Upload & Sell: Off
| p.4 #10 · Anyone Compared the Zeiss 35/f2 to Sigma 35/f1.4? |
Any lens will fail if shoot this way.
Some has red blow up, poor WB, no focal point, not so great on compose. Even most beautiful Bokeh won't save thise fotos. And Some of photo add too much contrast like 'swing', I can make any photo look this bad from 351.4zeiss, not to mention 35f2.
So, you don't get your point supported. Sorry! I feel the same way: you trying to look for fault of lens to support your point which stretch too much in this case.
Plus, most of samples doesn't show poor bokeh but merely average test shots.
Well, then show me some pictures with such ugly bokeh from any of the 2 Zeiss-lenses.
i've seen a ton, i would recommend just doing a flickr search. otherwise i'll find some samples to link you too when i get around to it.
Yeah right, but you can't show one.
I already searched, but was not able to find one. The Sigma-pictures were found in a few minutes however.
i didn't show one because i didn't do the search yet since i already made my decision about those two lenses for myself and don't really care to waste my time for somebody that is just looking to justify their own belief. i went for a hike with my daughter instead.
my personal opinion from viewing many images and trying out the ZF 35/2 myself is that the Z* 35/2 has terrible bokeh compared to most similar lenses (well the zm 35/2 is even worse) while the Z* 35/1/4 has excellent bokeh for the focal length but can produce supprising funkiness particularly in the corners at surprising times. from the comparisons i've seen the sigma seems better behaved and more predictable in it's bokeh, but not quite as gentle as the Z* 35/1.4 at short distances. the sigma seems to show onion rings slightly more readily as well, but neither lens seems to show them that often.
i'm sure somebody like lars who actually has all the lenses in question knows more about it than me though.
oh, i just did a search and found this in the first batch: ugly bokeh from the ZE 35/1.4