Why didnt they go with 12mm, 25mm and 42,5mm. In my opinion thats what the m43 market needs, 35mm equivalents.

Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN A versus Olympus 60mm F2.8 Macro:

http://lcap.tistory.com/entry/Sigma-60mm-f28-DN-vs-Olympus-60mm-f28-Macro

Honestly, not too much has changed with these lenses from the last generation. The build quality has improved and the rattling issue is much better but I don’t see any noticeable difference in image quality or Autofocus speed. If you have the last/original version of these lenses, I would say pass on upgrading your lenses unless you despise the plastic build or the lens rattle. Overall, we found the image quality to be quite good with both the 19mm and the 30mm.

In the end, these lenses are not bad in terms of results, they are simply more limited (slow AF and aperture) than other lenses available for this format. Image quality is very good and the build quality is better than some more expensive lenses in this format. In the end, the sluggish Autofocus and max aperture of F2.8 will immediately alienate a large chunk of prospective buyers.

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/06/02/review-sigma-19mm-and-30mm-dn-a-lenses-for-micro-four-thirds/

Overall, the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 DN turned out to be a great lens, especially considering the price. It’s a budget-friendly lens for those looking to shoot at longer focusing distances but don’t want to splurge on any of the more expensive options available. For the Sony E-Mount a good prime lens in this focal length is hard to find outside of zooms, so for now this may be your best option. Just know the build quality isn’t the best and sharpness may need to be improved in post.

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/06/14/review-sigma-60mm-f2-8-dn-sony/

Whether this lens is fitted to A Sony NEX, or Micro Four Thirds camera, the telephoto focal length and fast f/2.8 maximum aperture make this optic a perfectly good lens for portraiture for not a lot of money.

Even though this lens is reasonably inexpensive, Sigma haven't skimped on build or optical quality. It is capable of delivering pin-sharp results from maximum aperture and it is built well enough to be a worthy investment for many years to come.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sigma-60mm-f-2-8-dn-a-lens-review-22333

I've been using the 19 and 30 for months. The autofocus can overshoot and return. But I'm usually using manual anyway.

Crazy, crazy sharp. Great if you have a beautiful clear face to shoot. If not, I grab one of my FD or FL lenses and it softens them up a bit. :)

On M4/3 cameras it's a good choice for travellers, being not too large, yet long enough for street photography and some types of wildlife and sports shooting. Its minimum focusing distance of 50 cm limits its use for close-up work, although it can be used for larger flowers and similar-sized subjects.

http://photoreview.com.au/reviews/lenses/m4-3/sigma-60mm-f-2.8-dn-a-mft-lens

I think for the price, and all the reviews I am gonna get this 60mm to pair with my sigma 18-35mm while looking for some thing better for 18-35

The Sigma 30mm f/2.8 is one of the very best bargains in the photographic industry. It’s a very inexpensive lens ($199 retail, on sale at the time of this writing at $169), but packs serious imaging capabilities. The lens is small, light and puts out images with very high levels of detail right from f/2.8.

http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-sigma-30mm-f2-8-dn-art-sony-e-mount/

The lens isn't complicated, with just 8 elements in 6 groups, and the product is sharp images pretty much straight out of the gate at ƒ/2.8. According to our test results, it actually does get fractionally better at ƒ/4, but I can't imagine you'd see the difference unless you looked very closely indeed. It's sharp all the way through to the point where diffraction limiting starts to become present, at ƒ/11, but even then it's barely an issue.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sigma/60mm-f2.8-dn-a/review/

I initially ignored the Sigma 60mm as it received several mediocre tests. However, it then received a couple of good tests. Did they tweak the formula? Or is it quality control. The tests are all over the map--some say it is sharpest wide open, others F4, others F5.6. yada yada. I actually rarely have seen such different results. So I had to buy one and I'll compare it to the $99 Olly zoom which is pretty freaking sharp 60-70mm and half the price.

OK, I have had this lens for some time. The Sigma 60mm. Say it. Sounds awful, doesn't it? But it isn't.
I have also the Olly 75mm which is one of the sharpest lenses--if not the sharpest lens--for m4/3.
So, quite simply, there is no difference between these two lenses. The Sigma 60mm--which I paid $150 for--simply needs a rubber band on its awful, slippery beercan barrel, and then its perfect. The Olly is a bit longer, a whisker sharper in the corners, but everything else is the same. I tested these lenses on fabrics, trees, bugs, flowers, whatever, there is no real difference. The 60mm is smaller, light, completely silent, and anything else you might want in a lens.
The Olly is much more expensive, and way heavier and larger, so I kept wanting it to be magically better. It's a super lens, it just isn't different from the Sigma.

http://fototesty.pl/blog/466_sigma-3014-sony-a6000-realne-testy-w-terenie.html