imagesfromobjects wrote:
I had the Sammy 35 for a while, don't have it anymore for direct comparison, but I thought it was great (for the price, I mean). I recall some noise with the focus, yes. I'm guessing in a while, price on the Sigma will drop some, so it won't be too much more of an investment.
I'll have to test tonight with video because it's loud pretty much everywhere in Philadelphia before 11pm, but I can't hear *any* focus noise with it.
The build quality between the two is night and day. The Sigma is longer, but both are compact and light. The focus and aperture rings on the Sigma put the Samyang to shame.
IQ seems about in the same league, but I'm aware that I had a really good copy of the Samyang, so YMMV. Will have to see when I play with the RAWs in LR, but my impression is that the Sigma is richer in contrast and color. The bokeh is definitely smoother and you'll get more of it at 45 vs 35.
There will be more blur for the Sigma at same distance because the FL is longer. However, aside from more blur, the Sigma 45 has smoother rendering due to under-corrected spherical aberration. I tried the Samyang 35/2.8 and thought that rendering was harsh just like the FE 35/2.8 ZA's. The difference would be very obvious if comparing their rendering with the subject at mid-distance.
Seabassius wrote:
This is tempting as a walk around lens. I'm looking for small and good autofocus lens for everyday (I already have the CV40 if I want to be serious). How does it compare to the cheap little 35mm Samyang? I've heard that autofocus is a little loud on that.
I saw your thread about the CV 40/1.2. You love the rendering but wish it had AF. I can tell you that the rendering from the Sigma is smoother than the Voigtlander at same distance with both lenses at f/2.8:
See here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1608234/2#14940535
Having said that, my main negative for the Sigma 45 is AF-C accuracy. It's fast and silent but misses more than I like.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I saw your thread about the CV 40/1.2. You love the rendering but wish it had AF. I can tell you that the rendering from the Sigma is smoother than the Voigtlander at same distance with both lenses at f/2.8:
See here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1608234/2#14940535
Having said that, my main negative for the Sigma 45 is AF-C accuracy. It's fast and silent but misses more than I like.
Yeah, that's the big piece holding me back. I picked up the Tamron 17-28, I'll try and just be content play with it for a little bit and see if Sigma resolves the AF-C issue. Was going to test the decentering this weekend.
Aug 22, 2019 at 09:23 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Some random shots from my walk home this evening. Nothing that's going to end up in the portfolio, but figured I'd post for reference. Mostly interested in testing wide open - for my purposes, it's WAYYY sharp enough. Also interested in the transition zone stuff, and seeing what happens when you throw busy backgrounds in the mix. Also, just going for bokeh insanity, which..... this can deliver thanks to the MFD.
I think it did very well. Like I already said, I love the tones. Admittidly, I'm struggling with AF, but that's not necessarily a function of the lens, but from having shot MF for 95% of my work the past few years, and using a 1st gen Sony, I'm sure. Focus and recompose works well, as does pre-focusing, but I tried some "street" stuff of moving people with AF and my hit rate was zilch. Switched to manual focus and it got much better. Will investigate different tecniques - have a toddler party to shoot this weekend, and I'm not confident enough as-is to use this lens, so I'll be using mostly the CV 40/1.2, Elmarit 28 and CV 21. This probably sounds crazy to most people, but it's what I'm used to and what works best for me for candids. I'd use the Sigma for more "posed" type stuff or in manual mode, but will have to investigate further before diving into stuff where I *need* to get certain shots.
Anyway, what I love: the RENDERING. Holy smokes. Definitely something magical here, maybe it's the rounded blades or something else, but it WORKS. Size: awesome. Weight: awesome. Build: dreamy.
What I need to adjust to: auto focus.
Anyway, here's some shots:
Aug 22, 2019 at 10:30 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
twoeye wrote:
Good start Sigma, now give us a 300g 90mm f/2,8 which would be the perfect complement to this lens.
Tsss Tsss... are you mad ? How are we going to do anything with such a hideously sloooooooooooow prime ? Don't you know that portraits are only to be taken at f1.2 ?
Just kidding, I'm dying for a f2.8 portrait prime (but with low vignetting pretty please ?). Modern faster lenses loose much of the aberrations that make for pretty neat rendering and transitions by that f stop - and yet at that focal length as far as i'm concerned I'm spending a lot of time around f2.8-f4.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I saw your thread about the CV 40/1.2. You love the rendering but wish it had AF. I can tell you that the rendering from the Sigma is smoother than the Voigtlander at same distance with both lenses at f/2.8:
See here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1608234/2#14940535
Having said that, my main negative for the Sigma 45 is AF-C accuracy. It's fast and silent but misses more than I like.
Seems alittle odd we have heard nothing from Sigma about a firmware update. I know a bunch of us here at least sent Sigma emails about AF. I would assume we are not the only ones. They have to be aware of it by now. As soon as they fix that I'll buy the lens again. But AF issues in 2019 I'm not putting up with anymore.
twoeye wrote:
Good start Sigma, now give us a 300g 90mm f/2,8 which would be the perfect complement to this lens.
Would love to have Sigma 24, 45 and 90mm Contemporary with similar rendering, IQ and size.
AF-C accuracy is my main negative for the Sigma 45 at the moment but hopefully this can be improved. I don't know anyone at Sigma and their general tech support never replied to me. It's a bit odd that other reviewers do not mention this issue...
I'm keeping my copy because AF is very accurate in AF-S and I love the images it produces. Sigma seems to release firmware updates frequently so I think it's just a matter of time for them to release a firmware update for this lens: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/download/lenses/firmware/
MayaTlab wrote:
Tsss Tsss... are you mad ? How are we going to do anything with such a hideously sloooooooooooow prime ? Don't you know that portraits are only to be taken at f1.2 ?
Just kidding, I'm dying for a f2.8 portrait prime (but with low vignetting pretty please ?). Modern faster lenses loose much of the aberrations that make for pretty neat rendering and transitions by that f stop - and yet at that focal length as far as i'm concerned I'm spending a lot of time around f2.8-f4.
I think Sony has something exactly tailored to this:
Fred Miranda wrote:
Would love to have Sigma 24, 45 and 90mm Contemporary with similar rendering, IQ and size.
AF-C accuracy is my main negative for the Sigma 45 at the moment but hopefully this can be improved. I don't know anyone at Sigma and their general tech support never replied to me. It's a bit odd that other reviewers do not mention this issue...
I'm keeping my copy because AF is very accurate in AF-S and I love the images it produces. Sigma seems to release firmware updates frequently so I think it's just a matter of time for them to release a firmware update for this lens: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/download/lenses/firmware/...Show more →
That's interesting no one responded to you. I used the link I think you provided when I email them about my AF concerns with it. It took a couple days but they did inquire about it and wanted my serial number. At that point I had returned the lens and did not have that information. So obviously I was no help. Maybe if people that have concerns email again with serial numbers that will help them. Don't know.
GMPhotography wrote:
Apologies I have not read up on this lens yet. Question I have is how is it in low light event type stuff
When I tested mine before I returned it, AFS seemed pretty good in low light. AFC was not as good but I wasn't having consistent results in good light with AFC. So not sure if it was because of the low light or not. I will pick this lens up again once they iron out the AF bugs. This would complement the 24gm nicely when I don't want to drag around the 50 1.4
nhsonyshooter wrote:
When I tested mine before I returned it, AFS seemed pretty good in low light. AFC was not as good but I wasn't having consistent results in good light with AFC. So not sure if it was because of the low light or not. I will pick this lens up again once they iron out the AF bugs. This would complement the 24gm nicely when I don't want to drag around the 50 1.4
It's not because of low light, although if it's very dark, it may hunt due to the f/2.8 aperture. Even testing it outdoors in a sunny day, I still get too many misses in continuous focus. In the viewfinder, the AF-C focusing point is steady green but when checking the subject at 1:1, it's off way more than with my other AF lenses.
nhsonyshooter wrote:
That's interesting no one responded to you. I used the link I think you provided when I email them about my AF concerns with it. It took a couple days but they did inquire about it and wanted my serial number. At that point I had returned the lens and did not have that information. So obviously I was no help. Maybe if people that have concerns email again with serial numbers that will help them. Don't know.
There was no answer and I even posted a link to the review and detailed information...
Yeah, ditto. AF-S works fine, though. I'll mention it to the Lensrentals folks, maybe they have a direct line to Sigma.
For low light events, I'd use it in manual mode, but then might as well use the CV.
I can't speak to how well it does on newer Sony cameras, but on the a7S, the AF in low light is just so-so. Which doesn't bode well, because the a7S is insanely good in low light. Likely due to f/2.8.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's not because of low light, although if it's very dark, it may hunt due to the f/2.8 aperture. Even testing it outdoors in a sunny day, I still get too many misses in continuous focus. In the viewfinder, the AF-C focusing point is steady green but when checking the subject at 1:1, it's off way more than with my other AF lenses.
