this is the full frame version of the 18-35 f1.8 , I hope to get one used in two years 😢😅
There is also a 24-35 f/2.0 for full frame that was released soon after the 18-35 f/1.8
Would love a 35mm-85mm f/1.8 for portraits. Would be more compact too.
I thought it would be aps-c but FF is huge
This lens is on my radar!
This on the A7CR can be 28-45 at 61mp or 42-68 at 26mp in crop mode. What a true ART setup.
I have the Sigma 28mm 1.4 and 40mm 1.4. They are based on their cinema lenses for dslr and upgraded to L mount for mirrorless. They are both exceptional quality optics. So the new lens appeals as it's two in one and the 40mm is large as it is anyway. These focal lengths are very favoured by me and perhaps the new lens is aimed more at videography due to the short range. Sigma just do mad and weird things occasionally and sometimes utterly brilliant too. The image quality I get for the low cost is phenomenal to me. I come from medium format film mostly and before that 4x5, but these digital cameras today are now superb imaging tools and I am very happy to switch. More madness is good in my book.
I have the 40 1.4 too. I sold my a7ii but continue to use it for my a6000. Ridiculously sharp but big and heavy as hell. I use it for portraits.
Long ago I owned a (full frame) Tamron 20-35, one that received raving reviews and was quite expensive, but turned out rather disappointing, mainly because of lens flare and ghosting.
The same would probably happen if Sigma chooses to build a 24-45 or 20-45 lens. Mathematically this combination doesn't seem to work if you want to avoid flare, barrel distortion, vignetting etc. For that reason I fully understand and appreciate Sigma's choice. They have built a lens that doesn't compromise anywhere across the focal range.
The 28-45 range makes more sense than you might think.
The 28-45 range is very small, not wortwhile in many cases, besides it start at 28, that`s not good.
Sigma made a 24-35mm f2 for DSLR's, and it's a superb lens. It's like a trio of primes.
Hey Arthur, What are those two lights behind you?
I found these on amazon and so far so good! amzn.to/3VqWba3
If it were 24-35 it would be an excellent social event lens, hitting 24mm, 28mm & 35mm. As it is, I would still need to carry a 24 1.4 so it’s a hard pass.
This is why i love sigma
Strange. If I were a wedding photographer, and was based on the full frame, this is exactly the lens I would need. Just like i think Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f1.7 must be in MFT environment.
A two camera pairing with this lens and an 85mm f1.4 or f1.8 would be excellent for weddings.
@@raksh9 exactly!That's exactly what I've meant.
I'm mixed on this, the throw is short. But at weddings probably 28 gives enough-ish width (certainly when you have to photograph like 4 people who suddenly want their group shot taken), while 45mm gives you a tight enough crop for run and gun and portraits. Probably they really quickly should put out a 45-85mm partner for this. Still, apart from being MFT, the Lumix Leica 10-25 1.7 is a much more versatile lens (it's just that you are then stuck working on a G9).
That is a M4/3 lens! That is in no way giving you similar results to this. The M4/3 crop factor is 2, so really that is equivalent to a 20-50mm f/3.4 on full frame.
@@Eikenhorst yes, understood, I've used it. And a FF 20-50 would be preferable. And the lens is f1.7 with a DOF equivalent to f3.4, it is still an F1.7. I am simply making a comparison of useful focal lengths and in this case 28-45mm is a weird one.
I was hoping for something in the 35-85mm range with maybe f/1.8 or variable up to f/2 f/2.8 for example.
There are two lenses from Tamron and Samyang, both 35-150mm f/2-2.8
I know
This or Sigma 30mm 1.4 for APSC?
You know it costs 1350$ right? Now check 30. Its laughably expensive for such a limited range.
The Sony 35mm F/1.4 is only 1000 and a much better choice
Excellent as usual!!!
Thank you. I recommend trying this with a modern Sony body that has the most advanced auto focus like an A7CII or A7RV or even a A9iII to see if it can keep up with the AF speed of those systems. The A7C is no its target market IMHO. That is what I want to know that I did not learn in this review. Everything else was great. Take care.
Follow up: You should compare it to Canon’s RF 28-70mm f/2 L since that is a lens I hear that Sony is looking to release later this year. The Canon version is 1430 grams. The Sony 135mm f/1.8 is exactly the same 950 grams but physically smaller. I use that lens on a A7RV and A1. Take care.
Sigma - I'm starting to love this company. They seem to adhere to various photo needs. Compact lenses? You got it. Super fast primes/zooms? Got it too. Add to that the consistency in design (not stupid white/bright colors) - aperture rings, buttons and what not. Pricing is also fair. I have a 24/3.5 (chosen by size) and it's great, thinking about 90/2.8.
This reminds me of the Sigma 24-35 f2 and I LOVE that lens. This one is a winner.
Neither is a winner, depending on how much you pay for it. Sigma 24-35 cost me $400 used. This 28-45 would drop below $950 soon.
"Big company with big bokeh balls". 😆 nice one there @arthur. Great review as always. Loved it.
They should make an 18-50 f1.8
That would be incredible. I could replace 3 lenses with that one.
It be HUGE.
nah why don't they make 10- 300 f1.8...
Would save you the money for your gym contract as well.
@@zaiENT1 But then why not just make an 8mm-500mm F1.2? 🤣
lol Camera Conspiracies Kasey is definitly most likely probably, sure, not a fan of the Sigma 18-35. Not enough 3D Pop for the cinema master!
He is definitely not a fan, but he does acknowledge that it is a good lens. I would say his praise is more subdued.
how do you feel about the weight of this lens in an a7c style body
17mm zoom range isn't much. I'm not sure what the advantage is over a prime. I would rather have two small and light primes. but a 35 to 85 f1.8 portrait zoom would be cool.
til this day some of my best pics were with a sigma art canon lens mounted to my a7sii. i cant tell you why. but man it was perfect. with a canon body my pics were good to. but that combo was just different
What you cannot do with 35mm 1.8 prime that you can do with this one?
Zoom ;)
@@Eikenhorst Right.. 2 steps forward and 2 step back. Here is your zoom with this lens.
@@olegvorkunov5400 Yea, I get that the reach is more that a little underwhelming, but you asked ;)
Thanks! Beautiful pictures. 👍🏼
I liked seeing Arthur’s pet spider
To answer your question: anyone who wants a setup which is half this size...ie normal. The Nikon Z 28-400mm isn’t much bigger! This clearly shows what is possible with lens design, either a short focal length range with a large aperture or visa-versa, but not both.
Impressive build but that’s got to be one of the least appealing focal ranges I can think of. Looking forward to a wider version
Sigma had a 50-100mm f1.8 Art for afpc. I used that on my first camera the canon 70D. With no stabilizer it was tough to use.
Renders very nicely with dimensionality, but it needs more CA's to really make the 3D effect. Very sharp for the next generation 90mp sensors probably.
woah!!! looks like they used the same glass that they made the 18-35 with "chefs kiss" perfection ... there's good reason the 18-35 is the best zoom ever made ... this lens is now on my fathers day wishlist lol .. GREAT REVIEW AS ALWAYS
Hey Arthur r❤❤❤ I’m from Bangladesh I have a question Sony a7cii camera for bird and wildlife photography please please make a video for this camera
15-60mm F/2 would be glorious
Primes are for those situations where you can control the scene, eg walking towards or away from the subject. As you cannot alight from a vehicle to shoot lion, hippo or crocodile, we here in South Africa 🇿🇦 use zoom lenses. And that awesome 24-105 f4 L from Canon does it all, except when you need a reach north of 600mm. Then the 200-800 should suffice.
so considering an apsc camera this lens would be equivalent to a 44.8-72 mm if I'm not mistaken ?
42-67.5 ish mm
Just way too big. I use primes to carry a light setup. Rather take a 28 and 35 or 50 and switch once in a while than carry this beast. Nice for professionals though
This lens takes up less space if you would carry the 3 listes primes in a bag.
@@Tapirrr I don't care about bag weight, we all went to school at one point carrying books and what not. I care about weight & size on my camera.
Does the af make lots of noise in video?
Need a 24_105 mm F2.8_F4 variable. Small and compact
How is the sharpness compared to the Sony 35 1.4 gm or maybe the sigma 50 1.2?
Sony 35 1.4 gm is clear winner
Thank you Arthur
The spider then the wife’s expression lol nicely curated 😂 Sigma really is something else. Interesting option for some
Do front and rear elements move when focusing? Thanks.
does this lens balance on the rs3 mini gimbal?
We need this for Canon RF!
canon already have 28-70 f2, with even more range cover
Bow this lens perform on apsc? Like fx30?
from tests it has better results on APSC than FF
aren’t DG lenses full frame and DC APSC?
Yes.
Impressive option
I am still waiting for Sigma to start making Nikon Z Mount lenses. I have several F-Mount, and they are all VERY good.
am going to buy it for sure and i think its perfect
Awesome review. I will be keeping my Tamron G2 through. =) It works so well on my A6700. So much better than the 17-70.
Sigma, we need more similar lenses, please next make 50-52 f1.4
I have Canon lens that is 28-105 f2.8, lighter weight. Why can't they duplicate the original lenses that were made previously.
Geometry is different.
Subscribed right after you showed Camera Conspiracies. 😂
18-35 would have been a better focal range. With that and something like a Tamron 35-150 in your bag, you have a whole lot covered.
I'm like the spider. Always on the web(hehe)
Not wide enough for landscape, not long enough for portraits. What’s it supposed to do?
Here I thought there were more than 2 styles of photography. Silly me.
Great sigma lens.. Sigma always leads the lens frontier.. 😊
sigma can you make 35-70 ?
Wait did Sigma make you all sign NDAs that ended today (cus everyone posted their video on this lens at midnight)?
Great Video
18-35 1.8 and 50-80 1.8 would be the best combo.
HOLY SHIT! That s a dream
Sigma! Get this on the Canon RF mount!
i am convinced...
what is the filter diameter ?
Looks like 82mm (saw it printed on the side)
I love Camera Conspiracies lmao
I wonder if a prime 35mm 1.4 can be used instead of this heavy 28-45mm 1.8. I understand 35mm is not 28mm and not 45mm but I think 35mm 1.4 prime with few steps back and forth can do pretty much what this lens can do in lighter and brighter body. I think if Sigma made 20-50mm or 20-60mm 2.8 kind of like Tamron with longer end, I would be all over it.
My theory is that intended for use in events where sometimes the crowd limits your ability to move forward or back easily
Sharper than sigma 40mm f1.4 ?
So.. Some things to clear up. The Sigma 18-35 f1.8 was never for sony e mounts. Also there are absolutely no f1.8 zooms for the sony e mount ecosystem either, this is the first. A little weird that you didn't mention this as you've always been a Sony APSC channel. Sometimes it just feels like creators are just pushing out any type content now, and the information isn't always there anymore.
Very special purpose lens. Not really wide angle and not really great for portraits either, something in the middle with very high aperture. Maybe good for some indoor things (indoor architecture with few light) or some outdoor things at night.
Yeah it's weird. Barely any zoom or compression, and not wide enough for a lot of applications.
even if it can compare to my primes lens, that giant lens cannot replace my f/2.8 lenses 😀
btw good review
3:46 A big company with big bokeh balls.
Amazing Lens but dang it's huge.
I think this is a wedding photographer lens. Better than the tam 35-150
For events it’s nearly perfect. And would complement a 70-200 2.8 nicely
Not really. 28mm is usually not quite wide enough from hotel rooms, suites for bridal prep shots, there's no real need for f1.8 as the light is sufficient when opening up blinds/windows. Hardly any zoom or compression for that lens. I don't see the value at all.
@@jspau annything wider than 28 and youstart to really get some odd looks IMO
@@danieldreams222 odd looks?
@@danieldreams222 you are not probably good at photography if you say this :-D . Love my Sony 20 G on wedding shots. Simply you need to know how work with it
Interesting lens, but 28-45 is a strange range. 18-35 has more sens for me in that kind of lens.
This is a full frame lens.
I prefer a new version of the apsc 18-35 1.8 but E mount 🎉
I think they should have done at the very least 28-70. Just like canon and leave it at f2
with sonys breathing comp, this is roughly a 50...
That's only for Sony lenses...
Yup, breathing compensation only for native Sony lenses.
still waiting for a 10-1000mm f/1.4
What-the-Sigma?
Nice and light too! 😅
Would never do this. wrong compromise for a zoom. Barely any range. Barely goes wide. Mostly wide-normal.... Weighs about at much as a toaster oven. I don't really consider 1.8 to be a bokeh monster at anything with those focal lengths.
16-35mm f1.8 or a 50-85mm f1.8
I don't see the benefits of this lens over say a single 28mm or 35mm 1.8 prime tbh.
"a big company with big bokeh balls..." LMAO. This wins all the reviews.
I bought my 18-35mm sigma for $600 in 2017. If this is the "spiritual successor" to that, why in the ever loving crap is its more than TWICE that price now?!?! Holy frick.
It's called money printing. Inflation. Theft by government of your work
FF lenses are typical double or even triple the price of APSC lenses. Cost aside, I think the manufacturers understand that FF shooters are more willing to fork out a bigger chunk of cash for lenses hence they jack up their profit margins within that niche.