p.2 #1 · What do you expect from Sigma 35 F/1.4 artist?
I think Canon 35mm f/2 IS will be the main competitor to the Sigma lens. One stop slower, similar price, has IS, smaller and half the weight. Looking forward to see how they perform, kind of expect both to be rather good considering their most recent lenses.
p.2 #3 · What do you expect from Sigma 35 F/1.4 artist?
I hope that this lens stops down well. The 50/1.4, which has very beautiful boke and good sharpness wide open, never really gets all that much sharper when stopped down, which was one of my disappointments with it, the other being the AF "speed".
p.2 #5 · What do you expect from Sigma 35 F/1.4 artist?
That weight is okay. For comparison, the EF 35mm f/1.4L USM is 580 g and the AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G is 600 g. So the Sigma’s slightly heavier, but not much heavier.
The Distagon T* 1.4/35 is 830 g in ZF.2 guise, so a fair bit heavier, but it uses a completely different type of construction (machined aluminium alloy and brass).
The industrial design of the new Sigma is gorgeous. It makes Canon and Nikon lenses look fussy and dated, although they have their own appeal. I like the laser-engraved serial number on the barrel. Modern. Apt.
p.2 #6 · What do you expect from Sigma 35 F/1.4 artist?
carstenw wrote:
I hope that this lens stops down well. The 50/1.4, which has very beautiful boke and good sharpness wide open, never really gets all that much sharper when stopped down, which was one of my disappointments with it, the other being the AF "speed".
That's why you have multiple 50s. I have the Sigma 50/1.4 as well as the Zeiss 50/2 MP. Sigma for wide open (and really cool flares), the Zeiss for the rest.
p.2 #12 · What do you expect from Sigma 35 F/1.4 artist?
carstenw wrote:
I hope that this lens stops down well. The 50/1.4, which has very beautiful boke and good sharpness wide open, never really gets all that much sharper when stopped down, which was one of my disappointments with it, the other being the AF "speed".
p.2 #19 · What do you expect from Sigma 35 F/1.4 artist?
helimat wrote:
You are a respected member here, so I was surprised by what you wrote, it seemed like borderline internet bullshit.
I suspect it is a matter of "Performance does not increase as dramatically as it is stopped down as compared to such-and-such Zeiss/Leica/etc. lens, therefore it is lackluster in a relative sense, not an absolute sense."
This seems like a failure in communication, not a genuine difference of opinion on the lens.
