[Update: Pre-Order Now] Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art Bokeh Master Lens Pricing Is Here

[Update: Pre-Order Now] Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art Bokeh Master Lens Pricing Is Here

It should come as no surprise that Sigma's latest (and massive) 105mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art-series lens is cheaper than its Nikon equivalent. We already knew it would stay below $2,000, and now we finally have pricing for the new lens, which will ship in late June.

The Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art lens will ship for $1,599, representing a savings of roughly $600 compared to the Nikon's AF-S 105mm f/1.4E at $2,196.95. Pre-orders are not yet available, but must be imminent.

Of course, while both of these are the only 105mm f/1.4 lenses around (Nikon's was the first), they are by no means identical or equivalent. Until more people can test the Sigma version, either could be better in a different way. Sigma has at times been criticized for its focus issues (it's generally excellent, but not quite up to par and occasionally front- or back-focused before adjustments), but compared to Nikon's, its 105mm is nearly double the weight, extends about an inch further in each direction with a massive 105mm filter thread (82mm for the Nikon), features three more elements, and comes with a tripod collar and foot because you won't want to carry this too long at over 3.5 pounds.

It's safe to say these are two very different lenses; and the quality comparisons could easily go either way. For now, a decent middle play for those who can't wait might be to spring for a used Nikon 105mm f/1.4E for $1,849.95. Or will you wait?

Update: The lens is now available for pre-order and is set for delivery mid-June.

Log in or register to post comments


Wow thats amazing! I can't wait to get a hold of this lens. I thought it would be a lot more than this

Robert K Baggs's picture

I'd love to get a hands-on with this. If it's sharp wide-open, it'll be glorious to shoot in so many scenarios.

Reginald Walton's picture

I'd pay the extra $$ for the Nikon version and save my camera mount and arms from the weight of that behemoth.

Robert Nurse's picture

LOL! No IS, double the weight and an inch longer than the Nikon version? Yeah, I'd wait! I wonder if Canon has plans for such a thing.

Michael Kormos's picture

You generally don't need IS for f/1.4 lens.

Reginald Walton's picture

Not generally, but most 1.4 lenses don't weigh that much. :)

Marius Pettersen's picture

Looking forward to a time where Sigma learns how to produce quality optics in smaller package. Every ART-lens is bigger then the equivalent from Nikon and Canon, by my recollection. I'd love to try some Sigma glass, but I can't put anymore weight on my back, and I guess a lot of people feel the same.

They had discovered, that lenses are much better in the center and decided that “let’s make huge lenses, where center is equal in size to full frame”.

Tony Tumminello's picture

I'm curious if Tamron will follow suit as well. Tamron and Sigma seem to be in lockstep with a few lenses, and Tamron patented a 115mm f1.4 VR lens back in 2016 so maybe we'll see that pop up eventually.

Matt Rennells's picture

As long as you can deal with CA, then the 105mm f/2 DC lens for Nikon (from 1993 to 2016) is still an excellent choice for $1k. THAT's the bokeh master (along with it's 135 brother).

DJ Toman's picture

Shhhhh, don't let the secret out. Haha.

John Wolf's picture

What does 'CR' mean? TIA

Spy Black's picture

You mean CA? Chromatic Aberration.

Motti Bembaron's picture

Yes, that is going to be one heck of a lens for portraits. Too bad the Canadian dollar is in such bad shape, it will be almost $2,100 before tax :-(.

Just realized...it's 1.6kg????? That is way to much for me.

Sergio Tello's picture

I'll give this one a try, but I'll probably have to send it back like the rest. Except for the 85mm Art, that's a quality lens right there, it can actually autofocus correctly most of the time, unlike the rest of the Art lenses, here is looking at you 135mm Art. As long as I avoid certain angles to avoid the horrible CR, I can deal with the weight.

Ryan Mense's picture

Every time I see that side profile photo of it I think the image was resized all wrong in a photo editor and squished it.

Matt Williams's picture

Haha I think this exact same thing every time I see this thing

Spy Black's picture

Even if it isn't as sharp as the Nikkor if A) the optical quality is good enough regardless and B) if the AF is faster than the Nikkor's (and Sigma solve their overall focus issues), this will kill the Nikkor in bread 'n butter work.

Piotr Maksymowicz's picture

They should add tripod as a bonus. :))