Pixel Perfect wrote:
Sigma mtf for 35 f/1.4 wide open

Can't wait to check out real world reviews of the Sigma 35!!!

Fred Miranda wrote:

Remember you are comparing MTF charts at f/1.4 and f/2.
It's not that surprising that the new Canon 35mm f/2 IS will do better here. Even the $300 35mm f/2 holds its own when compared to the "L" at f/1.4.


I do realise that, but since the 35L is a much dearer than the old 35 f/2 I would still expect it to be as good wide open if not better. Also as we can see from the Sigma MTF which is f/1.4 it is as good if not a tad better than the 35 f/2 IS wide open. Basically what we are seeing if this holds up in the real world, the 35L will no longer be as desirable IMO and hard to justify other than maybe for build.

Pixel Perfect wrote:
Basically what we are seeing if this holds up in the real world, the 35L will no longer be as desirable IMO and hard to justify other than maybe for build.


That was Canon's plan all along. They will now be forced to introduce a diamond sharp 35mm f/1.4L II for a bargain price of $2,999!

Fred Miranda wrote:
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Basically what we are seeing if this holds up in the real world, the 35L will no longer be as desirable IMO and hard to justify other than maybe for build.


That was Canon's plan all along. They will now be forced to introduce a diamond sharp 35mm f/1.4L II for a bargain price of $2,999!

Fred, I've been on this forum for 4+ years now, and I think this is the first post I've seen of yours not fixing someones problem or addressing a complaint

While I understand your post, and about the (crazy)pricing Nikon/Canon has had lately, I do not understand how these MUCH smaller companies can produce better quality lenses at a fraction of the price.

Fred Miranda wrote:
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Basically what we are seeing if this holds up in the real world, the 35L will no longer be as desirable IMO and hard to justify other than maybe for build.


That was Canon's plan all along. They will now be forced to introduce a diamond sharp 35mm f/1.4L II for a bargain price of $2,999!

Damn I hope Canon don't see that price.

I'd expect it to be closer to $2K as it's a lot easier to design than a 24 f/1.4 and that was around $1.9K when first released. But taking into account further price rises it'll probably be dearer but technically I think it should be cheaper.

Ben I don't know the figures of any of these companies (I don't doubt they are smaller)
But a company like sigma can aim a lens at more than just 1 market . Ie there will always be a Canon and Nikon variant plus usually a Sony & Pentax version as well .

There is also a case of the 1st party manufacture knowing that most users of their product will want to own it's lenses as well , so can afford to increase the price of the lens as well .

snooked123 wrote:
The issue is that the prices of the amateur lenses is reaching the bottom end of the L lenses. Many of the amateur lenses could benefit from an update such as 50mm 1.4, 35mm f2 (older one), 28mm 1.8 and probably 85mm 1.8, but the prices of the updates are so high that people like me need to wait even longer to get lenses that don't cost an arm and a leg.

I agree Snooked. People like you and I are left scrounging change from under the couch cushions in order to try and save up for new, better, glass. I feel your pain. I've actually taken to trying to snag great deals on old, alternative, manual focus glass. But I do miss the AF very much, especially on my 3lb Soligor 70-222/3.5 macro.

BenV wrote:
Fred, I've been on this forum for 4+ years now, and I think this is the first post I've seen of yours not fixing someones problem or addressing a complaint

Well then you missed it a couple pages back. I was just as flabbergasted as you. lol

Ghost wrote:
Can't wait to check out real world reviews of the Sigma 35!!!

+1

As someone with limited budget I find it a bit disappointing to see all the new stuff constantly rising in price. I always thought we would see prices come down as technology advanced, but it seems that that the cost of gear continues it's steady march upwards.

The great news is it's an unprecedented age for photographers. The quality of almost every camera these days would have made us drool with envy just a short 10 years ago. Even point and shoot cameras are capable of great results, the gear is really no longer the limiting factor for most of us, and for those on a shoestring budget a 5-6 year old used DSLR and some used glass could be just the ticket.

That said I think most photographers are secret gear heads and we are always lusting after the greatest and latest, even if we don't really need it. Canon realizes this and charges accordingly.

Sigma Global Vision posted more pictures and information on the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A1
http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/a_35_14/

Excellent points andyjaggy82

indeed; even cameras from a few years back are fantastic.
I enjoy my 40D paired with some newer lenses such as the Canon 40mm F2.8 pancake

RAW converters are improving as well.

Well I recently went through the phase were I was very concerned about my gear and the quality of my lenses, and was very disappointing when I couldn't afford my "dream kit"

I eventually got over it and realized the 10-20% difference in quality from what I have to what I want simply wasn't worth worrying about, and that I would be much better off just getting out to shoot more. If it's a great shot, lighting and compositionally, no one is going to care or notice that it might be just ever so slightly soft, or that there might be just a touch of distortion or noise in the image.

Who puts out these MTF charts? Sorry for my ignorance. I'd love to see the original EF 35/2 MTF against the new Canon and Sigma offerings

Fred Miranda wrote:
Sigma Global Vision posted more pictures and information on the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A1
http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/a_35_14/

A gorgeous lens. I eagerly await the reviews.

andyjaggy82 wrote:
Well I recently went through the phase were I was very concerned about my gear and the quality of my lenses, and was very disappointing when I couldn't afford my "dream kit"

I eventually got over it and realized the 10-20% difference in quality from what I have to what I want simply wasn't worth worrying about, and that I would be much better off just getting out to shoot more. If it's a great shot, lighting and compositionally, no one is going to care or notice that it might be just ever so slightly soft, or that there might be just a touch of distortion or noise in the image.

I'm slowly getting to that point. I've begun to realize that I need to upgrade my body first and since I don't get out that much anymore, 3k of new glass is a bit of an ambition that isn't necessarily necessary. Although I do yearn for faster glass and more reach in just two lenses quite badly!

In regards to the last part of your message, it reminds me of a quote I have in my profile -
"What is focus and who has the right to say what focus is legitimate focus?" - Julia Margaret Cameron

Yup, I've done a bit of photography reading these past few months.

Jeff_Stapleton wrote:
Who puts out these MTF charts? Sorry for my ignorance. I'd love to see the original EF 35/2 MTF against the new Canon and Sigma offerings

It's here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1163966/4#11102126

Fred Miranda wrote:
geniousc wrote:
The 35 1.4 should be a killer if it includes the stated optimization software. There is a writeup in the Nikon forum about this. It's similar to Focal I guess but the lens has a programmable chip that can be user calibrated to cover all distances, firmware upgrades etc.. This should cover the focus issues.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1160493

gene

That is really cool. If successful, could we see something similar from Canon and Nikon?


I disagree. "Cool" would be them shipping lenses that consistently and accurately autofocus. This is them throwing in the towel and passing on the burden to the end user.

I find myself wondering how easy it will be to return these lenses on the basis of poor AF performance. Will Sigma force users through endless "recalibrations" before accepting a return, and maybe even attempt to shift blame to the owners - "Well we gave you a full calibration suite, its not our fault you can't make it work...."

LMAO
forum users always complain and bash the manufacturers
At least Sigma has worked out a way to check and improve lenses
Sigma is also producing quality lenses at more affordable prices

The Sigma EX lenses I have are excellent.
Focus is accurate and reilable on these cameras 5D/5D II/5D III/40D/7D
50mm F1.4
85mm F1.4

the quality is fine, but let's be honest: the rep they have for bad AF behaviour *is* justified. I have a 100
5mm macro, 50 1.4 and have had the 85 1.4 of sigma so I don't need any forums to tell me what I already know and experienced myself. But it's ok, really. Still like Sigma and I'm very curious to see how this lens will do.