p.1 #1 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
@BastianK (phillipreeve.net), just starting a rolling review on the Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art which is a native to the Sony E-mount.
Here is Bastian's first impressions:
"I did not spend that much time with the Sigma 35mm 1.2 Art yet but I already got the opportunity to shoot a full wedding with it (and I was using it as one of my two main lenses) and while I am usually very hesitant with my first impressions I can already tell you: this is an outstanding lens.
I think we all expected this to be a sharp lens, but neither did I expect it to be such a big improvement over its predecessor (especially being faster) nor did I expect it to be an improvement in terms of bokeh over the other fast Sigma lenses.
What I also really enjoy is how close it is in terms of handling to the Sony GM primes. Before we saw the first pictures of this lens I always argued “it may be good optically in the end, but I would surely miss the focus hold button and the aperture ring and I don’t think Sigma will include either”. Oh how wrong I was. Luckily.
Compared to the latest Canon f/1.2 mirrorless lenses I also cannot complain about the price, it seems to be justified in my opinion.
So the only disadvantages that remain are size and weight. At almost 1.1 kg this is a heavy lens. And it is a really big lens. Surely not one I would take on a hiking trip. But it was never Sigma’s intention to design a compact lens for hiking here. They wanted to design the best 35mm lens ever. And they weren’t satisfied with making it f/1.4, they made it f/1.2. And from what I have seen so far: they succeeded."
p.1 #2 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Well written and illuminating review by Bastian, as usual. The structure of the rendering looks attractive with that smoothness for a 35mm at 1.2 and non-conspicuous onion rings, and price for performance looks great compared to the competition. But sadly it is huge. Typical trade-off for highly-corrected modern optic. Good to have options for those shooters willing to carry them, not of interest to me though.
p.1 #3 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Great to see Sigma introduce such a lens, especially with the aperture ring and focus holds. It makes sense that Sigma makes a statement lens in the 35mm focal length, as they did when introducing their Art series initially with their 35mm f1.4. Its impressive how great of a job they did with it, while keeping it at a sensible price point
p.1 #4 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
@Fred Miranda@ Thanks for sharing here and on the landing page!
@all I will try to add the other sections as soon as possible.
Unfortunately I cannot share all pictures from that wedding, but let me tell you of all the 35mm I have used so far (for phillipreeve.net I reviewed 14 by now)
this is the one I like most in terms of across frame sharpness and rendering.
There is just one thing I don't like and that is the high mechanical/optical vignetting
(which is the right term depends on what publication you quote).
But surprisingly it still looks best in the corners compared to the other fast 35s.
I will also try to include a few bokeh comparisons to the 35mm 1.4 Art.
p.1 #5 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
I absolutely love this lens from all online samples I saw and from this wonderful review. This is a very nicely written review!
I will order the L Mount version I don’t think we will see other Mount in near future. This lens might worth the hassle to keep L Mount for me. I look forward to sigma L Mount version of FF camera and more natively designed glass. Too bad, Nikon and canon don’t share their Mount. Their loss.
Fred, I think you should also cross post this with order link in alt forum and let L Mount users see this. This is the best 35mm bokeh I ever seen, just pretty.
p.1 #6 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Looks like a stellar lens, and nice to see Sigma give FE mount some love with a made-for-mirrorless design instead of a DSLR lens with bolted on adapter.
This certainly proves there is no technical barrier to making an optically excellent autofocus f1.2 lens for FE mount.
p.1 #8 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
So in his shot showing bokeh at 4 different apertures, there is absolutely no change in the size of the blur circles from f/1.2 to f/1.4, only less vignetting. There appears no benefit at all from having f/1.2 for bokeh in that test.
p.1 #9 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Pixel Perfect wrote:
So in his shot showing bokeh at 4 different apertures, there is absolutely no change in the size of the blur circles from f/1.2 to f/1.4, only less vignetting. There appears no benefit at all from having f/1.2 for bokeh in that test.
If you look closely you will notice that the size of the light circles in the center does change when stopping down to f/1.4.
The corners are a whole different story though, indeed stopping down to f/1.4 from f/1.2 makes absolutely no difference
(also have a look at optical vignetting section maybe).
p.1 #10 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
BastianK wrote:
If you look closely you will notice that the size of the light circles in the center does change when stopping down to f/1.4.
The corners are a whole different story though, indeed stopping down to f/1.4 from f/1.2 makes absolutely no difference
(also have a look at optical vignetting section maybe).
You're right but it is a very minor change. Obviously we'd need to see far more examples but so far there seems to be little benefit for the f/1.2 given the massive weight, extra cost and huge vignetting. The vignetting is all the worse given they are touting this as a superb astro lens. Correcting for nearly 3 stops that at ISO 3200+ is not what you want to see.
p.1 #12 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Pixel Perfect wrote:
You're right but it is a very minor change. Obviously we'd need to see far more examples but so far there seems to be little benefit for the f/1.2 given the massive weight, extra cost and huge vignetting. The vignetting is all the worse given they are touting this as a superb astro lens. Correcting for nearly 3 stops that at ISO 3200+ is not what you want to see.
I don't see a minor change. The change in size is equivalent to the change in aperture in the central region. Mechanical vignetting restricts the border bokeh balls to show a noticeable improvement. But that is good enough for me.
Vignetting is not extraordinarily bad for such a lens. The new Canon 50/1.2 has similar levels of vignetting.
p.1 #13 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
@Bastian I'd love to see how this lens renders against the rx1 if both are shot f2 in terms of transitions and bokeh. I realize they aren't the same lens at all and really not too comparable beyond the FL in real world usage given size, price, specs and the fixed lens aspect, but do you still have RX1R2?
Jul 29, 2019 at 11:20 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
From the samples I very much like the rendering from this lens. It is huge, but it performs. Looks like a really nice option finally at 35mm.
p.1 #15 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Hmm I'm not sure if I can give up my 35za for this. While the sigma is well corrected and sharper, the rendering doesn't seem as "dreamy" from what I've seen compared to the 35za. Bokeh looks Sigma'ish which I'm ok with, but not really a fan of compared to other brands. Am I wrong? I really want to buy this lens because a 35 1.2 with AF has been a dream of mine for quite some time lol. I'd gladly buy it but I'll be taking a big loss selling my 35za and for what seems like little benefits plus extra weight and size. I mainly shoot weddings, video and environmental portraits with my 35mm. I'm still waiting for image samples that I really like from the 35 1.2.
p.1 #16 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Holger wrote:
I don't see a minor change. The change in size is equivalent to the change in aperture in the central region. Mechanical vignetting restricts the border bokeh balls to show a noticeable improvement. But that is good enough for me.
Vignetting is not extraordinarily bad for such a lens. The new Canon 50/1.2 has similar levels of vignetting.
I agree. From this sample at mid-distance, there is definitely more blur at f/1.2 and there is a small gain in resolution and contrast by going from f/1.2 to f/1.4:
Sigma 35/1.2 Art: f/1.2 vs f/1.4 comparison. (no changes in the RAW file except for equal sharpening for both images)
p.1 #17 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
Thanks for the review again, Bastian!
What I find a bit odd is that the mechanical vignetting causes the bokeh balls to have "ears".
Maybe it's me, but I don't think I've ever seen such behavior.
p.1 #18 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
While this isn't really a typical landscape lens, it will likely see use for astro where across frame sharpness is relevant. It would be good to see farther distance performance without refocusing for the corners to get a feel for any potential field curvature. In a few of the DPR samples at far distances, there are signs of curvature, but none of their images are good for determining whether or not this is the case.
As for whether this lens will appear for Canon or Nikon... For Canon at least, wouldn't it be sufficient to use the EF protocols, which Sigma long ago reverse engineered? My impression was Canon's basic EF to RF adapter is pretty much just a pass through? Sure, if this is the case, maybe you don't get the benefit of the third ring... Might be an acceptable compromise.
Would also be nice to see this level of optical performance focused on truly compact ~f/2 primes...
p.1 #19 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
It is all relative. I don’t want be that guy but here I want to mention anyway.
Leica L and Sony E are two smaller Mount compare to Canon and Nikon. Both are better than M Mount and Nikon F Mount for sure in term of Mount size for design flexibility. Sony E Mount is 46.1mm with 18mm flange distance, Leica l Mount is 51.6mm with 20mm flange distance, if you ratio them, they two are about the same I would assume they can handle about the same design first order with each has a little bit more flexibility in different area: L has bigger Mount to have bigger last element and E can put last element closer to sensor.
So, no wonder sigma will design lens natively work both Sony and L. However, if you pay attention to what canon have done with R Mount, you will realize it is not just market talk. They utilize their Mount size and flange distance on many design include 28-70, 50f1.2, 85f1.2 and even budget 35mm f1.8. Sorry I am on cellphone so no lens diagram included here.
I personally won’t expect any sigma lens designed for canikon in next few years given its bandwidth and all the hassle they need go through to back engineer Canikon’s AF. Even it does finally, I would say Sony E and Leica L are the one limit it’s full design potential just like Nikon F did on sigma tamron 3rd party design, especially on wide end and fast glass.
I would think that is why given 35f1.2 size and 82mm front element, it is still having huge vignettes.
I personally like this lens enough to order it (not only based on this fine review, there are also many Chinese reviews I have seen)but I have to say it is never at a time I hate this multiple Mount between system. You want certain lens, you either need wait forever or having multiple system.
Aztatlan wrote:
Looks like a stellar lens, and nice to see Sigma give FE mount some love with a made-for-mirrorless design instead of a DSLR lens with bolted on adapter.
This certainly proves there is no technical barrier to making an optically excellent autofocus f1.2 lens for FE mount.
p.1 #20 · Sigma 35/1.2 Art E-mount rolling review at phillipreeve.net
zhangyue wrote:
I would think that is why given 35f1.2 size and 82mm front element, it is still having huge vignettes.
The Canon 50 RF vignettes just as much if not worse than this new Sigma... despite using a larger mount and making use of it, and it being a longer focal length.
