This topic is in the 2016 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2016Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
p.3 #1Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Another sample here and I'm still on a tripod. Love this truck. 
Im focusing squarely on the headlight
Here the Prime Sigma 35mm shows its central sharpness and the zoom would match it at 2.3 just slightly down from open on the zoom. If you want sharp dead center wide open the 35 1.4 is it. If 2.3 is acceptable in the zoom than you can easily match the prime. Landscape shooters as we all know could care less here but they do care about corners and even at F4 the corners and centrally or across the frame is extremely good. Folks that focus stack this is a big benefit as you can be at F4 and shoot at higher shutter speeds as you knock off 4 or 5 focus stack frames and you should be more wide open doing it than at F8 I have found.
Okay here you can look at two things the Bokeh and the Bokeh balls. The zoom does not looks great here with bokeh balls but in another comparison i did it does look better. Honestly its going to depend on how you are using these lenses if it matters or not
The Zoom at F2 is first posted than the Prime at 1.4
Im focusing squarely on the headlight
Here the Prime Sigma 35mm shows its central sharpness and the zoom would match it at 2.3 just slightly down from open on the zoom. If you want sharp dead center wide open the 35 1.4 is it. If 2.3 is acceptable in the zoom than you can easily match the prime. Landscape shooters as we all know could care less here but they do care about corners and even at F4 the corners and centrally or across the frame is extremely good. Folks that focus stack this is a big benefit as you can be at F4 and shoot at higher shutter speeds as you knock off 4 or 5 focus stack frames and you should be more wide open doing it than at F8 I have found.
Okay here you can look at two things the Bokeh and the Bokeh balls. The zoom does not looks great here with bokeh balls but in another comparison i did it does look better. Honestly its going to depend on how you are using these lenses if it matters or not
The Zoom at F2 is first posted than the Prime at 1.4
Mar 24, 2016 at 07:36 AM
p.3 #2Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
I'm not really seeing onion rings per say. I have one more sample on this I'll post soon
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:04 AM
p.3 #3Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
GMPhotography wrote:
I subsequently learned, after my initial disappointment, that when Lensrentals I believe, did a test on 10 different Sigma 24-36 F2s, the range in performance was enormous - most were 'good' but they had a couple of stinkers in their sample of 10.
I never went back to test the lens again as for my 5DSR I have gone with the Stabilized Sigma 24-105 F4 OS and the new Canon 35L II F1.4, but from what I see from the pictures posted here of the Sigma 24-35 F2, they don't look very good at all and it is exactly what I saw - it is nowhere near as sharp as the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II - and the new Canon 35L II destroys it.
Great post - thanks.Well thanks but your not going to get off there as i am very interested to hear how you can explain one of the highest rated 35mm 1.4 primes in the Sigma can get beat in the corners longer before it can catch up to the zoom and the zoom on center is a touch behind the prime and I mean a touch as they would equal out at around 2.3. I think a lot of folks would ask you this same question.
I don't know, but the answer could be as simple as not using Live View with the DSLR in his quick test? That's not a variable in your testing (focus adjustment often needed with a DSLR and phase detect).
wallstreetonei wrote
When the Sigma 24-35 F2 arrived at my local dealer, I went it in and my sales guy and I tested it repeatedly versus my and one of the store's Canon 24-70 F2.8 II - the Canons were both noticeably sharper. I went in to buy the lens and walked out without it. My sales person, a Nikon shooter, was also very interested in the new Sigma as he wanted to buy it as well - after our tests - he came to the immediate and same conclusion that I did - no way.I subsequently learned, after my initial disappointment, that when Lensrentals I believe, did a test on 10 different Sigma 24-36 F2s, the range in performance was enormous - most were 'good' but they had a couple of stinkers in their sample of 10.
I never went back to test the lens again as for my 5DSR I have gone with the Stabilized Sigma 24-105 F4 OS and the new Canon 35L II F1.4, but from what I see from the pictures posted here of the Sigma 24-35 F2, they don't look very good at all and it is exactly what I saw - it is nowhere near as sharp as the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II - and the new Canon 35L II destroys it.
Great post - thanks.
I don't know, but the answer could be as simple as not using Live View with the DSLR in his quick test? That's not a variable in your testing (focus adjustment often needed with a DSLR and phase detect).
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:14 AM
p.3 #4Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Maybe so . Now I did have a really bad copy of the Sigma 35 1.4 way back when it came out. Even sent it in for repair and they never got it right than I bought it again with the A7r and I had a good copy than. We all know about copy variation for sure so I never dismiss that ever. I certainly have been a victim of this with the FE.
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:24 AM
p.3 #5Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
The 24-35/2 zoom has even performance across the the entire frame. One stop down at f/2.8, it is similar or better than the best zooms in the market (especially corners). It would be interesting how it compares to the 24-70GM but I already can tell that it loses big on price!
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:24 AM
p.3 #6Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
GMPhotography wrote:
Maybe so . Now I did have a really bad copy of the Sigma 35 1.4 way back when it came out. Even sent it in for repair and they never got it right than I bought it again with the A7r and I had a good copy than. We all know about copy variation for sure so I never dismiss that ever. I certainly have been a victim of this with the FE.
Certainly, if he did a thorough and careful test with Live View (at the store), sample variation is possible. If that's the case, the store should really send the bad copy back to Sigma rather than passing it on to a customer.
Maybe so . Now I did have a really bad copy of the Sigma 35 1.4 way back when it came out. Even sent it in for repair and they never got it right than I bought it again with the A7r and I had a good copy than. We all know about copy variation for sure so I never dismiss that ever. I certainly have been a victim of this with the FE.
Certainly, if he did a thorough and careful test with Live View (at the store), sample variation is possible. If that's the case, the store should really send the bad copy back to Sigma rather than passing it on to a customer.
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:29 AM
p.3 #7Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Fred I think and we still are not sure on the GM but I think it will have better bokeh and maybe less onion ring effect. But paying for that is another question. Honestly my bokeh lens is more a 50 and 85 as I want it more for people type images. I'm actually questioning the 1.4 as the zoom is so darn close but I believe it is still nice to have both for different styles of shooting. I would never carry them both to the same shoot though.
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:33 AM
p.3 #8Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Okay this is the worst torture tests I have done to several lenses and the Sony FE 35mm 1.4 and the Tamron 35mm 1.8 failed it it pretty bad. The Bokeh balls had bad onion ring effect and I am not really seeing it here. Sure they may have different shape but is anyone seeing onion ring here. Now i only have a solid base sharpening here that i use all the time but this is interesting to me. Thoughts but remember this is a ugly ugly test on any lens.
The area is right to the left of the cows horn
The area is right to the left of the cows horn
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:48 AM
p.3 #9Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
GMPhotography wrote:
Well thanks but your not going to get off there as i am very interested to hear how you can explain one of the highest rated 35mm 1.4 primes in the Sigma can get beat in the corners longer before it can catch up to the zoom and the zoom on center is a touch behind the prime and I mean a touch as they would equal out at around 2.3. I think a lot of folks would ask you this same question.
My comments have nothing to do with the Sigma 35 Prime.
I was potentially interested in the 24-35F2 as a main camera 'double - FL' wedding prime that could be shot at F2. That was my approach to this lens and when I saw the SLRGEAR.com review showing how good the blurr chart looked I had to try it. Compared to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II shot at 24mm and 35mm (the lens I tested) it wasn't even close. The Canon was so much sharper everywhere - and the Sigma had terrible corners (not a deal killer for a low light indoor wedding lens) but it was very unimpressive.
If the Sigma 24-35F2 could be as good at F2 as the Canon 35L II is at F1.4 I would buy it.
Since I have moved most of my thin depth of field prime shooting over to my Sony A7Rii where IBIS and the lack of a mirrorbox makes getting tack sharp images easy, I may go back in a test another copy of the lens for the single reason that I have the new Sigma adapter on order so that I can use the Sigma 24-105 on the A7Rii as a 'native' lens.
Well thanks but your not going to get off there as i am very interested to hear how you can explain one of the highest rated 35mm 1.4 primes in the Sigma can get beat in the corners longer before it can catch up to the zoom and the zoom on center is a touch behind the prime and I mean a touch as they would equal out at around 2.3. I think a lot of folks would ask you this same question.
My comments have nothing to do with the Sigma 35 Prime.
I was potentially interested in the 24-35F2 as a main camera 'double - FL' wedding prime that could be shot at F2. That was my approach to this lens and when I saw the SLRGEAR.com review showing how good the blurr chart looked I had to try it. Compared to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II shot at 24mm and 35mm (the lens I tested) it wasn't even close. The Canon was so much sharper everywhere - and the Sigma had terrible corners (not a deal killer for a low light indoor wedding lens) but it was very unimpressive.
If the Sigma 24-35F2 could be as good at F2 as the Canon 35L II is at F1.4 I would buy it.
Since I have moved most of my thin depth of field prime shooting over to my Sony A7Rii where IBIS and the lack of a mirrorbox makes getting tack sharp images easy, I may go back in a test another copy of the lens for the single reason that I have the new Sigma adapter on order so that I can use the Sigma 24-105 on the A7Rii as a 'native' lens.
Mar 24, 2016 at 08:59 AM
p.3 #10Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Sounds weird you may have tested a bad copy not sure, might be worth trying again as the corners on the zoom here in this test rock the house so it does make me wonder if you had a bad copy to test.
Mar 24, 2016 at 09:03 AM
p.3 #11Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Just found my Loxia 35mm test . It gets to level at 5.6 in the corners. Which looks to even the zoom at F4
Edited on Mar 24, 2016 at 09:08 AM · View previous versions
Edited on Mar 24, 2016 at 09:08 AM · View previous versions
Mar 24, 2016 at 09:03 AM
p.3 #12Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Not a strong showing given the candidates in the thread. Actually the Zoom looks even better at F4 than the Loxia at 5.6/ Look at the light fixture
I'll have to go test more for specific stuff now as I did not go further that testing day.
I'll have to go test more for specific stuff now as I did not go further that testing day.
Mar 24, 2016 at 09:04 AM
p.3 #13Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
wallstreetonei wrote:
My comments have nothing to do with the Sigma 35 Prime.
I was potentially interested in the 24-35F2 as a main camera 'double - FL' wedding prime that could be shot at F2. That was my approach to this lens and when I saw the SLRGEAR.com review showing how good the blurr chart looked I had to try it. Compared to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II shot at 24mm and 35mm (the lens I tested) it wasn't even close. The Canon was so much sharper everywhere - and the Sigma had terrible corners (not a deal killer for a low...Show more →
So, I'm just curious if your test was indeed sample variation as the difference sounds pretty dramatic. Did you test in the store on a tripod using Live View?
GMPhotography wrote
Well thanks but your not going to get off there as i am very interested to hear how you can explain one of the highest rated 35mm 1.4 primes in the Sigma can get beat in the corners longer before it can catch up to the zoom and the zoom on center is a touch behind the prime and I mean a touch as they would equal out at around 2.3. I think a lot of folks would ask you this same question.I was potentially interested in the 24-35F2 as a main camera 'double - FL' wedding prime that could be shot at F2. That was my approach to this lens and when I saw the SLRGEAR.com review showing how good the blurr chart looked I had to try it. Compared to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 II shot at 24mm and 35mm (the lens I tested) it wasn't even close. The Canon was so much sharper everywhere - and the Sigma had terrible corners (not a deal killer for a low...Show more →
So, I'm just curious if your test was indeed sample variation as the difference sounds pretty dramatic. Did you test in the store on a tripod using Live View?
Mar 24, 2016 at 09:19 AM
p.3 #14Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Guy,
If you would put the RX1RII through the same test, you would be shocked by how good the corners are at this distance. It is similar to the Loxia 21/2.8 performance, From my experience with this camera, the bokeh tests would give the edge to the Sonnar 35/2 as well. Pretty smooth blur transition at pretty much any distance.
If you would put the RX1RII through the same test, you would be shocked by how good the corners are at this distance. It is similar to the Loxia 21/2.8 performance, From my experience with this camera, the bokeh tests would give the edge to the Sonnar 35/2 as well. Pretty smooth blur transition at pretty much any distance.
Mar 24, 2016 at 09:43 AM
p.3 #15Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Is there a reason we don't have some version of the f2 Sonnar for the A7 yet?
Mar 24, 2016 at 09:53 AM
p.3 #16Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Fred Miranda wrote:
Guy,
If you would put the RX1RII through the same test, you would be shocked by how good the corners are at this distance. It is similar to the Loxia 21/2.8 performance, From my experience with this camera, the bokeh tests would give the edge to the Sonnar 35/2 as well. Pretty smooth blur transition at pretty much any distance.
I know and I know you love it too. Somehow I may have to figure it in for my pleasure not so much gigs. It be a perfect landscape type cam for me. I would keep the zoom and sell the 1.4 but than the plus plus just hurts. Lol
I keep seeing them used for pretty good prices too. Maybe end of summer after my big gig in NY. It would solve my love for 35mm lens
Guy,
If you would put the RX1RII through the same test, you would be shocked by how good the corners are at this distance. It is similar to the Loxia 21/2.8 performance, From my experience with this camera, the bokeh tests would give the edge to the Sonnar 35/2 as well. Pretty smooth blur transition at pretty much any distance.
I know and I know you love it too. Somehow I may have to figure it in for my pleasure not so much gigs. It be a perfect landscape type cam for me. I would keep the zoom and sell the 1.4 but than the plus plus just hurts. Lol
I keep seeing them used for pretty good prices too. Maybe end of summer after my big gig in NY. It would solve my love for 35mm lens
Mar 24, 2016 at 10:07 AM
p.3 #17Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
The Loxia 21 is without a doubt a killer lens and defiantly on my wish list now. Thanks for that Guy.
Mar 24, 2016 at 10:41 AM
p.3 #18Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Yea I thought it was the perfect lens for these lenses to compare it too. Certainly does show how freaking good it really is as we had some members have some issues. Nice to know what a good copy should look like. Why I do these silly tests. I do them for me but I like to share this stuff so folks don't get burned out there. We are seeing some sample variance and we need to test what we buy right away before our return period runs out. But now us Sony users have a Native gold standard that we can compare too. I can't recommend buying it enough. I wish they would make a 28mm just like it. In all honesty if the rumor is true I don't know how a Batis 18 could be better. Let's face it how many super wides have we seen this good across the frame even at 2.8 and dead perfect at F4. I have not
I asked Fred privately what he thought of his and his answer matches what we are seeing, I bought it immediately. So Fred gets the credit on this one. I'm just showing you all how good it really is and I am impressed by the zoom at 24mm to keep up pretty darn well. I don't expect it to match it but close is very good indeed.
I asked Fred privately what he thought of his and his answer matches what we are seeing, I bought it immediately. So Fred gets the credit on this one. I'm just showing you all how good it really is and I am impressed by the zoom at 24mm to keep up pretty darn well. I don't expect it to match it but close is very good indeed.
Mar 24, 2016 at 10:49 AM
p.3 #19Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
tylerdurden801 wrote:
Is there a reason we don't have some version of the f2 Sonnar for the A7 yet?
It would have to be a dramatically different optical design (to the point that it would not be the same lens) as the RX1 Sonnar has a huge rear element which is located extremely close to the sensor itself. The built in leaf shutter of the lens plus the fixed lens nature of the RX1 allows for this. The A7 focal plane shutter would be in the way even if you could insert an interchangeable lens with that design into the A7 mount - which is also doubtful.
Is there a reason we don't have some version of the f2 Sonnar for the A7 yet?
It would have to be a dramatically different optical design (to the point that it would not be the same lens) as the RX1 Sonnar has a huge rear element which is located extremely close to the sensor itself. The built in leaf shutter of the lens plus the fixed lens nature of the RX1 allows for this. The A7 focal plane shutter would be in the way even if you could insert an interchangeable lens with that design into the A7 mount - which is also doubtful.
Mar 24, 2016 at 11:19 AM
p.3 #20Sigma 24-35 F2/ Sigma 35 1.4 Plus many comparison lens tests
Yes, it's not only the rear element proximity to the sensor but also its larger size contributing to this unmatched IQ across the frame. This optical formula only works on a camera with a fixed lens and that's why it's not quite possible to mimic this performance with an interchangeable body.
@Matt Grum posted an illustration on this here.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1396444/4#13279531
@Matt Grum posted an illustration on this here.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1396444/4#13279531
Mar 24, 2016 at 11:55 AM