I agree, street photography is my hobby and I try and challenge myself by using different focal lengths every other week. I love using my 135 because of the isolation, plus the GM has a closer focus than your average 135. Could be that it has been over 3 months since I last used any of my 50’s.
That said, this 135 GM is an amazing lens that makes me question if keeping my vintage 135’s (Pentax, Nikon, and Minolta) make since at all! Great time to be alive😁
I agree, street photography is my hobby and I try and challenge myself by using different focal lengths every other week. I love using my 135 because of the isolation, plus the GM has a closer focus than your average 135. Could be that it has been over 3 months since I last used any of my 50’s.
That said, this 135 GM is an amazing lens that makes me question if keeping my vintage 135’s (Pentax, Nikon, and Minolta) make since at all! Great time to be alive😁
The 105 is probably never hitting my Sony bag. I'm looking at Nikon's 105 1.4 for my Nikon ecosystem, but the Sigma's is huge. Did you get any good shots with it?
JadedWriter wrote:
The 105 is probably never hitting my Sony bag. I'm looking at Nikon's 105 1.4 for my Nikon ecosystem, but the Sigma's is huge. Did you get any good shots with it?
I actually did, but not of people - I'm not much of a "real" street photographer. I did grab one of a woman that I liked (the photo, not the woman), but I didn't like the composition so I never posted it.
I'm not even classified as a real street photographer saxguy wrote:
I actually did, but not of people - I'm not much of a "real" street photographer. I did grab one of a woman that I liked (the photo, not the woman), but I didn't like the composition so I never posted it.
Jochenb wrote:
Yes my third Loxia 21 finally was a good one. The 50 Loxia was great at first try. With the 85 Loxia I gave up after a few bad copies. And so on and so on.
The funny thing is I usually am more lucky with lenses that have bad reputation when it comes to copy variation (16-35 GM, FE 35/1.4, Voigtlander 15 III,...).
I share these examples because I want people that might encounter the same won't think they're the only one having problems.
Bad news about the 135 GM. My first Loxia 21 was quite decentred, but my second copy was absolutely perfect!! I also had a very badly decentred new 24-70 ZA for a-mount and at the same time a not working AF and have had a decentred 70-200G for a-mount. The last two mentioned I sold long ago. And they got repaired.
2xbass wrote:
One thing that’s exciting, and somewhat validates the size and weight of the 105 is that Lensrentals recently tested it, and some other lenses, at an insane 200 lp/mm and the Sigma 105 came out on top, even sharper than the Sony 135, although the Sony beats it at lower resolutions.
Any chance you have a link available for these tests?
I've seen a few people reference this, but haven't seen the article or charts.
Mar 25, 2020 at 02:52 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
First thing to notice is that Roger is very explicit that the these high resolution tests say nothing about performance of the lens in the real world on today's cameras. It was just a fun test for him, and the lens that came out on top was the Zeiss Otus 55 f/1.4 APO, not the Sigma 105 f/1.4 Art. The Sigma 40 f/1.4 Art is also a little better than the 105.
I sold my 70-200 f2.8 GM because I wanted something lighter and cheaper. I figured since I shoot motorsport in the middle of the day, 70-200 f4 G should be enough.
But I have A7R IV and I'm thinking, that 70-200 G is probably not going to use my camera to its full potential.
I'm looking into this lens for motorsport photography. I have access to the track and don't need a very long reach.
What do you guys think? is this lens as good or better than 70-200 GM?
Nebell wrote:
I sold my 70-200 f2.8 GM because I wanted something lighter and cheaper. I figured since I shoot motorsport in the middle of the day, 70-200 f4 G should be enough.
But I have A7R IV and I'm thinking, that 70-200 G is probably not going to use my camera to its full potential.
I'm looking into this lens for motorsport photography. I have access to the track and don't need a very long reach.
What do you guys think? is this lens as good or better than 70-200 GM?
The IQ and focus speed is no comparison if you can live with not having the flexibility of the zoom. The good thing is the 135 in crop mode on the A7RIV is like shooting at 200 so you have the best of both worlds. I sold my 70-200 after getting the 135 GM.
Seems I can't quote until 25 post so I'm just gonna leave a quick reply
Didn't know it focuses faster than 70-200, that's great to know.
I got tons of good photos from my A7R3 last year with 70-200, it should be even better with new A7R4 AND 135 GM, with a better image quality.
Nebell wrote:
Didn't know it focuses faster than 70-200, that's great to know.
I got tons of good photos from my A7R3 last year with 70-200, it should be even better with new A7R4 AND 135 GM, with a better image quality.
Here's a video in which I talk a bit about it compared to the 70-200:
