Tommy_D wrote:
I sincerely hope that lens is a joke. No EX designation (so who knows what its build quality will be), awful MTF chart (sharp in the very center but falls off steeply towards edges and corners), even worse vignetting (loses 80% of illumination at corners at f/1.4).
I'm not sure what you mean, the MTF chart is actually better than MTF chart for the Nikon 35/1.4G. And the falloff curve is almost identical, but starts higher.
Tommy_D wrote:
I sincerely hope that lens is a joke. No EX designation (so who knows what its build quality will be), awful MTF chart (sharp in the very center but falls off steeply towards edges and corners), even worse vignetting (loses 80% of illumination at corners at f/1.4).
That MTF chart is much better (and has a similar curve shape too) the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 MTF chart (though that doesn't necessarily mean that it will be much better than the Nikon, manufactures fudge this stuff, after all).
I'm pretty sure the "EX" designation went away, at the behest of the overpriced marketing gurus Sigma paid to drain them of cash... er - "Revamp their lineup."
Fast wide primes vignette, get used to it. 80% falloff is a smidge more than 2 stops. The Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 also vignettes a smidge more than 2 stops wide open (per Photozone.de results).
The design also is, apparently (judging by the number of glass types used), a super-achromat design (4th degree correction), for lower chromatic aberration. The Nikkor is a achromat (2nd degree correction). That doesn't guarantee better performance than the Nikkor, but it at least shows some effort on Sigma's part.
In all, from the stats provided, the lens is extremely comparable to the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4. Sigma's recent fast prime efforts have shown that they can make good quality lenses. One should at least wait for reviews before judging (and not damn them based on provided info that makes the lens look better on paper than the comparable Nikkor).
Tommy_D wrote:
I sincerely hope that lens is a joke. No EX designation (so who knows what its build quality will be), awful MTF chart (sharp in the very center but falls off steeply towards edges and corners), even worse vignetting (loses 80% of illumination at corners at f/1.4).
runamuck wrote:
Okay, I'm not an artist. Nor am I contemporary. That leaves sports with my Bigma and 70-200. The closest I get to sports is the occasional Cubs game on TV. I guess I have to sell my Sigma lenses and get some other brand?
I'm sorry dude, your Bigma looks like it's been assigned to "contemporary." ("Standard zoom lenses, telephoto zoom lenses, high-magnification zoom lenses and more" - Sigma).
You've been pigeonholed, I'm afraid... (you can still shoot sports with your 70-200, I'm sure, but don't let that Contemporary Bigma near a Cubs game, the Sigma marketing police will come and take you away).
Tommy_D wrote:
I sincerely hope that lens is a joke. No EX designation (so who knows what its build quality will be), awful MTF chart (sharp in the very center but falls off steeply towards edges and corners), even worse vignetting (loses 80% of illumination at corners at f/1.4).
What? The MTF chart is AMAZING. Keep in mind that it is at f1.4. Compare with other 35 1.4 lenses and you'll change your mind.
interesting... isn't "13 elements in 11 groups" about the most for ANY 35mm/1.4 ?
whatever... but if it's an "ART" lens, it's a must have
Like to see how the IQ compares to my favorite 35mm lens, the Rollei HFT 1.4 -- one lens with quite the Art mojo
never had the guts to pull the trigger on a sigma lens. this one, though, has me excited - from the MTF and design (looks more like a Hasselblad mock up than a sigma!) with a price point of probably a grand? if the reviews are good, the QC spot on (perhaps the most commented topic on sigma lenses), and it's IQ is great (the big three in criteria), perhaps i'll bite. The Art thing? who cares if it works...
hopefully it's not just marketing and sigma actually is serious about making consistently good lenses...
^^^ I'd guess it would be in between the 50 and 85 in price. Say $799??
The lens looks very interesting. The Sig 50 was awesome when I had it, just didn't love the focal lenght. I'd love a 35L, but if I can get something close with the Sigma 35, I might pull the trigger.
Bumping this thread in-case anyone heard something new. I search what I could, but found nothing, not even a rumor release date, or even year for that matter.
I don't quite like their new product category..
Is that 120-300 OS usable for wildlife?
and I think I have seens great sports pictures with wideangle, fisheye... artistic photos with supertele
I like the direction Sigma is going. From their new categories (albeit silly naming categories), to their new smooth finish, to the new concept of AF tuning the lens yourself.. I like it a LOT. That 35 1.4 is very intriguing also.
DontShoot wroteI like the direction Sigma is going. From their new categories (albeit silly naming categories), ...
Their silly named categories serve only to confuse the less-educated (on the specific subject of their silly categories), and make the more-educated laugh at them.
A camera lens is a device to project an image onto a recording medium, not an art tool, modern tool or sports tool; dumping them into silly categories is silly. Silly marketing behavior serves no purpose other than sowing confusion and making people laugh at you. Unless your selling humor or a competitor's product, sowing confusion and making people laugh at you isn't really a productive marketing activity.
No EX designation!!!! OH the huge manatee!
