Sigma Contemporary Trio for Fuji X

Clockwise from top left, the 16mm, 30mm, and 56mm
Sigma ƒ/1.4 Trio. Not to scale.

Just announced, the existing Sigma Contemporary "Trio" for Fujifilm X-mount.

The lenses are: the 16mm ƒ/1.4 DC DN Contemporary (24mm angle-of-view equivalent), the 30mm ƒ/1.4 DC DN Contemporary (45mm-e), and the 56mm ƒ/1.4 DC DN Contemporary (85mm-e).

The trio of basic fast primes is already available for Micro 4/3 (where the effective angles of view mimic longer lenses), Canon EF-M, Leica L, and Sony E. The Trio offers very high image quality, high speed, and surprisingly low price. In fact, for many people, the price is low enough that you might be able to try one just to see for yourself, or buy it on a lark. All three lenses together cost a little more than a thousand dollars. It's not nothing, but I looked at a Leica lens hood the other day, and the money for all three of these would buy you four of those.

The Trio lenses have been a big hit. On Fuji, the two questions you'll most need to ask yourself are, 1.) do I really need ƒ/1.4? (because otherwise they compete with the near-perfect Fujicrons), and, how are you going to feel about lenses on your Fujis that don't have aperture rings? (Sigma should try a trio of "Sigmacrons"—ƒ/2 primes with aperture rings—hmm.)

The perspective distortion in this screen-grab drives me a little batty as a still. But here they're to scale with each other.

If you do try them, I think you'll be surprised, if my experience with the 30mm is any indicator. (I bought the 30mm to do an OC/OL/OY that I haven't had the gumption [moxie? Sand? Bottle? Mettle? Pluck? Cheek? Grit?] to start yet.)

We have more new products to catch up with (looking at you, OM-1 and GH6), but L8r.

Mike

Book o' the Week

Ara Güler's Istanbul, one of the more amazing books in my collection. I'm also amazed it's still in print. Not only does it culminate a longtime habit and a vast body of work for the Turkish photographer of Armenian descent, one of the few world-famous photographers from Turkey—a labor of love—but it's a unique and wonderful example of bookmaking. If you don't buy this, at least see one sometime.

This book link is a portal to Amazon.

Today at B&H Photo

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Leon Droby: "As a sometimes Fujifilm user, no aperture ring is a deal breaker for me. The UI is a major reason I like using Fujifilm cameras. And controlling the aperture on the lens is a big part of the UI. Heck, on my Nikon Z, I configure the focus ring to adjust the aperture when using autofocus. Makes the Nikon just a little more 'Fuji like.'  ;-) "

darlene: "I do not need ƒ/1.4. When I want to play with a thin depth of field (usually an exercise in manual focus for me), I shoot my Nikon 50mm ƒ/1.2 as shown in this X-Pro2 + 50mm ƒ/1.2 image:

"One reason I chose Fuji cameras was for aperture rings on lenses. I know Sigma can make nice glass. I have a SD1 kit with nice lenses, but Fuji gives me what I want and allows me to choose what I need."

Rivki Locker: "The lenses look interesting and I’m thrilled that Fuji is opening up the field to third parties. That said, the two main reasons I bought into Fuji were for the tactile nature of the system (I love all the dials!) and for the size of the lenses. These just don’t check either of the boxes for me. I do realize I could assign the aperture to the rear dial, but last I tried that (with the Fuji 27mm lens) it was just too challenging to adapt my muscle memory when switching lenses. I’ll be sticking with my beloved Fuji 14mm, 18mm, 35mmƒ/1.4, and 56mm. All stellar lenses with the advantage of size and aperture dial."

Comments

[Albert Smith]

The lack of an aperture ring is a bit of a deal breaker for me. I like the Fujifilm old school layout that allows me to look down at the top of my camera and see the most important variables at a glance. And for me there is only one variable, the f-stop. I shoot in aperture priority and with auto-ISO, so I only control my aperture, and having to bring the camera to my eye to see what it is (hoping that I didn't inadvertently move the control wheel) doesn't work for me.

You are right about the max aperture. The only lens that might interest me is the 56mm. I have the Fujifilm 16mm f/1.4 and the 35mm f/1.4, but never pulled the trigger on the XF 56mm f/1.2 because the 50mm f/2 Fujicron gets the job done. I also have the 60mm f/2.4 that gets me great images that never leave me thinking, "if only less was in focus."

[Stan B.]

I'm still hoping for a small, Quality 18mm X-mount offering. If I want oversized lenses, I'll go full frame.

[Albert Smith]

Maybe of some interest to someone, this photo laden article came up in my newsfeeds featuring these lenses used on a Fujifilm X-T4 for a travel piece. It's produced by Sigma, so it is pretty positive.

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/magazine/m_series/others-lenses/fujifilm-x-mount/nicolas_datiche/

[robert e]

". . . gumption [moxie? Sand? Bottle? Mettle? Pluck? Cheek? Grit?]"

I think you mean "chutzpah." ;)

[Steve Rosenblum]

Looks like a Sigma Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN for Fuji X has been confirmed as well.

[Moose]

"(I bought the 30mm to do an OC/OL/OY that I haven't had the gumption [moxie? Sand? Bottle? Mettle? Pluck? Cheek? Grit?]"

Foolishness, desire for self punishment, felt requirement to continue a practice taken on from others, and now not appropriate for my needs?

Perhaps you don't relish relinquishing all worldly ease and pleasure in order to live with purity in a cave in the desert?

Asceticism is not everyone's stairway to heaven. OC/OL/OY feels to me like hell on earth.

[As I said in the original article, "If you don't like this idea, no need to get all scornful or whimpery with me...you're solidly in the majority...." It's a blog. Yous takes what yous wants and leaves the rest. (I'm using the Brooklyn plural "you" there, because it's not just you, but everybody.) --Mike]

[Peter Wright]

I use these three lenses on my Leica CL. They are a perfect complement to the trio of Leica CL zooms that are very high quality optically and mechanically, but have relatively slow max apertures.

I always find it interesting that as the Sigma lenses increase in optical length, they reduce in physical length. When I first got them I found for a while I was pulling out the 16mm when I wanted the 56mm and vice versa. (And yes, they are an incredible bargain!)

[Patrick Medd]

Tempting, but as you say I think I'll stick to my Fujicrons, I want that aperture ring, and the ability to slip all my lenses into a jacket pocket. My only issue with the Fujicrons in fact is that 50mm (75mm-e) is a bit too short and I would prefer an 85mm-e, which means that one day my resistance will break down and I'll buy myself the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 (with its aperture ring).

[James]

I already basically have these focal lengths covered with Fuji lenses. However, the lack of an aperture ring would rule them out for me. I have the shot the 30mm in a MFT mount. It's a very good lens. I just prefer my lenses to have aperture rings. That said the price on these is very good especially when you consider the quality. I think this is a great deal for Fuji. I have never linked lens adapters so this gives Fuji users more options without using an adapter which can only be good for the brand in general.

[Craig S]

Thanks for bringing the Güler book to my attention - I'm looking forward to its arrival, especially in light of you describing it as a "unique and wonderful example of bookmaking."

[Tom Burke]

I'm a big fan of Sigma's Contemporary range. That's based on just one lens, to be fair, the APS-C 17-70 f2.8-f4 which I've used on several Canon DSLRs for over a decade. Better, IMHO, than any of the Canon EF-S offerings. Most people just head straight for the Art lenses, which are indeed phenomenal, but also phenomenally sized and priced.

So yet another thing pushing me towards Fujifilm.....

[John Krumm]

I might get the 30mm just for the "wider normal" field of view. 35mm on aspc always feels a little tight to me. I have an older 60mm Sigma for M43 and it is exceptionally nice optically.

[Geoff Wittig]

A disappointment from Sigma.
The blunder of failing to include an aperture ring is incomprehensible to me, as the 'haptics' of the lovely Fuji cameras and lenses really is what the system is all about. Sigma's high-end Art lenses on Canon's D-SLRs remain my go-to portrait gear; they're optically wonderful. But Fuji's clumsy menus are a very poor substitute for an aperture ring.
I will have to pass.

[Daniel]

Chalk up another who is glad to see more lenses for Fuji=X cameras but won't purchase because of the missing aperture cotrol on them. The "feel" of the lens is part of the Fuji and going back and forth from it to the tiny scrolling wheel is not worth it - especially with gloves on in the cold.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

"Hadn't the sand to start" is a phrase I'm not familiar with. The other variants, sure, they don't mean exactly the same thing of course but any one of them, or several of them (since human motivation is seldom simple) could apply to your situation.

["Informal • North American:
firmness of purpose.
"No one has the sand to stand against him." --Oxford Languages

Must have come from "grit," maybe? --Mike]

I've got this range pretty well covered already, though with slower lenses. I certainly would appreciate f/1.4; even back in full-frame I liked f/1.4, though sometimes (surprisingly rarely) the depth of field was a problem. Now, in Micro Four Thirds, DoF is even less of a problem at any given aperture and field of view.

(One of the main distinguishing characteristics of Old School photographers—we think depth of field is something that, most often, we want more of!)

An aperture ring on the lens is much less convenient than a primary control dial on the body for aperture. Which is the norm for any serious modern camera, they have 2 primary control wheels and in manual mode those control aperture and shutter speed. (The lack of really good support for messing with ISO for each photo is one of my big long-standing complaints. Auto ISO only partly handles that.) Sure, I had to get used to the two-wheel way of controlling exposure, but I did that more than a decade ago, I think a full 2. It was clearly better.

[Richard Tugwell]

Got to agree with all the featured comments and others regarding dials and aperture rings. I have a pretty comprehensive Fuji system (most of the lenses bought early on in 2015/16) and I can say that I hardly ever use the menus, probably only to format the SD card

[Steve Biro]

(Sigma should try a trio of "Sigmacrons"—ƒ/2 primes with aperture rings—hmm.)

Mike... Sigma has produced a line of f/2.0 "Sigmacrons" in L-mount and FE-mount. There's a 20mm, a 24mm, a 35mm and a 65mm. All f/2.0. There's also a line of slightly smaller but very similar lenses: a 24mm f/3.5, a 45mm f/2.8 and a 90mm f/2.8. All of these lenses feature aperture rings and some kind of weather resistance - a gasket at the mount at the very least. They're all priced in the $600-700 range, though.

[TC]

At some point manufacturers gave up on the idea of making mirrorless cameras and lenses small and light, and it seems everything once again is getting larger and heavier and, dare I say, less useful. But I'm glad that these big new lenses are coming out because it lead to enough of a price drop that I could pick up an original Fujinon 35mm f1.4 for cheap. Small enough on an XE4 to fit in my jacket pocket, aperture ring, and lovely rendering. Nothing else quite like it, and it doesn't seem as if Fuji or anyone else is interested in doing something like that again.

[Thomas Mc Cann]

Hadn't the sand to start
In Anthony Trollopes book 'Is He Popenjay' one character is described as having no pith. I though that a delghtful, descriptive, expression