Two of my five,some would think I am crazy but wouldn't have it any other way. Enjoying the 135 immensely,I have 4 Sigma lens 50-100,18-35,and the 8-16 none have been a disappointment.
agelessphotog wrote:
Shew, that bokeh looks harsh.
Here we are. It's a matter of taste.
I stopped to talk negative against Sigma lenses or what brand ever. I'm glad everyone can buy what he's able to afford.
And then, when he gets it, he should be proud of his new jewel.
We are comfortable to have the choice.
Now and then i find the bokeh of the 135 Art harsh as well, but there are images around who renders very creamy.
So it's maybe the technique of composition and light as well as the distance to the-, and most important the kind of the background.
Desertcruiser is exactly right, in my opinion at least. The composition, lighting, the distance the subject is from the sensor plane, the distance the subject to the background, the busyness factor of the background all contribute more to how the bokeh is rendered than whether you use the Siggy 135 Art or the Nikon 105E.
They both are very nice lenses that are more than capable of producing excellent results, however... if all of the above noted factors are not taken into account, either lens is capable of falling flat on it's face.
We as photographers are certainly blessed to have such a great variety of excellent lenses to choose from. Whether we are biased more towards Nikon, Sigma Art, or Zeiss... I find it hard not to admit that they all are great at producing excellent output under the right circumstances.
As it has been said before, choose the focal length that best suits your needs, keep working towards perfecting your compositional/lighting skills, celebrate in other's images that please you and offer helpful constructive criticism in a kind way when you feel that another perspective would be welcomed.
Robert Dull wrote:
Two of my five,some would think I am crazy but wouldn't have it any other way. Enjoying the 135 immensely,I have 4 Sigma lens 50-100,18-35,and the 8-16 none have been a disappointment.
agelessphotog wrote:
Shew, that bokeh looks harsh.
This guy. I think you need to stop. You posted an entire thread saying that the Sigma looked soft, based on a YouTube video you saw. You're clearly extremely biased against the lens, for reasons truly unknown.
Todd wrote:
Nice... I like the stone street. Where is this location? That's a great lens, isn't it!
Thank you Todd,
It was shoot at Soho, lower Manhattan, the Sigma 135mm is a great lens.
---------------------------------------------
Lance B wrote:
Very nice indeedy!
Thank you Lance
---------------------------------------------
Uzay wrote:
isolation is impressive
The lens is sharp and deliver a beautiful and smooth bokeh.
---------------------------------------------
eke2k6 wrote:
This guy. I think you need to stop. You posted an entire thread saying that the Sigma looked soft, based on a YouTube video you saw. You're clearly extremely biased against the lens, for reasons truly unknown.
, if somebody make a statement based in a low resolution video means he has no idea how to evaluate the qualities of a lens.
, if somebody make a statement based in a low resolution video means he has no idea how to evaluate the qualities of a lens. 