p.7 #1 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
darbo wrote:
Man I think my copy is all defective...the aperture is stuck hard on f/1.2...I managed to move it to f/11, but it immediately slammed right back to f/1.2
p.7 #7 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
Just got mine but it's too late to go shooting. It's a bit big but balanced well so far. I'm thinking a compact hood would work well to eliminate the bulk of the included one but I've had mixed results on aftermarket hoods that will work with lens caps.
I'd rather just store it in my bag with lens hood and cap attached. Is anyone using an aftermarket hood that works with the lens cap?
p.7 #9 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
Here are a few of my "bokeh test" images with a variety of subjects. Most of these are at 1.2. I tested 4 of these lenses (all from B&H) and each has some weird behavior, but the wide-open rendering is enough for me to accept the flaws:
p.7 #10 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
Great shots.. What problems did you have with the other copies?
ketang wrote:
Here are a few of my "bokeh test" images with a variety of subjects. Most of these are at 1.2. I tested 4 of these lenses (all from B&H) and each has some weird behavior, but the wide-open rendering is enough for me to accept the flaws:
With the one I am keeping, the behavior has some similarities: the plane of focus is fairly flat at f/1.2 at both close and infinity distances, meaning it is OK to use with all subjects. The issue is at longer distances. Between f/2 and f/5, stopping down increases contrast and sharpness in the center and mid-frame. However, the edges actually go out of focus and the plane of focus moves forward closer to the lens. This is no longer an issue at f/5.6 as the depth of field increases enough that the image is sharp across the frame at a given distance. The reason I'm OK with this is that I'm shooting mostly at 1.2 and closer distances. For longer distance landscape use, I am fine with stopping down to f/5.6 or smaller.
The issue with the edges being in focus at a shorter distance at the intermediate apertures has been the case with all 4 lenses, so if it's a manufacturing defect then it was made with quite a few samples.
ysultan wrote:
Great shots.. What problems did you have with the other copies?
With the one I am keeping, the behavior has some similarities: the plane of focus is fairly flat at f/1.2 at both close and infinity distances, meaning it is OK to use with all subjects. The issue is at longer distances. Between f/2 and f/5, stopping down increases contrast and sharpness in the center and mid-frame. However, the edges actually go out of focus and the plane of focus moves forward closer to the lens. This is no longer an issue at f/5.6 as the depth of field increases enough that the image is sharp across the frame at a given distance. The reason I'm OK with this is that I'm shooting mostly at 1.2 and closer distances. For longer distance landscape use, I am fine with stopping down to f/5.6 or smaller.
The issue with the edges being in focus at a shorter distance at the intermediate apertures has been the case with all 4 lenses, so if it's a manufacturing defect then it was made with quite a few samples.
p.7 #13 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
jefonyx wrote:
I always take the time to compose some shots for this 35 1.2 on my sessions, it adds this wide perspective I really like.
Having 1.2 for night shots was a blessing
Jef -- I love all these environmental portraits featuring such beautiful models. This looks to be a great lens for providing some background context without looking contrived blur. Kudos!
BTW -- what are you using for fill in daylight and main light for the night shots?
David -- You know how weak I am for these types of scenes!
Grrrrrrr. . . between you, and Jef's images of all the French beauties, I don't know what I'll do (more like, when will I succumb to the power of this lens?). Thanks for all the great examples.
p.7 #15 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
Gunzorro wrote:
Jef -- I love all these environmental portraits featuring such beautiful models. This looks to be a great lens for providing some background context without looking contrived blur. Kudos!
BTW -- what are you using for fill in daylight and main light for the night shots?
Thanks!
Thanks Gunzorro !
You'll generally find all my lighting gear directly on my website for each session
p.7 #16 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
Gunzorro wrote:
David -- You know how weak I am for these types of scenes!
Grrrrrrr. . . between you, and Jef's images of all the French beauties, I don't know what I'll do (more like, when will I succumb to the power of this lens?). Thanks for all the great examples.
The lens is pure magic Jim. Thanks for the encouraging comments on my use of it so far.
p.7 #17 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
Just got mine today. Preliminary testing shows it to be sharp and well centered tho I always like to do more than one set of tests. Infinity testing shows it sharper than the CV 40/1.2 especially away from center until well stopped down (at least F4 or more likely F5.6 tho I only did one quick test). It also seems really sharp with good rendering at portrait distances. However, I am concerned about autofocus. Up close using eye AF wide open on AF-C, I found all but one razor sharp on the eye (4 out of 5 I think). However, stopped down to F2, I took two pics and both were a bit soft. Worse, at infinity using either autofocus C or S, I found all to be a bit off tho it was into the sun and thus a tough test. More testing is clearly in order, but not sure that I am thrilled with the Autofocus performance thus far. Naturally, a firmware fix could solve the problem, but I have 30 days to return the lens and am curious if anyone else has noticed these types of issues. Thx for any input.
p.7 #20 · Sigma 35mm f/1.2 Art E Mount Lens Image Thread
I rented one for a week from LensRentals and had similar autofocus experiences to yours. At infinity, I found autofocus to be inconsistent. I did not notice the problem you did at f2, but it's possible it was there.
I attributed the difference in autofocus to AF-S (infinity) vs. AF-C (closer), but it may have been the variation in distance vs. focus mode.
I loved the lens. It's the weight, not the autofocus issues, that made me decide I probably won't purchase it.
Luvwine wrote:
Just got mine today. Preliminary testing shows it to be sharp and well centered tho I always like to do more than one set of tests. Infinity testing shows it sharper than the CV 40/1.2 especially away from center until well stopped down (at least F4 or more likely F5.6 tho I only did one quick test). It also seems really sharp with good rendering at portrait distances. However, I am concerned about autofocus. Up close using eye AF wide open on AF-C, I found all but one razor sharp on the eye (4 out of 5 I think). However, stopped down to F2, I took two pics and both were a bit soft. Worse, at infinity using either autofocus C or S, I found all to be a bit off tho it was into the sun and thus a tough test. More testing is clearly in order, but not sure that I am thrilled with the Autofocus performance thus far. Naturally, a firmware fix could solve the problem, but I have 30 days to return the lens and am curious if anyone else has noticed these types of issues. Thx for any input. ...Show more →
)
