[24X36NOW]

The 150 Macro OS isn't being made in PK mount, nor the 12-24 II lens. Highly unlikely that the 180 Macro OS will be, either. Might as well not get too excited about new Sigma lenses, since unless the market share hemorrhaging that Pentax has been doing stops, there won't be many new Sigma lenses in PK mount. This is the unfortunate result of years (and years) of "bottom feeding" in the marketplace. :ugh:

[fs999]

B+H didn't read your post... New Sigma 180mm F2.8 Macro

[dasuhu]

B+H didn't read your post... New Sigma 180mm F2.8 Macro

I had the Sigma 150mm macro on pre-order from Adorama for several months, before Adorama finally cancelled the order. So listing of new Sigma lens for k mount on a reputable dealer site like Adorama or B&H means little, in my opinion.

[24X36NOW]

B+H didn't read your post... New Sigma 180mm F2.8 Macro

There's a lot of "placeholders" for new Sigma lenses that haven't been introduced in K-mount - it doesn't mean a thing. Sigma has been making fewer and fewer K-mount lenses, and the high end stuff in particular has been eliminated. Your chance of seeing the OS versions of the macro lenses and the 120-300 in PK mount absent a Pentax FF camera coming out to generate some actual interest in the brand is essentially zero. The writing is on the wall and the exodus of third party lens support is a reflection of that.

I had the Sigma 150mm macro on pre-order from Adorama for several months, before Adorama finally cancelled the order. So listing of new Sigma lens for k mount on a reputable dealer site like Adorama or B&H means little, in my opinion.

Agreed. It means nothing, actually. B&H lists the 120-300 f 2.8 OS in PK mount as well. Sigma didn't even make the NON-OS version of that lens in PK mount.

[atlnq9]

I have no doubt that if Pentax releases a FF camera you will see a lot of these higher end Sigma lenses for K mount. There will be a huge market for them since there is no way Pentax can bring there level of selection of FF lenses at release.

[24X36NOW]

I have no doubt that if Pentax releases a FF camera you will see a lot of these higher end Sigma lenses for K mount. There will be a huge market for them since there is no way Pentax can bring there level of selection of FF lenses at release.

Agreed. That's the only way you'll see those lenses in PK mount. Sigma has been the slowest at "pulling the plug," of the third party lens makers, but they presently seem to be in a "wait and see" mode. It's up to Pentax to nudge things in the right direction now, rather than continue the APS-C-only "funeral procession" of the K-mount.

[reeftool]

Minimum focusing distance of almost half a meter sounds like it would be a bit troublesome to work with?

It really depends on what you're shooting and how you use it. Most of my macro/close ups are shot from a kayak on the water so a longer macro lens like this works perfectly fine. I probably wouldn't shoot many macros wide open with that narrow DOF but it's nice to have it. It's probably pretty useful for anything else you would use a telephoto of this size for.

[eurostar]

I have no doubt that if Pentax releases a FF camera you will see a lot of these higher end Sigma lenses for K mount. There will be a huge market for them since there is no way Pentax can bring there level of selection of FF lenses at release.

Usually FF take around 5% of the sales of a brand (Leica not included). If there are not enough APS-C cameras to justify bringing some lenses to market now, how could the 5% of the same number?

[civiletti]

Usually FF take around 5% of the sales of a brand (Leica not included). If there are not enough APS-C cameras to justify bringing some lenses to market now, how could the 5% of the same number?

Pentax sells only two APS-C models, and many Pentax users have several FF lenses already. A Pentax FF body would sell much more than 5% of Pentax's total, IMO.

[ElJamoquio]

Usually FF take around 5% of the sales of a brand (Leica not included). If there are not enough APS-C cameras to justify bringing some lenses to market now, how could the 5% of the same number?

hint... why is Leica not included in your number?

I dunno, but it seems to me like APS-C is going to bleed market share. FF sensors will take some from above and smaller ILC's will take it from below.

[atlnq9]

Usually FF take around 5% of the sales of a brand (Leica not included). If there are not enough APS-C cameras to justify bringing some lenses to market now, how could the 5% of the same number?

How many apsc camera users can justify the price of lenses such as the 120-300, 12-24 (which there are cheaper crop sensor lenses for), and say this 180 macro (the 100 macro already gives apsc users the equivalent of 150mm compared to FF at a fraction of the cost; this lens will not likely come in under 2k), etc.? These are already small market share targeted lenses so the comparison to FF sales isn't very applicable.

[RXrenesis8]

... the 100 macro already gives apsc users the equivalent of 150mm compared to FF at a fraction of the cost ...

With macro it doesn't work out quite so daintily. With a lens like this one of the primary reasons for buying it over a 50 or 100mm 1:1 macro is its greater working distance.

[Digitalis]

How many apsc camera users can justify the price of lenses such as the 120-300, 12-24 (which there are cheaper crop sensor lenses for), and say this 180 macro (the 100 macro already gives apsc users the equivalent of 150mm compared to FF at a fraction of the cost; this lens will not likely come in under 2k), etc.? These are already small market share targeted lenses so the comparison to FF sales isn't very applicable.

I own a 100-300mm f/4 and it is very good, and very useful zoom range - I wonder what sigma was thinking when they discontinued it. I also own the 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro and again, it is an excellent lens...I doubt I will update to the current 180mm f/2.8 the difference between f/3.5 and f/2.8 isn't nearly big enough to deliver any meaningful advantage.


Sigma 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro - PEntax K10D ISO100@ f/16 1/180th

[atlnq9]

With macro it doesn't work out quite so daintily. With a lens like this one of the primary reasons for buying it over a 50 or 100mm 1:1 macro is its greater working distance.

Yes it is. If you target the exact same pespective with a FF and 150mm lens then you get the exact same working distance as apsc and 100mm. Look at as magnification to print not lens magnification.

I own a 100-300mm f/4 and it is very good, and very useful zoom range - I wonder what sigma was thinking when they discontinued it. I also own the 180mm f/3.5 APO EX Macro and again, it is an excellent lens...I doubt I will update to the current 180mm f/2.8 the difference between f/3.5 and f/2.8 isn't nearly big enough to deliver any meaningful advantage.

They probably couldn't support sales of the 100-300 and 120-300 so decided to drop the low end one as many FF shooters desire the 2.8 aperture. Was the 180 3.5 ever made in a OS version? Could be why they dropped it because with the design it couldn't be implemented. The 150mm and this new 180mm could... Lets face it Nikon and Canon are the driving forces for lens design from third parties. Nobody is designing lenses specific for Pentax except Pentax. All the versions for Pentax are just a retrofit from the Canon and Nikon designs. But doing the retrofit still has to be justified because it is an added cost. If they think to make it economical they need sell twice what would actually sell in real life they won't. More would sell for Pentax if they had a FF because Pentax doesn't have a good selection of FF lenses currently for sale. And there isn't a large enough surplus of them in the used market like for the 645D...

[RXrenesis8]

Look at as magnification to print not lens magnification.

This argument only works for subjects/scenes that you are photographing at less than 1:1. Everything smaller will be shot at the minimum working distance, or with some form of extension.