imagesfromobjects wrote:
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.
Yes, AF-S is great and that's why I kept the lens.
I just tried it on a friend's a7iii, works WAY better than on my a7S in AF-C, but still hard to say if it's up to snuff, compared to other lenses on up-to-date bodies.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, AF-S is great and that's why I kept the lens.
imagesfromobjects wrote:
I just tried it on a friend's a7iii, works WAY better than on my a7S in AF-C, but still hard to say if it's up to snuff, compared to other lenses on up-to-date bodies.
It could very well be the issue is body dependent. I'm using it on a A7R3.
For 45mm L Mount, I didn't notice systematic focus error in AFC at any distance, but keep in mind PanaS AFC (with sigma) is relatively slow and a little mess during eye/face AF, sometimes I can't differentiate it is focus error or simply focusing delay for moving kids. For non moving stuff in AFC, it is always accurate though.
My copy of sigma 35mm f1.2 is DOA, AFS at close distance consistently back focus, at mid to long distance, it doesn't have good repeatability that you can rely on even AFS with pin point focus. Either I have a faulty lens or a fault compatibility.
The contrast of 45mm definitely can/should be better at f2.8 compare to real good modern lens, at close distance it is glow like specialty lens. at infinity, its cross frame consistence is good even at wide aperture. vignette performance is very good actually(but its a f2.8 lens), so no funky stuff at corner. (A treat I value more and more after using small MF system. )
Distortion is big for a prime but but it is -2% so portrait subject looks prettier than they really are. Tip, for portrait, Leave it uncorrected.
Very well-drawn greens above #1, and nice rendering images p14. Zeiss have long used 2% distortion as the threshold value for 'noticing' in output. For a 'contemporary' lens, it has the something of the elegance of an older generation optic.
Smaller, lighter, slower lenses have the unique design opportunity to be truly dual purpose .. no one will expect 800-1600 gram primes to travel far, so stopped down performance is a very low priority, very low indeed.
The 215g weight and even the 55mm filters hark back to earlier Carl Zeiss and Leica lenses. More of these please, Sigma.
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.
The Sony 90mm f2.8G lens is quite nice, although it's a pretty chunky piece of glass.
The new Sigma has indeed been compared with the STF in this thread but I still think that there are some significant differences. Besides front bokeh, apodization lenses preserve the apodization effect far into the blur while lenses with spherical aberration tuned to make background blur more gaussian in nature are less and less influenced as defocus increases.
To be frank I think that it would be nice to have lenses covering the whole spectrum between perfectly flat circles of confusions and gaussian ones, but as far as I'm concerned I think that I really like the balance lenses like the Sigma 45 seem to achieve.
VetraLens wrote:
The Sony 90mm f2.8G lens is quite nice, although it's a pretty chunky piece of glass.
I haven't looked much at it but as a macro lens shouldn't it try to minimise spherical aberration ? Combined with good homogeneity throughout the frame it's what makes the Sigma quite interesting.
I used to be happy using macro lenses as portrait lenses but the more I age the more I start to have a preference for somewhat more dedicated lenses.
2 questions for zhangyue if you have a chance to check, since you are using this Sigma lens on the S1:
I am curious to know how fully compatible Sigma's native L-mount lenses are with the features in the S series bodies. Is the body's focus bracketing feature functional? And is the focus by wire rotational characteristic able to be changed from proportional to linear, as it can be with the Panasonic native lenses?
All the bracket function works such as aperture or focus bracket.
All focus by wire feature seems functional and programmable except one: control rotation angle: set it either 90 or 360 degree seems make no difference. Always 360 degree to me.
2ndviolinman wrote:
2 questions for zhangyue if you have a chance to check, since you are using this Sigma lens on the S1:
I am curious to know how fully compatible Sigma's native L-mount lenses are with the features in the S series bodies. Is the body's focus bracketing feature functional? And is the focus by wire rotational characteristic able to be changed from proportional to linear, as it can be with the Panasonic native lenses?
I packed FE 35 f2.8 & FE 55 along with Tamron 17-28 and Olympus OM 135 f.28 for my Matterhorn & Chamonix hiking trips but reading this review of Fred made me rent Sigma 45 to replace 35 & 55 as it saves me 200 grams in weight. Is that a good idea? Plan to shoot few pano's in Chamonix valley and from 500px exif looks like 35mm to 50mm was the most used focal length for most panos in the region.
MayaTlab wrote:
I haven't looked much at it but as a macro lens shouldn't it try to minimise spherical aberration ? Combined with good homogeneity throughout the frame it's what makes the Sigma quite interesting.
I used to be happy using macro lenses as portrait lenses but the more I age the more I start to have a preference for somewhat more dedicated lenses.
The vintage, manual focus Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5 macro is very popular exactly because they didn’t correct too much those aberrations.
nhsonyshooter wrote:
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.
Last Friday, I sent another email to Sigma at: [email protected] and today I got an answer:
"Hello Fred,
Thank you for informing us of the issue. We have sent your original email to Japan and they are looking into it. We will let you know their conclusions and response when we get it. Sorry for the delay in responding."
So, it looks like Sigma Japan is aware of the issue.
