p.18 #1 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Phil, Gregg, impressive images taken with that lens . I am waiting for the verdict between the Sigma and Canon 35mm f/2.0 IS before making a decision but your images are really great. Thanks for sharing.
p.18 #2 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
I won't argue with you, but I'm not quite sure what you mean by the following:
the stats don't support it being better than L lenses.
What stats would those be? From what I gather, the Sigma is every bit the lens that any L glass is with regard to the stats that matter, i.e. MTF, AF, build. Weather sealing may be the one and only knock. I can't think of what other "stats" would even matter.
until Sigma masters the low light arena they'll always be second tier.
What the heck does that even mean?
it lacks the edge of L glass.
See above.
I just don't see anything from this lens that would suggest that it is anything but a worthy equivalent to a Canon L. Please enlighten me if you can, maybe I'm missing something, but your descriptions above are far too vague.
p.18 #3 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
@Peacekpr...
As far as I know, the dock isn't available yet. sometime after the new year. I am looking forward to it, though!
Thanx for the kind words...
Gregg
Dec 09, 2012 at 11:50 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.18 #4 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
AGeoJO wrote:
Phil, Gregg, impressive images taken with that lens . Thanks for sharing.
p.18 #10 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
sdeutscher wrote:
My Sigma 35mm f1.4 is sharper than any L I have of I had over the years....I am really impressed
Well, that's a broad... what? Overstatement? What L lens or lenses are you referring to? Do you have any images or whatever that you can provide to support that claim, please?
p.18 #11 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
AGeoJO wrote:
Well, that's a broad... what? Overstatement? What L lens or lenses are you referring to? Do you have any images or whatever that you can provide to support that claim, please?
I believe he is referring to "any L I have of I had over the years" ...translation: any L lens he has ever owned. There are a few comparisons floating around out, but I think this one might be helpful to you. I think there might be a similar comparison with a Zeiss lens or two as well.
p.18 #12 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
AGeoJO wrote:
Well, that's a broad... what? Overstatement? What L lens or lenses are you referring to? Do you have any images or whatever that you can provide to support that claim, please?
Yes...I know....maybe it's overstated but this is what I'm seeing right out of the camera.....I only have the lens for a few days....I'll post some images....
I had many lenses over the years(16-35,17-40,24-70,28-70, 24-105, 70-200 f4 and f2.8, 80-200, 100-400, 85, 135, 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8).
I'm not into well controlled testing...I'm basing this on my experience and I'm shooting for many years....
The only other Sigma better than the Canon was the 15mm fisheye(I had both)
I'm not the type of guy who would fire away statements just like that....but this Sigma is really good. It's worth giving it a try
p.18 #14 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
sdeutscher,
Comparing lenses not of the same or at least similar focal length and comparing a prime and a zoom lens in the same breadth could bring up more questions than answers. In addition, it sounds like you are basing your statement on impression or memory. Shooting conditions change and sometimes, they could favor one lens over the other. I am not disputing that the new Sigma could be a sharper lens but we also need to keep in mind that the 35mmL is of approximately 12 years old design and it is basically one of the few L lenses that have not been updated by Canon. Again, I am keeping an open mind but your claim is too rich for my taste.
p.18 #15 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
My statement is based purely on my impression and experience....I haven't done any test. Also, I used the Sigma on a 5Dmk2 which I didn't have....let's say.....7 years ago(or other comparable performance body/sensor)
I know what you're saying and I agree with you.
My point was a bit different and it wasn't meant to be a direct comparison or test based result.
Let me put it this way: I have been reading these forums for many years and very much on a daily basis and I value some simple impressions of some of the members from here much more that any rigorous test conducted in a close to perfect manner
p.18 #16 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
And to continue with my impressions: besides sharpness, the lens feels heavy, feels premium, is very well build, you get a much nicer feel when you put the caps on, the lens shade on(which locks better and tighter than on a Canon)....you know....the little things....
The focus is much better than I'm used from other Sigmas(both in speed and precision)
You do get some onion rings like other people mentioned about....but not to the point it would really bother me
p.18 #18 · Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
sdeutscher wrote:
the lens feels heavy, feels premium, is very well build, you get a much nicer feel when you put the caps on, the lens shade on(which locks better and tighter than on a Canon)....you know....the little things....
The focus is much better than I'm used from other Sigmas(both in speed and precision)
My first impressions match these, especially the weight and build. I expected it to be heavier than it looked, and then was surprised slightly that it felt heavier and more solid than that expectation. Fit and finish is better than any Sigma/Tokina/Tamron I've held, and is comparable to Canon's Ls.
. I am waiting for the verdict between the Sigma and Canon 35mm f/2.0 IS before making a decision but your images are really great. Thanks for sharing.
