Nemorino said:

What are the red pieces at the wings? Has it been injured and bandaged?

Click to expand...

It’s a rare red-winged marsh harrier, a cousin of the red-winged blackbird.

AlanF said:

Marsh Harrier

Click to expand...

What are the red pieces at the wings? Has it been injured and bandaged?

Bob Howland said:

(Sigma doesn't make a 135 f/1.8, do they?)

Click to expand...

They don't yet have one for mirrorless but they had one for SLR.

Sigma is still working their way through their mirrorless ART primes with a few gaps remaining, including a 28/1.4, 40/1.4, 105/1.4, and 135/1.8. These are all lenses they had in the SLR era and will probably also release on mirrorless.

Quackator said:

If it is in the weight class of the Canon 1.8/200, I'm sold as soon as it appears in EF or RF mount.
Being a Sigma, it likely performs better than the EF 1.8/200 wide open and that is all I need.
I'd even prefer EF, so the mount converter with drop-in filters can be used.
Meike black mist all the way.....

Click to expand...

Sigma has been giving Sony a run for their money when it comes to minimizing lens weight. The Sigma 50/1.4 ART and 50/1.2 ART are both extremely compact and lightweight. The 500/5.6 is an absolute marvel of a lens, smaller and lighter than the Nikon 500/5.6 PF but without using PF or DO type optics. If Sigma does release a 200/1.8 I would expect it will be under 2kg, though probably not quite as light as Sony's 300/2.8GM which is an astonishing 1470g. (The old-school EF 200/1.8L was 3.2kg with its hood, about 3kg without.)

The bad news is that the chance of Canon allowing such a lens onto RF is basically zero.

Edit: The EF 200/1.8 and EF 200/2 both had drop-in filter holders. Sigma's new 300-600/4 does too, and their 800/5.6 and 300-800/5.6 from the SLR era did too. If they do bring out a 200/1.8 on mirrorless, I would expect it to have a drop-in filter too.

The video mentioned "high end portraiture." Twenty or thirty years ago, when Sports Illustrated did TV programs documenting the making of the swimsuit issue, the Canon version of this was the lens that was used. Earlier shows used the 300 f/2.8, handheld. Tiny, tiny depth of field. I still maintain that my 135 f/2 is a much, much better value. (Sigma doesn't make a 135 f/1.8, do they?)

David_B said:

That's what you might have expected due to the executive order signed back then. What actually happened is that the elimination of de minimis in Feb 2025 was reversed because it wasn't able to be implemented and will actually take effect from May 2025. Whether or not it gets reversed again because it can't be implemented is yet to be seen.

Click to expand...

Yes. That’s what I wrote. The exemption was eliminated then restored almost immediately.

blackcoffee17 said:

How is Sigma capable of producing so many lens models?

Click to expand...

An extremely well-managed factory.

tiggy@mac.com said:

I bet that's a heavy lens for its size, coming from Sigma. Still, I'd love to have something like that on RF. Would prefer Sigma over Canon if it meant being half the price. Would be the perfect woodcock mating season lens.

Click to expand...

Would a recreation of their 120-300 f/2.8 be as good or better for woodcocks?

I wonder what this will do to upcoming products - will this alter the features that go into products so that newer cameras can hit a lower price point (pre-tarriff) so that consumers can go back to buying $1000 cameras rather than $1400 cameras.

neuroanatomist said:

The de minimis (under $800) duty exemption was eliminated back in February. A couple of days later it was restored because Customs couldn’t deal with the volume.

Click to expand...

That's what you might have expected due to the executive order signed back then. What actually happened is that the elimination of de minimis in Feb 2025 was reversed because it wasn't able to be implemented and will actually take effect from May 2025. Whether or not it gets reversed again because it can't be implemented is yet to be seen.

David_B said:

For people buying from eBay, etc, a detail from this Trump movee that's not widely being reported on is that the previous $800 lower limit for duties is being abolished. What this means is that buying a lens from Japan directly on something like ebay for $500 would have been duty free a month ago, but if it were $2500, then it would be hit with duties. Now the $500 lens is hit with tarriffs & duties, just like the $2500 lens.

Click to expand...

The de minimis (under $800) duty exemption was eliminated back in February. A couple of days later it was restored because Customs couldn’t deal with the volume.

For people buying from eBay, etc, a detail from this Trump movee that's not widely being reported on is that the previous $800 lower limit for duties is being abolished. What this means is that buying a lens from Japan directly on something like ebay for $500 would have been duty free a month ago, but if it were $2500, then it would be hit with duties. Now the $500 lens is hit with tarriffs & duties, just like the $2500 lens.