This topic is in the 2012 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2012Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
p.3 #1Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
I have the Sigma 50 1.4. Love it. Awesome bokeh, fast, great colours, AF is slick. Looking forward to adding this 35mm into the stable.
Nov 21, 2012 at 04:19 PM
p.3 #2Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
If you read the full text of the review, the Sigma and Canon lenses test equal up by f/2.8. The Sigma is only better at f/1.4 and f/2.0.
Huge differences among the MSPR and "street" prices are pretty typical of Sigma.
Canon has a tiny dealer profit margin (MSRP-wholesale) and consistent prices as a result. Apparently Sigma's dealer pricing is variable.
Huge differences among the MSPR and "street" prices are pretty typical of Sigma.
Canon has a tiny dealer profit margin (MSRP-wholesale) and consistent prices as a result. Apparently Sigma's dealer pricing is variable.
Nov 21, 2012 at 04:28 PM
p.3 #3Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
How about the typical yellow cast of sigma glass..is it gone?
Nov 21, 2012 at 04:42 PM
p.3 #4Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
I haven't had that yellow cast in any of my current or past Sigma lenses, is that still a concern?
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:05 PM
p.3 #5Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Vox Sciurorum wrote:
If you read the full text of the review, the Sigma and Canon lenses test equal up by f/2.8. The Sigma is only better at f/1.4 and f/2.0.
Canon has a tiny dealer profit margin (MSRP-wholesale) and consistent prices as a result. Apparently Sigma's dealer pricing is variable.
"Only" better at 1.4 and 2.0? Well, heck.. I guess I won't buy it then, because I *never* ever shoot at 1.4 or 2.0 with fast primes...
If you read the full text of the review, the Sigma and Canon lenses test equal up by f/2.8. The Sigma is only better at f/1.4 and f/2.0.
Earlier quote
Huge differences among the MSPR and "street" prices are pretty typical of Sigma."Only" better at 1.4 and 2.0? Well, heck.. I guess I won't buy it then, because I *never* ever shoot at 1.4 or 2.0 with fast primes...
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:09 PM
p.3 #6Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Vox Sciurorum wrote:
If you read the full text of the review, the Sigma and Canon lenses test equal up by f/2.8. The Sigma is only better at f/1.4 and f/2.0.
They equal up but only against Roger's copy of the very best Canon 35L he has tested (out of 100 copies of lens or so). Or did I read this wrong?
Roger wrote:
Stopped down to f/2.0 and f/2.8 respectively, the Sigma responds with 900/770/560 and 1000/870/770 mtf50 values (center/average/corner). The Canon ‘best copy’ returned 840/740/520 and 1000/840/740 numbers. It’s probably worth mentioning the Sigma has slightly less distortion at 1%, too.
I wonder if my 35L even goes to f/2.8?
Never tried that one before...
If you read the full text of the review, the Sigma and Canon lenses test equal up by f/2.8. The Sigma is only better at f/1.4 and f/2.0.
They equal up but only against Roger's copy of the very best Canon 35L he has tested (out of 100 copies of lens or so). Or did I read this wrong?
Roger wrote:
Stopped down to f/2.0 and f/2.8 respectively, the Sigma responds with 900/770/560 and 1000/870/770 mtf50 values (center/average/corner). The Canon ‘best copy’ returned 840/740/520 and 1000/840/740 numbers. It’s probably worth mentioning the Sigma has slightly less distortion at 1%, too.
I wonder if my 35L even goes to f/2.8?
Never tried that one before...Nov 21, 2012 at 05:16 PM
p.3 #7Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
They equal up but only against Roger's copy of the very best Canon 35L he has tested (out of 100 copies of lens or so). Or did I read this wrong?
You're right. The one Sigma tests equal to the best Canon at f/2.8.
You're right. The one Sigma tests equal to the best Canon at f/2.8.
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:29 PM
p.3 #8Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Pardon the ignorance, but what do people shoot with a 35 mm?
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:30 PM
p.3 #9Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Romy, they definitely DON'T shoot the ISS as it orbits 400km above Earth...
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:32 PM
p.3 #10Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Anyone tried that lens on the FX format yet??
??Nov 21, 2012 at 05:36 PM
p.3 #11Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
mitesh wrote:
Romy, they definitely DON'T shoot the ISS as it orbits 400km above Earth...
Thanks. My wallet is safe then from what seems to be an amazing piece of very short glass.
Romy, they definitely DON'T shoot the ISS as it orbits 400km above Earth...
Thanks. My wallet is safe then from what seems to be an amazing piece of very short glass.
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:36 PM
p.3 #12Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
luke0622 wrote:
Anyone tried that lens on the FX format yet??
Roger did use it with the 5D mk2, so his take is using a 35mm sensor.
Anyone tried that lens on the FX format yet
??Roger did use it with the 5D mk2, so his take is using a 35mm sensor.
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:46 PM
p.3 #13Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Liquidstone wrote:
Pardon the ignorance, but what do people shoot with a 35 mm?
You know, test charts, rulers, FoCal targets... Stuff like that.
Pardon the ignorance, but what do people shoot with a 35 mm?
You know, test charts, rulers, FoCal targets... Stuff like that.
Nov 21, 2012 at 05:51 PM
p.3 #14Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
http://www.dchome.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1161389&extra=page%3D1
Dunno if I can post link here but this is from a HK user who test his new Sigma 35 on a 1DX, if you are interested. With 100% crop as well.
If link is not allowed please del, thanks
Dunno if I can post link here but this is from a HK user who test his new Sigma 35 on a 1DX, if you are interested. With 100% crop as well.
If link is not allowed please del, thanks
Nov 21, 2012 at 06:00 PM
p.3 #15Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
I now have high expectations for the new 120-300.
Nov 21, 2012 at 07:44 PM
p.3 #16Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
vsg28 wrote:
I haven't had that yellow cast in any of my current or past Sigma lenses, is that still a concern?
Maybe when we shot film and it was hard to get rid of, But I have not seen it in any of my 4 Sigma lenses.
I haven't had that yellow cast in any of my current or past Sigma lenses, is that still a concern?
Maybe when we shot film and it was hard to get rid of, But I have not seen it in any of my 4 Sigma lenses.
Nov 21, 2012 at 07:46 PM
p.3 #17Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Any word if it's weather sealed? That could be a big Canon 35L advantage for some.
Nov 21, 2012 at 08:44 PM
p.3 #19Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I now have high expectations for the new 120-300.
Same here for a new Sigmonster with OS and focus limiter.
I now have high expectations for the new 120-300.
Same here for a new Sigmonster with OS and focus limiter.
Nov 21, 2012 at 08:59 PM
p.3 #20Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM first impressions
sounds interesting
if i ever get the money to dedicate to such a lens this just may be the one (and hopefully sigma will make it easier to get the money, would also sell my 50mm 1.4)
Edited on Nov 21, 2012 at 09:56 PM · View previous versions
if i ever get the money to dedicate to such a lens this just may be the one (and hopefully sigma will make it easier to get the money, would also sell my 50mm 1.4)
Edited on Nov 21, 2012 at 09:56 PM · View previous versions
Nov 21, 2012 at 09:52 PM