As Leica Rumors originally reported, while there appears to be no official confirmation that the two lenses are the same, a close examination of the technical specifications indicates that they are: The construction of both the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art and the Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-70mm f/2.8 ASPH. share a lot in common.
Additionally, when lens diagrams are compared, the two appear to have an identical construction.
In the Sigma diagram, the parts that are outlined in red denote the aspherical elements, which match up with the labeled aspherical elements on the Leica diagram.
In a conversation with PetaPixel, Leica noted that it has a strong relationship with its L-mount alliance partners and that the Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-70mm f/2.8 ASPH. is made in Japan, but stops short of specifically saying that it is a Sigma lens at its core.
It’s hard to look at the technical specifications of both lenses and not walk away with the conclusion that they are identical. That said, Leica did make other changes to its iteration of the lens that differentiate it from the Sigma model.
For one, it uses an all-metal housing which may make it more resistant to the elements — weather resistance is a repeated theme of importance to Leica. Additionally, Leica removed all buttons and switches from the exterior of the lens — even the manual focus/autofocus switch — which means that can only be adjusted from the camera itself, but also may make for fewer weak points where moisture or dust could sneak in and damage the internals. Additionally, Leica’s lens hood is made of metal.
There are some other minor differences, too. While the Leica weighs more (no doubt due to the additional metal parts), Sigma states an 84.1 to 34.3-degree field of view while Leica states an 82.3 to 35.3-degree field of view. Leica also has published a 7.1-inch minimum focusing distance while Sigma states a 7.09-inch minimum focusing distance — minor, but different.
Leica also broadly states that all of its first-party lenses are better matches for one another even if the L-mount is shared among Panasonic, Sigma, and Leica. So while all the lenses in the L-mount alliance are compatible with one another, Leica contends that overall each of the brands’ optics will likely perform their best with a matching camera.
Even if Leica were to confirm that the two lenses are optically identical — which it doesn’t seem keen to do — it wouldn’t be out of character. Leica has worked with partners in the past to release new versions of what are basically re-housed versions of previously available products. For example, the V-Lux was a rehoused Panasonic FZ1000 and the D-Lux was a Leica rebrand of the Panasonic LX1000.
In the end, it might come down to aesthetics. The Leica might appeal to some more than the Sigma, at which point they will have to decide if the Leica is worth the additional $1,736 over the Sigma.
Making cameras is a tough gig. Every release demands to stand out from the crowd in some way. For the Sigma fp L, it’s turning heads by the remarkably compact size and resolution-dense full-frame sensor. Is it enough?
The Sigma fp L is barely wider than the lenses that get attached to it and sports a whopping 61-megapixel full-frame backside-illuminated sensor. It shares many of its other design aspects with the previous 24-megapixel fp model that debuted in 2019, and both have staked their claim as being the smallest and lightest full-frame cameras available today. With an increase of megapixels comes an increase in price, and the fp L is $800 more expensive at the time of publication: $2,500.
Build Quality and Design
When I first unboxed the Sigma fp L, I was immediately surprised at how great it looked and felt. It’s a compact-sized camera, but unlike any other small camera I’ve used, there’s some heft-to-size ratio happening which triggers my caveman brain into thinking it feels high quality. All the materials feel really nice as well, including the matte finish and the faux leather on the grip side. Almost all the buttons and switches have satisfying clicks, and the top dial has just the right amount of tension. There are two exceptions with the review unit I borrowed: the rear dial is a little sloppy for my taste and the down button on this dial feels notably softer than the other directions and doesn’t have a pronounced click.
Two omissions in the design would go on to annoy me almost every day of shooting, and that’s having no multi-controller joystick on the back and no tilting rear screen. Without a multi-controller, moving the focus point takes extra steps. To do so, you need to press down, press AEL, move the focus point around with the D-pad buttons, then press the center button or half-press the shutter to exit. Yes, you can use the touchscreen, but like any other touchscreen found on cameras, it’s imprecise and only applicable to slow-paced shooting situations.
Having no tilting rear screen is self-explanatory in why that’s frustrating. I’ll tell you, in practice, it’s as bad of an idea as it sounds. I’m flipping up and down my screen all the time on other cameras if I’m not using the viewfinder. It does make me question what Sigma’s motivation was here. Did the designers really mean to sacrifice something so obviously useful and commonplace just so the company’s marketing materials could say it’s the smallest full-frame interchangeable lens camera? At what length were these sacrifices made just to make the claim?
What sucks most about the Sigma fp L is that when feeling the weight, the materials, and the shape in your hands, all your senses tell you you’re are holding onto a special camera. Seeing how the modular pieces come together like the EVF-11 or HG-11 Hand Grip is really interesting and a finely executed concept. But then you turn it on.
The Sigma fp L supposedly has an upgraded autofocus system from the original fp which now includes 49 phase-detect autofocus points in addition to just the contrast-detection. I say “supposedly” because in practice, the Sigma fp L’s autofocusing is atrocious.
For moving subjects or non-moving subjects, AF-C is near unusable, and the quicker you learn that the quicker you can just use manual focus or AF-S and stop completely missing shots. As a bird photographer and someone who lives in 2021, I use AF-C on my cameras full-time. With the Sigma fp L, AF-C should not be an option because of its gross inaccuracy.
This leads to another issue: all the single-point focus area sizes — small, medium, and large — seem to act exactly the same. Each of them easily dismisses subjects in the foreground and time after time after time will simply focus on the background. It’s a little better when using the multi-point areas, but those require the subject to be a sizable portion of the frame with prominent isolation or it can be overlooked. Other than prioritizing “focus” or “release” with the autofocus, there’s no way to customize the tracking sensitivity and how much grab it has on objects.
In AF-S focus mode, things become more reliable but at the cost of not being able to keep up to date focusing if you or your subject move. Sure, this is how photography was done for a long time before AF-C more recently overcame its struggles, but this is a brand new camera and I expect much better.
One thing this camera does right and deserves acknowledgment for is showing the focus peaking in autofocus. I wish all cameras did this.
With no mechanical shutter built into the camera body, the Sigma fp L depends on the electronic shutter’s readout speed being fast enough to combat rolling shutter effects.
It fails at this spectacularly.
I have never seen a camera with this bad of a “jello” effect, ever. Even while handholding the camera with a wider 35mm lens and not panning or tilting to follow a subject, I can see each individual frame in a continuous burst look slightly different from the next as everything slightly warps just from the natural hand movement.
Once I started taking frames with the camera picking up a subject though, it’s truly game over as everything in the frame begins to slant heavily. It doesn’t stop there, because if the subject itself is moving and the camera is still, it can become detached from itself and produce some very weird effects.
With slow readout speeds and poor autofocus performance, I would not recommend anyone get the fp L for any type of action photography.
The battery life can be looked at in one of two ways. Either it’s good that the 61-megapixel camera seems to press out a couple of hours worth of photography time for the smaller size of BP-51 battery it’s using, or it’s bad if you just look at the time the camera can stay active and compare that to the field. I had two batteries to use with the Sigma fp L and that regularly would give me around three hours of photography if I was mindful of saving battery where I could by turning the camera off.
One killer that could be addressed is the fact that when paired with a lens that features optical image stabilization, that stabilization never turns off unless the camera is off or it’s disabled on the lens. That means if I’m just walking around with the camera to my side, it’s going to crazy trying to stabilize all that movement all the time non-stop. Other cameras I’ve used will only power on the lens stabilization when the shutter is half-pressed and then turn itself off after 5 seconds or so of inactivity.
Another unfortunate quirk that popped out to me while using the camera was that after you shoot a photo, the leveling gauge and histogram will disappear until the buffer clears. Even with one RAW shot onto a UHS-II compatible card, this takes about 2.5 seconds to regain the monitoring.
While the Sigma fp L appears to be a letdown in many areas, one thing is clear to me and that’s in the end the sensor does produce some stunning images. The tonality of light, colors, dynamic range, and sheer megapixels to work with are all superb.
Working with the images in post-processing is a piece of cake as they can withstand lots of rough pushing and pulling. In tough lighting situations, such as strong contrast or the sun in the frame, there are smooth gradations and things don’t easily get jagged and clipped. There’s enough dynamic range to expose for highlights and recover the detailed shadows without becoming overly muddy.
Congratulations on Being Small, I Guess
All things considered, where the Sigma fp L slots into best would probably be landscape and travel photography. Anything that takes pressure away from autofocus and movement of the camera greatly increases the joy of using it. When I was going around with this camera photographing flowering plants or scenic views or self-portrait travel-esque stuff, it really wasn’t so bad, and the resulting images look great coming off the sensor. And if I really were away traveling, the small size is obviously a big plus.
More often than not though, some annoyance would creep into the day and if I owned the setup it wouldn’t take long for me to wonder if I made a mistake in not getting something else. That’s not somewhere your head should be after dropping $2,500.
Are There Alternatives?
As far as having a high-resolution full-frame sensor inside an interchangeable lens camera that’s this tiny, there’s nothing else that compares on the market. That being said, if you’re interested in the Sigma fp L it’s probably a good bet that the size is a big draw. For that, I can think of two other cameras to look at, however, each has greatly reduced megapixels.
The most obvious would be the Sigma fp. This camera launched in late 2019 and shares many aspects of design and functionality in common with the new fp L. The Sigma fp has a lower count 24-megapixel sensor and only contrast-detect autofocus among other subtler differences, but it is less expensive. For the right person, it’s possible the fp and fp L share the exact same features that are most valued.
The other option comes from Sony, where the company has released its own compact full-frame interchangeable lens camera since the original Sigma fp debuted. The Sony a7C is also down to 24 megapixels, but it’s also the smallest full-frame camera with in-body image stabilization — something the Sigma fp L lacks. For better or worse, it also uses the E-mount, which brings on a totally different set of compatible lenses.
Should You Buy It?
No. As stated above, the Sigma fp L is a truly unique camera with no real alternatives at the time of publication. If no concessions can be made — for example, your camera must be L-mount, it must be this small, it must be full frame, it must be 61 megapixels, and the actual performance of anything is secondary — then there is nothing else to discuss. However, after using the camera for a couple of weeks I believe the answer to be no. Any leeway you have in finding your next camera that’s kind of like the Sigma fp L in a few ways but not all is going to get you further with your money.
The Sigma fp L is flawed, but it’s not entirely a bad camera. There are aspects that I truly enjoyed about it, and for certain genres of photography like landscapes, it’s just a couple of features away from being excellent. If I were a pure landscape photographer and this was the only camera that existed, it wouldn’t be such a bad life. But this isn’t the only camera, and the other options out there that are more well-rounded in design and performance make the Sigma fp L hard to recommend.
K&F Concept has just released a new magnetic filter kit that you can get for as little as $110. The Kit comes with a magnetic adapter ring, UV filter, CPL filter, and 10stop ND. That all fit nicely into the included case that can hold four 82mm filters. The pouch also has a velcro belt […]
SIGMA has announced the 35mm F1.4 DG DN | Art lens. This doesn’t come as any real surprise as images and information have already been leaked well in advance. SIGMA is touting this release as the “Art F1.4 35mm” reborn for mirrorless. It will be available in Panasonic L Mount or Sony E Mount. You … Continued
It’s not really much of a surprise that with the official announcement expected tomorrow we’re seeing leaks. This time, though, it doesn’t come from Nokishita. Well, it sort of does, but not directly. This time they’re just the messenger. British retailer Campkins Cameras and Dutch retailer Foto Konijnenberg both published complete product listings for the […]
As reported by The Digital Picture, Sigma has announced that it has concluded its investigation into the issue and instituted countermeasures.
“As a result of our investigation, there is a possibility that the ghost resistance will deteriorate with some products from the initial lot,” the company writes. “In addition, since we have confirmed the countermeasures by process management regarding this matter, we would like to inform you that we would like to collect all the products with the target serial number and replace them with new ones.”
In the initial service announcement, Sigma noted that it believed that the issue was specific to Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Contemporary lenses for both L-mount and Sony E mount with serial numbers prior to 55488834. The company is sticking with that assessment after looking into the issue and offering to collect and replace any lenses that have made it into the wild that fit that description.
Sigma originally said that the number of lenses that were affected by this issue could not be particularly high, as the optic had only shipped in a few select locations globally. The United States, for example, had not yet begun fulfilling pre-orders at the time of the initial service announcement. At the time of publication, the lens was still not in inventory at Adorama.
To check the serial number of a Sigma lens, customers can either find it printed on the side of the box the lens was sold in or etched above the Sigma logo on the side of the lens as shown in the graphic below.
In order to get your lens replaced — should yours have a serial number prior to 55488834 — the company has asked that you contact your local authorized Sigma Service Station, which you can find using this link.
Sigma originally estimated that its investigation would conclude within a month, leaving customers unsure if the situation would allow for lenses to be fulfilled before April. However, Sigma announced and concluded its investigation into the issue in exactly two weeks, meaning it should not be long until the lens — now free of the ghosting deterioration issue — is widely available globally.
After my testing of the new Sony compact primes, I was able to spend some time with the competing set of primes from Sigma that were arguably the reason Sony created its lenses in the first place. Both sets are fun, compact, and extremely portable optics… but which should you buy?
Like the Sony lenses, these primes from Sigma are almost identical in design with the only real difference between them being the chosen focal lengths and maximum apertures. As such, you can treat this comparison as a performance evaluation of all three and how they compare to the Sony G lenses.
Editor’s note: The following evaluation is meant to be viewed against the full review of the Sony lenses found here, as most of the information below focuses on showing how the Sigma lenses perform and is written from the assumption that readers have familiarized themselves with the same assessment of the Sony lenses.
Testing the Sigma I-Series Lenses
To test these lenses I used a Sony Alpha 7 III and a Sony a6100 and shot at the minimum and maximum apertures to determine the sharpness and quality of the images.
One of the first things I noticed when taking these lenses out of the box was just how sturdy the design was and how they resembled bigger cinema lenses. Each lens in the set looks identical in design with the only difference being the physical size, and — as mentioned previously — all of which were larger than the Sony counterparts. Despite this, they were still pretty similar to the Sony lenses in the sense that the aperture rings were once again in a position where it would be very easy to accidentally shift the lens’s manual aperture setting when mounting or removing the lens.
I complained about this in my Sony compact prime lens review so it’s only fair to point it out here. So once again, be sure to double-check your settings when you use this glass to be sure it’s in the position you want.
Something I want to note right away: It is my opinion that the overall shooting experience with these lenses was even more satisfying than with the Sony lenses.
Let me explain that.
With the increased size and more stylish design, I felt more confident shooting in the streets and for my clients. They just gave off a cinematographer vibe that I really appreciated. They just look, feel, and operate really nicely in a way that is difficult to explain but is apparent once you’ve held them in hand.
Just like with Sony’s lenses, the I-Series has a satisfying “clicking” aperture ring that you can manually set for your shot, or slide into the Auto position to make changes digitally based on your preference. While I enjoyed the feel of Sony’s trio, these lenses felt more mechanical and even produced a little more tension when not in Auto mode. The aperture “clicks” were even more satisfying than on the Sony with that larger grooved ring. It is worth mentioning this though: while I never bothered to use the “de-click” switch that Sony provides on its lenses, this is a feature that is noticeably missing from the Sigma I-series.
Visually, I felt like this set of glass gave a much more professional vibe while shooting on the streets. This is, of course, entirely subjective so take from this what you will.
With the Sony lenses, it seemed people just thought I was a tourist and never really gave me much attention, whereas with the Sigma glass, people noticed, and moved out of my shots for me. It kind of felt like I was a location scout prepping scenes for an upcoming shoot. The downside to this is these lenses look expensive compared to the Sony counterparts, meaning if you are trying to be discreet they’re going to stand out a fair bit more.
As for their size, you can read the exact dimensions and weights here, but it is worth noting that while they are still very compact, they are heavier and larger than the Sony brand counterparts. Additionally, Sony made a point of keeping all three of its lenses the exact same size while Sigma has not. Additionally, stacked end to end, even the two smallest lenses in the Sigma set are larger than an iPhone X and weigh a fair bit more than the ones from Sony. The good news is they are still small enough to fit in your sweater or jacket pockets, making them easy for conveniently carrying and lens swapping while on the move.
Something else to take note of is that these lenses have a largely metal housing compared to the Sony lenses which have a lot more plastic. Because of this, Sigma was able to do something a little different by providing the option for a fancier magnetic lens cap along with the standard plastic “pinch” type. If you’re the type of shooter who never uses a lens hood because they are tedious, the metal versions are a lovely divergence from the expected. That said, while it’s a rather cool additional feature to have, it is not altogether practical if you do use the lens hoods, since it takes a bit of maneuvering to get it off once snapped in place.
Finally, it is also worth pointing out that these lenses all have a nicely designed gasket seal on the mount giving you some peace of mind that little in the way of dust or water will seep its way in while you’re out shooting.
All of the lenses in this set worked consistently well with a fast and smooth performing autofocus that including face/eye detection features.
The performance feels just as fast and snappy as with the Sony trio (despite Sony touting its autofocus system as vastly superior to competitors). I was able to quickly lock on to surfers in motion on the beach without issue. The metal lens hood and aperture/focus rings feel great to work with and going full manual for focusing is very smooth.
Shifting from Auto to Manual focus was easy with the switches for that feature placement closer to the lens mount on the barrel versus the vertical switch found on the Sony set. I personally prefer the Sigma switch here, but that is again a purely subjective, personal preference as they both respond quickly and work as intended.
For an example the kind of clarity you can expect, below is a short timelapse of a moonrise that I shot with Sigma 65mm f/2 at f/6.3.
The 45mm and 65mm lenses were incredibly sharp and accurate edge to edge where the wider 24mm and 35mm lenses left a little vignetting on the edges. This is easily fixable with a lens profile adjustment but be aware of that going in.
All four lenses gave a great creamy bokeh for their respective apertures, with the 65mm having the most appealing of the set. Trying to recreate the Sony Bokeh tests, I feel that while the Sigma lenses — especially at f/2 — were incredibly smooth looking, only the 65mm really had something over the Sony.
The Sigma glass was consistently smooth from each of the lenses, but nothing really “wowed” me compared to how I felt with the Sony lenses. While each of them looks good, in my personal opinion, if you’re looking for glass with a more pronounced bokeh pattern, the Sony set may be the winner here.
Sigma 24mm f/3.5
Sigma 35mm f/2
Sigma 45mm f/2
Sigma 65mm f/2
Comparing Strengths and Weaknesses
Both lenses score well in the autofocus performance and overall image quality department, so you’ll have to look at other factors if you really want to nitpick on which lenses are right for you.
Interesting focal lengths
Nice contrast in the medium apertures
Aperture and focus rings are super easy to use with focus pulling system
Looks more professional and feature higher quality materials than Sony lenses
Weather/Dust resistance is of higher quality than with the Sony lenses
The metal lens hood is very nice
The 24mm and 45mm are cheaper than the comparable Sony options
Sigma’s metal lens hood somehow feels more prone to scratches than Sony’s common plastic one
Sony’s compact primes are lighter and smaller
Sigma’s magnetic lens cap is nice, but not practical when paired with the lens hood
Sony has a de-clickable aperture, Sigma does not
Bokeh was overall more pleasant on the Sony lenses
The Sigma 35mm and 65mm are more expensive than the comparable Sony options
Sturdy and Professional Versus Smaller and Performant
The Sigma I-series feels like a much more professional set of lenses than the Sony trio, but with that comes the compromise of a larger size and heavier footprint. These lenses are still much smaller and lighter than the f/1.8 and f/1.4 primes you’re used to carrying around so the trade-off may be worth it along with the cost savings when you look at those wider lenses.
Even though they are larger and heavier than Sony’s similar lenses, the Sigmas are still easy to pack up and carry in your kit, saving you a lot of space and weight when compared to the Art/G-Master series lenses. I felt that the Sony lenses overall had better bokeh, with the exception of Sigma’s 65mm, but the overall image quality from all lenses was very good. Again, the only reason to not recommend any of them is if you actually truly need that extra shallow depth of field and are willing to trade off the extra cost, size, and weight to get it.
If you do more video than photo work, the Sigma lenses would be a fantastic addition to your kit since they’re already primed and ready to go for pulling kits thanks to the more pronounced grooves on the focus and aperture rings. Additionally, these Sigma lenses provide some slightly more unique focal lengths than others.
Honestly, I think both these sets can be used together, as no one is saying you have to pick one company and only use those lenses. While the professional and cinematic look of the Sigma lenses was awesome, I preferred the image quality on most of what Sony offered despite their slightly less high-end feel. If I were in the market for these focal lengths, I’d likely mix and match a few of them from both brands.
The Sigma I-Series is a great set of lenses with some unique focal lengths that will help you capture sharp images and video for whatever project you have in mind. Are they better or worse than the Sony lenses? Unfortunately, there is no straight-across answer.
If you want something that is incredibly small and lightweight for traveling, the Sony trio may be the better direction for you. However, if you plan on doing more video work where manual focusing is more prevalent or if you prefer a more robust, higher-end build, then the Sigma lineup makes more sense. In the end, both did a great job from an image quality standpoint and you can’t really go wrong either way there. In the end, you’ll just have to make your decisions based on personal preference.
Sigma has published a service notice for its newly-announced 28-70mm f/2.8 lens. According to a detailed note on Sigma’s website, the company has been made aware of the deterioration of the ghosting resistance on the lens over time under certain shooting conditions.
As reported by The Digital Picture, Sigma notes that a potential issue with the lens can lead to “increased ghosting over time in certain shooting conditions.” The company apologizes for the situation, and notes that this falls short of its “usual high standards” and it is “acting as quickly as possible to rectify the issue.”
The issue is currently specific to the Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN Contemporary for both L-mount and Sony E mount, with serial numbers prior to 55488834.
“You can find the serial number printed on the side of the lens, and also on the box. If your serial number is higher than 55488834 you can be assured it is not affected by this issue,” Sigma writes.
The company says that the issue had been identified early on, so only a certain small subset of customers should be affected. It urges anyone who has already received the 28-70mm f/2.8 to check their lens’ serial number to see if it is affected. This shouldn’t be many lenses, as it only started shipping very recently in a few select markets.
“Our optical engineers are working hard to identify and eradicate the underlying cause of the phenomenon, and we expect to have this resolved within a month,” Sigma writes. “We will suspend all shipments of the applicable product until the cause of this matter has been identified. Once we know the cause, we will be in touch with the small number of affected customers to advise on whether we will repair their lens or replace it, and how this process will work.”
The Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 was originally announced in early February and slated for release on March 12 for both E-Mount and L-Mount for for $899. Given this issue, it’s possible that the lens will not actually be set to ship to customers until late April or early May.
On March 25, Sigma announced the 61-megapixel fp L camera that features a new autofocus system and much more resolution than the original fp. The company has provided a few images captured on the camera, and the quality looks impressive.
Sigma’s latest takes what made the original fp desirable — its small size — and added features that would make it something more photographers would be interested in. For starters, a true hybrid autofocus system is a boon, making the fp the first camera released in the L-mount alliance to feature phase detection autofocus. You can read more about it here.
But more than that, Sigma integrated features that take advantage of the resolution, which will be interesting to see for applications such as wildlife photography. While none of the images Sigma shared with PetaPixel use this new crop zoom option, we can get an idea of what to expect by taking a closer look at full resolution images.
The photos below were captured by photographer Aya Iwasaki, and the first one is a macro photo that really shows off the resolving power of the new camera. The original file size is massive: 53.4 MB at a 9520 x 6328 resolution and was captured with the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DDG DN Macro Art lens at f/5.6, 1/640 second, and ISO 400. Here is the full image:
And this is a fully-zoomed crop:
The next image from Iwasaki is a landscape photo and give an indication of the dynamic range of the sensor. This image was captured with the 65mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary lens at f/4, 1/500 second, and ISO 100:
And this is a fully-zoomed crop:
Two more landscape images were provided by Sigma, these ones captured by photographer Yang Su Tie. The first is a panoramic crop shot with the 65mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary lens at f/4, 1/1600 second, and ISO 100:
And again a crop:
Finally, a photo shot on the 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art at f/16, 1/15 second, and ISO 100:
And again a fully-zoomed crop:
Based on these images, the question isn’t so much if the sensor is good, but more about what lenses can be used to fully take advantage of that resolution. Other questions that still remain center around how good the new autofocus system is and if Sigma addressed issues with the rolling shutter that plagued the original fp, as both cameras feature a fully electronic shutter. These are questions PetaPixel intends to answer in our review of the camera.
In related news, for those interested in using the camera for filmmaking, SmallRig and Sigma teamed up to create a custom cage solution for both the fp and fp L:
The Sigma fp L is set to become available in mid-April for $2,499.