Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 4 5 6 end

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

philip_pj wrote:
None of the usual suspects have seen fit to include any infinity or even middle distance images that I can find. Many people would like to see how image depth is defined and rendered, perhaps some kind soul can provide a set of images they have shot or a link, to something other than the usual 'near focus far bokeh' fast 35 photo?

I was looking for just those sorts of images prior to buying the Sigma 35/1.4 for my D800 but it seems most are preoccupied with near focus with near to far bokeh as you say. I've had the lens for just over a week which sadly has coincided with almost a week of fog here, but one bright day turned up and from my dog walk in the sun that morning, here's a sampling of handheld shots. All can be clicked on for larger. Sorry, I've no comparison shots with a comparable ZF35 to show and I've recently sold my ZM35/2:

Near focus, far OOF areas/bokeh:

@f/1.4

@f/11 (close focus is ~ 20cm in front of lens, handy)

Sorry, focus still not at infinity

Much farther out, still not at infinity, but perhaps close enough:

@f/2

Focus 3-ish meters away, a little busy but also a busy scene

Focus out a little more @f/1.4, distant OOF

Focus out 33m at least, lower part of the building on a vibrant square @f/1.4

Flare/Ghosts (or lack thereof) with sun dead on

@f/5.6

... off to left @f/16 (wide open less likely to generate ghosts it seems):

Ghosts are something to watch out for; fortunately you can open the lens up wide and still enjoy good sharpness and perhaps avoid ghosts. That said I wasn't overly careful that morning and have a few sun-high frames with ghosts showing up.

All in all I like it.

Jan 24, 2013 at 05:04 PM

wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #2 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Jan 24, 2013 at 05:21 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

It looks excellent in all respects, except boke close up, which gets a bit busy (but not horribly so). What about colours? These shots are a bit too drab to tell. How is the AF?

Jan 24, 2013 at 05:30 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

I'll find some vibrant colours for you, or shoot some. Someone else is likely to beat me to it, for our gloomy rainy weather can squash neon colours and/or the will to shoot them.

As far as AF goes, it is decently quick and quiet and is certainly faster than I am. Once in a while it focuses on the background instead of the intended target but not so often that it feels like there is problem there. AF focus repeatability seems as good as my Nikkor 85/1.8G. Manual focus is very usable - the focus ring is a little on the stiff side but has no play and I find I can focus by eye if need be, but haven't needed to.

Centre PDAF point focus on my D800 is spot on, as are the centre column of focus points. However as one selects PDAF points away from the centre columns, focus accuracy goes away. I've read elsewhere that Sigma has a patch for D800 users which addresses this; at this point sending in the lens would be the only way to get this patch. I'm waiting to see someone else go through the process to learn what the result is.

No surprise, live view CDAF focus is terrific, anywhere in the frame.

The lens is heavy but not outrageously so compared to the 35/1.4G (65 grams heavier than the Nikkor). The lens focuses internally; the filter ring does not move. The hood stores on-lens reversed and attaches with a solid and reassuring click as you'd hope and expect. Only time will tell but it feels like a solidly built lens. Here in Canada the distributor offers a 10 year warranty.

Jan 24, 2013 at 06:01 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

You could update it yourself:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/news/sigmas_new_35mm_f14_lens_offers_an_optional_usb_dock_for_minute_adjustments.html

Jan 24, 2013 at 06:27 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

Oh yes, I meant to mention the USB dock, an interesting idea I chalked up to being gimmicky at first. Time will tell - it isn't available yet AFAIK. It'd be nice if shops specializing in Sigma optics offer firmware updates as a free service; my dealer offers to ship back lenses free for warranty service so they have an incentive to offer this sort of service.

Jan 24, 2013 at 06:36 PM

wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #7 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

wayne seltzer wrote:
What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Michael, I guess you didn't get my joke.

I was just saying the same thing you said to me about my RX1 infinity shots back in Dec.
Can you post any 100% crops from the infinity shots?

Jan 24, 2013 at 06:43 PM

sebboh
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

this looks very nice:

michaelwatkins wrote:
Focus out a little more @f/1.4, distant OOF

there is a little bit of loCA, but i don't think any of the other 35/1.4s would do better.

some of the closer focused shots have some funky bokeh, but again, i don't think the competition would do better.

Jan 24, 2013 at 07:59 PM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

wayne seltzer wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Michael, I guess you didn't get my joke.

Jan 25, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

michaelwatkins wrote:
Oh yes, I meant to mention the USB dock, an interesting idea I chalked up to being gimmicky at first. Time will tell - it isn't available yet AFAIK. It'd be nice if shops specializing in Sigma optics offer firmware updates as a free service; my dealer offers to ship back lenses free for warranty service so they have an incentive to offer this sort of service.

This is what Roger Cicala (Lensrentals) posted about the USB dock and it's software.

"It will adjust the internal motors and algorithms that translate what the camera tells it to do and what it is telling the camera. From what I understand it will fix the issue of 'it's fine at 15 feet, but frontfocuses close and backfocuses further' very well. Same thing for zooms where it may be spot on at one part of the range, but not at others.

It looks like pretty powerful software. "

He also write a lot about the Sigma lens. And has tested it against Canon/Nikon 35mm lenses
http://www.lensrentals.com/

Jan 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM

wiseguy010
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

Lars Johnsson wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Michael, I guess you didn't get my joke.

Jan 25, 2013 at 10:25 PM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

wiseguy010 wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Michael, I guess you didn't get my joke.

I was just saying the same thing you said to me about my RX1 infinity shots back in Dec.
Can you post any 100% crops from the infinity shots?

In the Canon forum you can find a lot of of pics from all different distances with the Sigma lens. There are a couple of long threads.

I had a look into those threads, but there are many pictures with really horrible bokeh. I almost directly had the Voiglander 20/3.5 color skopar in mind. That lens can also give this kind of nervous bokeh in certain situations.

The lens has rather nice bokeh. Better than the Canon/Nikon 35mm lenses. But not as good as the Zeiss 35/1,4. Every lens can give nervous bokeh in certain situations like you wrote. The Sigma doesn't do that more than other brands.
It's also very different to actually use the lens and compare it against other brands in real life shooting, than looking at a few web-sized pics on internet. Every review of the lens that I have been reading (6-7 at least) also confirm it's very good and the bokeh is better or at least as good as the competition. It's easily the best 35mm AF lens for Canon/Nikon. And it also competes with the best 35mm MF lenses. It does this with a price that is much lower than the others also.
Please show a link to all those pics with horrible bokeh? And that would be much better if shot with all the other 35mm lenses. If you say it's similar to the Voiglander 20/3.5 lens. It's obvious that you have never used the lens.

Jan 26, 2013 at 03:42 AM

Lasse Eriksson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

michael49 wrote:
asabet wrote:
....
All of these are at f/1.4. In each comparison, the Leica is the first and Sigma is second:
...]

Thanks for posting this - those are insanely close. The Sigma wins on price alone in my book!!

+1 yes the Sigma wins on price

Jan 26, 2013 at 04:57 AM

philip_pj
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #14 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

It does look very decent and will make plenty of fine images. Thank you, Michael, for taking the trouble in cool BC. Fast 35mm lenses group around the 600 gram region, so that is good also.

Only serious question is that intangible colour/contrast tonal subtlety you see in the better Zeiss/Leica lenses, but not readily ascertained in web jpgs with all other things like workflow, camera, software, etc. I'd say they have found a good niche with this one, well done Sigma.

Jan 26, 2013 at 05:06 AM

wiseguy010
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

Lars Johnsson wrote:
wiseguy010 wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Michael, I guess you didn't get my joke.

Edited on Feb 07, 2013 at 02:13 AM · View previous versions

Jan 26, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

And show similar pics from the other 35mm lenses that have much better bokeh

as usual we will never see those. You have never even used the lens and already made so many posts about it's terrible bokeh. And how much better your 35mm lens is

We are all different but that's not something most people here would do without any experience or knowledge about a lens. Instead you start to write about a 20mm voigtlander lens you have!!! A lens that has nothing in common with the Sigma or other 35mm lenses in this thread.
And yes, I post pics from Thailand with the lenses that I use and write about. I belive that's much better than write about lenses that I never have seen or used

And I don't post other people's pics either, Fred have rules about that.........how do you even know what lens those different pics are shot with?

Jan 26, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Sven Jeppesen
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

michaelwatkins wrote:
I'll find some vibrant colours for you, or shoot some. Someone else is likely to beat me to it, for our gloomy rainy weather can squash neon colours and/or the will to shoot them.

Jan 26, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Lasse Eriksson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

wiseguy010 wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
wiseguy010 wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
What no infinity crops? What are you trying to hide?

Michael, I guess you didn't get my joke.

Only somebody who are trying to downtalk and give the lens a bad reputation. The pic is not nice, you can't see any sharpness or where the AF should be. it's shot from maybe less than a meter straight down into the ground. it's just ridicilous and shows that your goal is to make this Sigma lens look bad. I'm sure you asked Roger and the others about permission to post their photos. Instead of a link to those photos

Jan 26, 2013 at 01:27 PM

wiseguy010
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

These are just some of the pictures posted here on fredmiranda. So you don't have to look far.

Jan 26, 2013 at 02:07 PM

wiseguy010
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4?

Lars Johnsson wrote:
And show similar pics from the other 35mm lenses that have much better bokeh

as usual we will never see those. You have never even used the lens and already made so many posts about it's terrible bokeh. And how much better your 35mm lens is

And I don't post other people's pics either, Fred have rules about that.........how do you even know what lens those different pics are shot with?

You can talk a whole day, but these pictures are just plain ugly. Sorry.

Jan 26, 2013 at 02:10 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 6 end