I wanted to love this lens and was really happy that there was a genuine challenge to Canon but I've been so disappointed.
My Sigma 35mm arrived at the weekend and after being disappointed with most of my initial photos, I finally did some tests today and the autofocus is all over the place. Mostly, the lens front-focuses massively but sometimes it back-focuses a little.
This is my tenth lens purchase, I've never sent one back before but this one is being returned tomorrow. I know it's possible to do micro-adjustments on a 5D3 but there are times when I may want to use it on my 40D and it's just as bad on that. Also, I don't see why I should spend hours of my time correcting the lens when I could be working.
12monkeys wrote:
I wanted to love this lens and was really happy that there was a genuine challenge to Canon but I've been so disappointed.
My Sigma 35mm arrived at the weekend and after being disappointed with most of my initial photos, I finally did some tests today and the autofocus is all over the place. Mostly, the lens front-focuses massively but sometimes it back-focuses a little.
This is my tenth lens purchase, I've never sent one back before but this one is being returned tomorrow. I know it's possible to do micro-adjustments on a 5D3 but there are times when I may want to use it on my 40D and it's just as bad on that. Also, I don't see why I should spend hours of my time correcting the lens when I could be working. ...Show more →
Mine is flat out fantastic. It sounds like you got a dud. Exchange it for another Sigma. It is an astonishing lens.
Tom K. wrote: 12monkeys wroteI wanted to love this lens and was really happy that there was a genuine challenge to Canon but I've been so disappointed.
My Sigma 35mm arrived at the weekend and after being disappointed with most of my initial photos, I finally did some tests today and the autofocus is all over the place. Mostly, the lens front-focuses massively but sometimes it back-focuses a little.
This is my tenth lens purchase, I've never sent one back before but this one is being returned tomorrow. I know it's possible to do micro-adjustments on a 5D3 but there are times when I may want to use it on my 40D and it's just as bad on that. Also, I don't see why I should spend hours of my time correcting the lens when I could be working.Mine is flat out fantastic. It sounds like you got a dud. Exchange it for another Sigma. It is an astonishing lens.
I just picked this up today after reading about it for weeks, my dealer allowed me to do some test shots there, and I didn't find focus an issue on my 5DMKII. It was just as reliable as my 50L.
I took this of my wife (6 months pregnant) on our way home. So far, i'm impressed. Wide open has some nice color/contrast and look to it. Like the 50L, critical focus is important, and I have to watch my dof.
Still really enjoying this lens. No real issues with AF in indoor/lowlight/bright sunlight. I trust the AF as much as my other L lenses. Love this lens!
Here are some samples wide open. No editing except for resize under LR.
Just noticed that Ken Rockwell has, in his own words, "soiled his bag with this Sigma". http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/35mm-f14.htm
Unsurprisingly, he finds it optically superb, the AF is fine, but... "its mechanics seem to be the poorest of any other 35mm f/1.4 lens I've ever seen". Without ever elaborating on that claim. A fair amount of his usual Sigma bashing ensues, but is never really substantiated. So I would take that with a grain of salt.
Snopchenko wrote:
Just noticed that Ken Rockwell has, in his own words, "soiled his bag with this Sigma". http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/35mm-f14.htm
Unsurprisingly, he finds it optically superb, the AF is fine, but... "its mechanics seem to be the poorest of any other 35mm f/1.4 lens I've ever seen". Without ever elaborating on that claim. A fair amount of his usual Sigma bashing ensues, but is never really substantiated. So I would take that with a grain of salt.
His main gripe were with 'future' compatibility issues. He's got a point, but honestly, if this $900 lens can give me great images for the next 5 years, i'll be happy.
I trust Ken's opinion on photography about as much as I trust my local Burger King to not give me food poisoning. Plenty of haters around on here and elsewhere towards him.
Regardless, for $900, this is the best lens that honestly matches both the Canon and NIkon in many ways (except weather sealing with the Nikon). Again, you'd easily pay $900-$1000 for a used 35L that's many years old (even in great condition), upwards of $1100 for a mint+ condition 35L. For the type of shooting this will do, it's a no brainer to get a NEW LENS with a WARRANTY, for a lot less given that it performs equally, or slightly better, than the professional counterparts.
I've been working with this one for awhile, and it's a tank. It's one of those lenses that, if you don't already have a 35L, you buy if you want a 35 1.4, but if you already have a 35L, not really worth selling to buy this one... Just my $.02.
Snopchenko wrote:
Just noticed that Ken Rockwell has, in his own words, "soiled his bag with this Sigma". http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/35mm-f14.htm
Unsurprisingly, he finds it optically superb, the AF is fine, but... "its mechanics seem to be the poorest of any other 35mm f/1.4 lens I've ever seen". Without ever elaborating on that claim. A fair amount of his usual Sigma bashing ensues, but is never really substantiated. So I would take that with a grain of salt.
Poor mechanics? I own this lens, and I have no idea what he is talking about. The only problems I've had with this lens is AF-inconsistencies, but after a quick trip to Sigma it is now spot on.
I have owned the 35L in the past, and I think the S35 is way way better.
Funny thing is, his copy didn't even have any AF issues, so I had no idea what he was talking about. Maybe you'll be luckier with understanding it; but even he had to acknowledge that this lens is fine optically.
Again, his writeups are a joy to read most of the time, but painful at times, and this one is somewhat a case of the latter.