>> |
Anonymous
I'd buy it in an instant if I wanted a lens that wide. I'm very much one for normal focal lengths.
The slow lens doesn't really matter too much... it's designed for street, first of all. Some DoF is good for that.
Second, it's not that much of a limitation. Mike Johnston put it out pretty well here (http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2007/03/tales-of-self-obstruction-and-sigma-dp.html), talking about Sam Abell and his Kodachrome 25 and f/1.4 prime, which is the exact same as ISO 200 and f/4. Or someone whose work is more street-oriented: I know David Alan Harvey used Velvia 50 exclusively for his Cuba book, and an M6 with a 35/1.4, 28/2.8, and 50/1.4, primarily the 35/1.4. That would mean one would have to shoot at ISO 400 to get the same exposure as the 35/1.4 wide open. Not hard for an APS-C sensor. From there, any higher sensititives are only advantages. It also means that, for the same field of view, that at ISO 100 the Sigma will equal Harvey's 28/2.8. Huge benefits there.
It's a dedicated camera for street work and documentary photography where an SLR is too obtrusive in many cases, a cheap stand-in for a Leica M8. Not a jack-of-all-tricks replacement for an SLR. The only huge flaw with it is that the lens is too wide.
I do get a feeling, just from looking at the camera, that Sigma designed the lens around the body, and not the other way around, as it should be. It's physically a very small lens, which would explain its slow speed and short focal length. And the camera is small- 109x60x31- compared to even the 121x76x32 Leica CL, which is more than small enough for most people's purposes.
|