Would love to see that show. I thought Winogrand mostly shot with 28mm. Could be wrong though.
Abstraction wrote:
I am sure the Sigma is an excellent lense, and the new Sony 35 will likely be very good.
I have to say, however, that I went to see the show of Garry Winogrand's color
photos at the Brooklyn Museum today. Over a period of 20 years, beginning
sometime in the 1950s and for the next 20 years, he shot 60,000+ color
slides. Although this body of work has been ignored, it is stunning, to my eye
as wonderful has the B&W photos for which he is famous. These were shot, as
far as I can determine, with a Summicron 35mm f/2 and an M3. That is, he
may have used one camera and one lense almost exclusively for 20 years.
In order to exhibit the original technology, the show includes a 100 slides
projec ted with a classic carousel projector. In another, large room there
are perhaps 10 constantly changing digitalized images on opposing walls.
They were large, probably 4 x 6 ft, and stunning in their sharpness, contrast,
and impact.
The corners were probably weak, there may have been aberrations, probably
lens flaws of all kinds. By our standards the Summicron is probably a medicore
lens. I didn't notice. it is one of the best photography shows I have seen.
Hello! Received the lens yesterday and took some quick shots of the pets around the house (and a small trip to the comic shop). All of these shots are at 1.8 (except the toy box which is f/2). I imported and exported in Capture one 12 with no edits. Edit: Also- capture one 12 doesn't know this lens yet- so I guess these are uncorrected? I'm new to capture one since my adobe sub is running out.
[url=https://flic.kr/p/2h7Ys4R]
So far I have to say I am much, much happier with this lens than the Sigma 1.4 based on the size alone. It’s going to pair nicely with the FE 85mm as my auto focus lenses.
Ody1 wrote:
Reading many posts here, I wasted my money. Mine arrives on Wednesday and I'm excited for it.
Don’t worry, you will be happy. The circus started when one of the reviewers insisted with too many foliage (against bright sky) pics. There are just 2 lenses that can consistently deal with that, the 85 and the 100 GM, and they are of such different FL than 35mm that it’s not even worth trying to compare.
p.33 #10 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
vdo1 wrote:
Together with weight and size these were my exact expectations, even before it was ever announced. A faster 35/2.8. Isn’t it what we were asking for?
Exactly. I sure am not looking for a big heavy lens with fantastic rendering...we already have enough of those. Give me reasonably fast but light compact and sharp lenses with AF and I'm happy.
p.33 #12 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
chez wrote:
Exactly. I sure am not looking for a big heavy lens with fantastic rendering...we already have enough of those. Give me reasonably fast but light compact and sharp lenses with AF and I'm happy.
If it's sharp, has good contrast, and colors, that usually enough of a baseline to work with in post. It's when the soft, and colors and contrast are muddy that the output is hard to work with.
My sense is that the lens is more than good enough to create great photos, but I need to shoot with it more. I'm trying to get outside but its so freaking humid this morning that my lens immediately fogs up.
p.33 #13 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
KarmaKramer wrote:
I envision it being very similar to the 55/1.8. Mega sharp and fast AF but a little dull. Useful,effective but a buy/sell favorite down the line.
From the samples posted here, the 55/1.8 seems to have smoother rendering compared to the FE 35/1.8.
I don't think the 35/1.8's images are dull at all! I see more contrast and deeper colors compared to the 55mm. Yes, they are similar in size and build but imo not in rendering and contrast.
p.33 #14 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Fred Miranda wrote:
From the samples posted here, the 55/1.8 seems to have smoother rendering compared to the FE 35/1.8.
I don't think the 35/1.8's images are dull at all! I see more contrast and deeper colors as well. Yes, they are similar in size and build but imo not in rendering and contrast.
FE 50/1.8 is smoother too, however I’ll put it mostly on the difference in FL, not in the 50 having some special mojo.
p.33 #15 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Looking forward to your rendering verdict, Fred, assuming you’re planning to review.
Fred Miranda wrote:
From the samples posted here, the 55/1.8 seems to have smoother rendering compared to the FE 35/1.8.
I don't think the 35/1.8's images are dull at all! I see more contrast and deeper colors compared to the 55mm. Yes, they are similar in size and build but imo not in rendering and contrast.
p.33 #17 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Kind of regretting being cheap and buying from Henry's instead of BH. Guess I'll at least wait for our venerable members to chim in before I get impatient and rebuy from a domestic store.
p.33 #18 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
If I were choosing a small AF lens in the 35-45mm range, I'd still go with the Sigma I think. Not digging the bokeh from this 35/1.8. The images do look punchy, though, and I think it'll satisfy lots of folks.
p.33 #19 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
twentysevenone wrote:
Kind of regretting being cheap and buying from Henry's instead of BH. Guess I'll at least wait for our venerable members to chim in before I get impatient and rebuy from a domestic store.
Vistek has it in stock so it’s a matter of days until Henrys does too. Or you can cancel with Henrys and order with Vistek lol.
p.33 #20 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
akashyap wrote:
Did you sell it to get the A7Riii?
No I had both at the same time. I would have kept the rx1rii if it had the same functioning speed and af system as the r3, but it was sluggish in comparison
