Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Archive 2013 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM

  
 
mawz
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


grahamb3 wrote:
My Sigma 20mm f/1.8 was $385 in 2006. KEH is offering the lens at $449 (EOS ex. condition).



And it currently sells for $629 at B&H.



Mar 27, 2013 at 08:08 AM
uscmatt99
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


ulrikft2 wrote:
Indeed, I think people are emotionally siding with the zeiss here. Might be sunk-cost-fallacy playing up? I don't know.

The sigma has me wanting a new nikon fullframe slr-body again. I have the 50 1.4 sigmalux already, with a 35 and 85 1.4 as well, It would be an amazing kit.


I'm not sure what I'd buy now with both lenses on the market, priced as they are. If they were priced the same I'd get the Zeiss, but as they are I'd probably have gotten the Sigma. It depends on your expectations and shooting habits I think. With the Zeiss at f/1.4, I'm willing to put up with the softness/haze at 100% and the occasional intense purple fringing, because the out of focus rendering at all distances looks more pleasing to me than the Sigma, which can get busy but not the majority of the time. But if I wanted eyelash sharpness and great contrast at 100% for environmental portraits, or if I shot landscapes frequently at f/1.4-f/2.8, I'd get the Sigma.

Stopped down at f/5.6 and beyond, it's hard to say for me at this point. In reviewing some of my favorite landscape photos of uniformly distant subjects, I'm disappointed I didn't stop down to f/11 more frequently. I got too used to the performance of the 100/2 at infinty at f/5.6 where there is critical sharpness across the field at f/5.6. On the 35/1.4 at f/5.6, the central detail is stunning, but there is definite progressive smudging as I move out to the edges and corners related to field curvature, with the lens focused to the hard infinity stop. However, for subjects that have interesting details at the edges and corners closer to me than the center, the results are much better with phenomenal retention of detail. I almost sent the lens in for servicing at first, but after reviewing more photos it seems to be inherent in the design. I'm not sure if there is a flatter focal plane for the Sigma, but I'd rather have a flat field most of the time.



Mar 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM
dcjs
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


mawz wrote:
And it currently sells for $629 at B&H.


Remember that stuff hasn't necessarily gotten that much more expensive, but rather money has become cheaper because they make so much more of it these days.



Mar 27, 2013 at 12:21 PM
darbo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


I have the Zeiss 1.4/35mm ZE, but if I didn't I would get the Sigma. It's a relatively easy decision: The Sigma is the sharpest and most well-corrected 35mm lens currently available for DSLRs...and it's got AF....and it's half the price.

However, I very much prefer my Zeiss regarding bokeh, overall rendering quality, and that occasional 3d look that Zeiss lenses deliver. But, I might rather use the Sigma for landscape and architectural subjects, where maximum sharpness and narrow apertures are preferred.



Mar 27, 2013 at 01:47 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


There is no real winner or looser here. Depending on the scene, and the lens FC characteristics, different parts will be sharp and others not. If money is important then the sigma wins. If Zeiss rendering is important to you, then only the Zeiss can deliver. If you like AF or prefer MF choices are obvious.


Mar 27, 2013 at 01:53 PM
j.liam
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


edwardkaraa wrote:
There is no real winner or looser here. Depending on the scene, and the lens FC characteristics, different parts will be sharp and others not. If money is important then the sigma wins. If Zeiss rendering is important to you, then only the Zeiss can deliver. If you like AF or prefer MF choices are obvious.


Different horses for different course.

Now, if I owned a Nikon 35/1.4, it would likely be heading off for sale before its value drops any further.

Very little mention lately of that pricey lens. Wondering what those out there with this optic are thinking...



Mar 27, 2013 at 02:20 PM
Jean jacques
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


I just received my sigma 35mm1.4 for my 5D3
I find this lens absolutly wonderful, as great as the best L series (135mm, and my old 28/70 2.8 that i have sold many years ago

here some samples

http://hanche-genou.com/album-louvres35mm/index.html

have a look, (use the zoom, and after get a HD picture by clicking)



Mar 27, 2013 at 03:00 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


The sharpness and colours look outstanding. It will probably be an awesome landscaping lens. I am less convinced by the rendering style close to wide open. Some aberrations, some odd aperture shapes, some swirls in foreground boke and harsh background boke. But nothing extreme, just a bit more than from the Leica or Zeiss 35/1.4s, quite acceptable, and for a much cheaper price.


Mar 27, 2013 at 03:19 PM
Jean jacques
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


this is another samples serie:

http://hanche-genou.com/album35/index.html

(no photographic interest)



Mar 27, 2013 at 03:42 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


It is a bit hard to get an accurate impression of the real-life sharpness from these photos, since they are over-sharpened, even the larger versions. Look around branches and fine dark detail, and you will see white halos.


Mar 27, 2013 at 04:06 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


edwardkaraa wrote:
There is no real winner or looser here. Depending on the scene, and the lens FC characteristics, different parts will be sharp and others not. If money is important then the sigma wins. If Zeiss rendering is important to you, then only the Zeiss can deliver. If you like AF or prefer MF choices are obvious.


I don't get the "if money is important ...." part. On one hand you are saying that there is no winner or loser and either one of them could be better based on the scene etc. But then you kind of imply as if Sigma is the "budget" choice As for the rendering these particular samples don't show any rendering advantage for the zeiss. Of course these are just a couple of shots and not representative of how these two lenses compare in various different conditions.



Mar 27, 2013 at 07:11 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


curious80 wrote:
I don't get the "if money is important ...." part. On one hand you are saying that there is no winner or loser and either one of them could be better based on the scene etc. But then you kind of imply as if Sigma is the "budget" choice As for the rendering these particular samples don't show any rendering advantage for the zeiss. Of course these are just a couple of shots and not representative of how these two lenses compare in various different conditions.


Sorry for insulting you by implying that the sigma is a budget lens. It is certainly cheaper than the Zeiss though, and for most people money is of certain concern. So I am sure some people would choose the sigma only for money considerations.



Mar 27, 2013 at 09:10 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


edwardkaraa wrote:
Sorry for insulting you by implying that the sigma is a budget lens. It is certainly cheaper than the Zeiss though, and for most people money is of certain concern. So I am sure some people would choose the sigma only for money considerations.


Ohh you didn't insult me by any means, after all I am not a sigma engineer I just meant that there is a difference between being "great for the price" versus being great. Looks to me that the Sigma is excellent even if you take price out of the equation and it is not clear if the Zeiss is any better than it overall.



Mar 27, 2013 at 10:31 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


I was just kidding with you, curious

Of course, the sigma is seems to be at the same level of Zeiss. So I agree with you on this point. The fact that it's cheaper will make it an obvious choice for anyone who is cost conscious. I still would get the Zeiss though. It is the better lens even if the differences are rather subtle.



Mar 27, 2013 at 10:52 PM
curious80
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


fair enough!


Mar 27, 2013 at 11:02 PM
Jorge Torralba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


I found this post today and it inspired me to re-post an old review I did of the zeiss 1.4 a while back.

http://jorgetorralba.com/2015/10/31/zeiss-35mm-f1-4-distagon-zfze-review/

I think at this point the field is much more competitive and there is a lot to choose from. My first choice would not be the ZF or ZE version.



Oct 31, 2015 at 02:12 PM
Sam_W
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


I would agree with that. The Z* 1.4/35 is a lovely lens, but there's far, far too much competition, especially with the 35L II.

If Zeiss could magically take the C/Y 1.4/35 and make it in Z* mount with identical glass/optical formula as the original C/Y, I'd totally buy that over the others. The character of it wins out.

Though come mid-2016, if one wants a super-performing 1.4/35, just buy the Otus 28 and crop a ~10% border.



Oct 31, 2015 at 03:00 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


Sam_W wrote:
I would agree with that. The Z* 1.4/35 is a lovely lens, but there's far, far too much competition, especially with the 35L II.

If Zeiss could magically take the C/Y 1.4/35 and make it in Z* mount with identical glass/optical formula as the original C/Y, I'd totally buy that over the others. The character of it wins out.

Though come mid-2016, if one wants a super-performing 1.4/35, just buy the Otus 28 and crop a ~10% border.


I still love my ZE 35 f/1.4. The bokeh is tremendous and it is plenty sharp enough. I love the rendering, YMMV.



Oct 31, 2015 at 03:02 PM
magiclight
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


I've got both lenses (Canon versions) and have also done a few comparisons too.

I bought the Sigma because I wanted a 35mm which was well corrected wide open and had AF.

In the end I was a little disappointed with the Sigma AF. The lens AF was a bit 'hit a and miss'.

I prefer the ZE 35mm, nice colour rendition and performs better than the Sigma stopped down in the corners for landscapes. The ZE bokeh is better however this can depend on subject/background distance.

The sigma is great value for the price.




Oct 31, 2015 at 07:02 PM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Zeiss 35/1.4 ZF.2 vs. Sigma 35/1.4 DG HSM


With no significant difference between the two lenses I would go with the Sigma that provides autofocus. The Sigma appears to have superior color rendition to the Zeiss lens, possibly from superior coatings used on the elements.

For low light photography the autofocus helps and for normal light situations I would be shooting at f8 to f16 and not wide open with such a lens. If I want selective focus I use one of my tilt shift lenses.



Nov 01, 2015 at 02:16 PM
1      
2
       3       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.