ariel777 wrote:
Quite interesting.....the negative comments as to The 135 follow the same pattern as those threads referencing other Sigma lenses, e.g., any of the earlier Art lenses. Nonetheless, the Art series continues to be well received, reliable, well-priced and with stunning IQ over a period spanning 5 years or so. Negative comments persist and always will as to Sigma, as many have had poor results with the products attributable to the pre-Art product line. So be it. Of course problems will arise, They always do....with any product line.....even those that bear the Nikon logo.
All of those negative comments should come to an end here pretty soon because as I mentioned in earlier post, the manager at Precision Camera told me that the original owner of Sigma passed away and his son took over and remodeled and redid the entire factory along with quality control. Now all of the Sigma lens is coming out of that factory will be nearly perfect. You will probably have one or two lenses out of 100 or 500 that may not work well. I am guessing that this information came from the Sigma representative. So go buy the latest sigma and enjoy it.
So many "seasoned" photographers here comparing the bokeh. The shots of the 105 vs 135 are framed the EXACT same way, meaning that the 105 is much closer to the subject than the 135 is. We all know what this does to bokeh blur/creaminess.
Because the Sigma has to be a few feet back to get the same framing, the background will be slightly less blurred than the 105 with the same framing. Put them at the same distance though, and the 135 destroys the 105.
Come on. This is photography 101. Stop burying your head sand the sand to justify your 105E purchase. The 105E is a fantastic lens, but the Sigma is better all around (AF, sharpness, contrast) while still being $800 (!) cheaper. I hate people who go out of their way to bash another product simply to defend their own.
eke2k6 wrote:
So many "seasoned" photographers here comparing the bokeh. The shots of the 105 vs 135 are framed the EXACT same way, meaning that the 105 is much closer to the subject than the 135 is. We all know what this does to bokeh blur/creaminess.
Because the Sigma has to be a few feet back to get the same framing, the background will be slightly less blurred than the 105 with the same framing. Put them at the same distance though, and the 135 destroys the 105.
Come on. This is photography 101. Stop burying your head sand the sand to justify your 105E purchase. The 105E is a fantastic lens, but the Sigma is better all around (AF, sharpness, contrast) while still being $800 (!) cheaper. I hate people who go out of their way to bash another product simply to defend their own....Show more →
Hey, it's perfectly fine for you to put a Taiwanian body kit on your civic!
trenchmonkey wrote:
Love how the sharpness really drops off after f4...typical Sigma A
Todd wrote:
Seriously? I shot a image at F/8 yesterday with mine and it was razor-sharp thank you.
Seriously. I buy glass to use wide open (or close to it) My collection of Sigma
Global Vision Glass is substantial and ALL are better a stop or 2 of wide open
than stopped down. 35 f1.4/50 f1.4/50-100 f1.8/24-105 f4/150-600S. Don't
know why your panties are in a twist...loves me some Art & Sport.
I find it funny someone would say my comments are negative towards the Sigma 135. Iv'e said I think it's an amazing lens, I just prefer the 105. I like the 105's rendering just a little more and trust the Nikon AF a little more. If it wasn't for the Nikon 105 the Sigma 135 would be my primary portrait lens.
It's interesting that everyone is discussing sharpness and AF, but not FL. For me FL plays an important role in deciding which lens to get. The 105 FL sits perfect between the 58 and 200. If anything I might be adding the Sigma 135 to the 105, but not replace it. 135 is too far from the 58, which means if I were to replace it, I'll have to buy a 85mm to cover that hole.
hijazist wrote:
It's interesting that everyone is discussing sharpness and AF, but not FL. For me FL plays an important role in deciding which lens to get. The 105 FL sits perfect between the 58 and 200. If anything I might be adding the Sigma 135 to the 105, but not replace it. 135 is too far from the 58, which means if I were to replace it, I'll have to buy a 85mm to cover that hole.
I agree that FL plays an important role. I am most comfortable with the 24 - 50ish – 105 combination. Unfortunately the lenses I would like for those focal lengths cost more than I am willing to spend.
Instead I have been forcing myself to learn the 35 – 85 combination (Sigma 35/1.4 and Nikon 85/1.8G). As these focal lengths become more comfortable I am leaning towards a 35 – 85 – 135 trio of primes. Everything I have heard so far about the Sigma 135 supports that inclination.
I am especially happy to hear reports of fast autofocus. Would anyone who has the Sigma 135 like to try their hand at running dog pictures?
hijazist wrote:
It's interesting that everyone is discussing sharpness and AF, but not FL. For me FL plays an important role in deciding which lens to get. The 105 FL sits perfect between the 58 and 200. If anything I might be adding the Sigma 135 to the 105, but not replace it. 135 is too far from the 58, which means if I were to replace it, I'll have to buy a 85mm to cover that hole.
You are right, my decision to go with the Sigma is also because of my lens configuration 35 - 85 - so the 135mm complement it.
The Nikon 105mm is too close to my 85mm so makes more sense to go with the Sigma 135mm.
Taken yesterday of the tree across the street. F/1.8 looks good against F/8. Someone mentioned that the sharpness and IQ diminishes beyond F/4 with this lens... I don't see it.
Hi Bruce,rest assured the auto focus is plenty fast for dogs as I have been shooting my
goldens since I got the lens,one of which is pretty quick when he wants to be. That's directly towards the camera(D500 with it's "crippled" dynamic mode). To give you a laugh however the first day I was holding it like my 50-100 and some shots were horribly out of focus,say what? All good however it was me as I was slightly turning the focus ring as I was following Scot,a wide rubber band solved my dumbness. This is a shot at the end of one of his jaunts,I tracked and took this.
ariel777 wrote:
Quite interesting.....the negative comments as to The 135 follow the same pattern as those threads referencing other Sigma lenses, e.g., any of the earlier Art lenses. Nonetheless, the Art series continues to be well received, reliable, well-priced and with stunning IQ over a period spanning 5 years or so. Negative comments persist and always will as to Sigma, as many have had poor results with the products attributable to the pre-Art product line. So be it. Of course problems will arise, They always do....with any product line.....even those that bear the Nikon logo.
I pretty much discount all such comments, along with comments where people proclaim that a given Sigma optic (which they often haven't tried) will never be as good as their [insert OEM or Zeiss here] equivalent. I've had terrific experience with Sigmas, particularly the outstanding Art lenses... they are basically a premium manufacturer with sub-premium (though certainly not bargain anymore) prices. One challenge they presently and will always face is reverse-engineering to operate on non-Sigma mounts, but the dock is a great workaround for that ongoing problem.
That said, I am worried that this particular Sigma may be too close to my 105 (which gives me slightly less perspective compression and outstanding OOF backgrounds). I was set on buying this, but am now thinking I will rent first before adding another large telephoto prime to my collection.
Robert Dull wrote:
Hi Bruce,rest assured the auto focus is plenty fast for dogs as I have been shooting my
goldens since I got the lens,one of which is pretty quick when he wants to be. That's directly towards the camera(D500 with it's "crippled" dynamic mode). To give you a laugh however the first day I was holding it like my 50-100 and some shots were horribly out of focus,say what? All good however it was me as I was slightly turning the focus ring as I was following Scot,a wide rubber band solved my dumbness. This is a shot at the end of one of his jaunts,I tracked and took this. ...Show more →
Robert, thank you very much for posting that. Lovely picture, and Scot is a beautiful dog! If you are taking dog pictures anyway, feel free to join in on Show Your Best Nikon Dog Shots Part 2 (clicky).
And yes, I have done the same thing with the focus ring. With a new piece of gear, it often takes a few days to figure out where to rest my fingers . . .
Lightsearcher wrote:
Now that my Sigma 135mm is perfectly calibrated I will do a more detailed test this weekend again with the Nikon 105mm and 200mm f2, provably I should add the 70-200mm f2.8 some people is asking for comparison shots.
I predict the findings will be very similar of what I already observed, the performance of all these lenses are outstanding and very similar the variation is mainly AF speed, weigh and of course price.
I look forward to your comparison photos! I too am interested to see how the 70-200 f2.8 compares to the 200 f2 and others.
Marcelo, thank you very much for your test shots and I look forward to more of them The 135 Art looks to be a great option for many.
Personally I really like many of the Art series and I have the 20, 24, 35 and 50 Art lenses all of which are superb. They are different in rendering and it just we as photographers decide which lens we prefer. The discussion relating to AF consistency is still an issue and rarely is accuracy a problem. The USB hub resolves the accuracy variations and really no different with Nikon lenses. The AF consistency is puzzling. You can pick up 4 copies, and I have done this with all 4 Art lenses I now own, that 1 or 2 lenses will have 50 to 75% AF consistency while the others have close to 100%. Obviously I made sure I had the ones close to 100%.
I personally don't mind as I understand that I will test fully any Art lens in store before I accept it. For the price I accept this compromise and hopefully this improves
Alright! Mine arrived this morning and I took it out for a spin. These are wide open, straight out of my D750. All I can say is, this was well worth the wait. (click the images for full sharpness)
PS. The focus was TELEPATHIC. The instant that I hit the button, the shot was in focus. I have never experienced anything like that from a prime. It was incredible.
Most excellent work. I really like that last image the most, however I can't see her right hand so it looks like she doesn't have a right arm. Other than that I am well pleased with the results
eke2k6 wrote:
And the piece de resistance is how it handles backlit subjects. Such beauty.
