p.17 #3 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Thanks!
Pixel peeping is my favorite weekend pastime nowadays ...
I think your results match what was previously said by Besar, at least to my untrained eyes CV has a slight upper hand in the center (which is mostly gone by f5.6), but the rest of the frame is a bit wonky to me (maybe a midfield dip on the CV?)...
Anyways, thanks again for taking the time and effort to do this .
p.17 #5 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
My morning coffee companion
Please let me introduce Tina, my morning companion. She shows up every morning around 8 o'clock to have her treat, while I'm having my morning coffee in the kitchen, saying "Hello!" and watching her. Sometimes she wants some extra, so she leans her paws and sticks her little nose to the glass door. Until I happily oblige She is now preparing for the Canadian winter, she already grew the white fur around her ears and got a little fatso, so I'm confident she will go nicely through the cold. I'll be there with her treats to help too.
The photo is taken through a double glass door, so it's a little bit milky and soft, and I got some nasty magenta reflections too there. So please don't bother to judge the lens optics based on this. My purpose was to test the "Animal Eye AF" and it quite worked - as long as she was looking at me, that is. :-) It was the first time I tried it, I wasn't strongly impressed but it's definitely usable.
p.17 #6 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
A very good performance by the Sigma, which many will be happy with. But it's second fiddle to the VC 110mm in colour tonal separation, object (image motif) shaping (a 3D effect), residual CA; and greater authenticity as a result. The CV is more complex, has many more APD elements = brighter colour, APO.
Flatter (little murky) colour response lets the Sigma down, but 'sharpness first' people can say they are very close (for differences, see fine detail on tall flagpole, top left blue roof details). The difference right now - $100. thanks for posting these, very informative.
p.17 #7 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
philip_pj wrote:
A very good performance by the Sigma, which many will be happy with. But it's second fiddle to the VC 110mm in colour tonal separation, object (image motif) shaping (a 3D effect), residual CA; and greater authenticity as a result. The CV is more complex, has many more APD elements = brighter colour, APO.
Flatter (little murky) colour response lets the Sigma down, but 'sharpness first' people can say they are very close (for differences, see fine detail on tall flagpole, top left blue roof details). The difference right now - $100. thanks for posting these, very informative.
Sometimes I am entertained by the similarity to comments one might read on an Audiophile, or wine forum.
Makes me want to listen to a CV on the old tube set, and sip a vintage CV.
p.17 #9 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
My friends, this is a hobby that should be fun. Some people like to take pictures, others (like me) to analyze, compare, and look for differences.
As for the differences between the APO Lanthar 110 and the Sigma, I think that the Sigma is better in the macro, but only with large apertures, from f / 5.6 they are the same. In distance, the VC 110 is better. it follows from observing my copies.
p.17 #10 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
1bwana1 wrote:
Sometimes I am entertained by the similarity to comments one might read on an Audiophile, or wine forum.
Makes me want to listen to a CV on the old tube set, and sip a vintage CV.
For maximum enjoyment, I would definitely recommend the RM-SPR1 cables. They produce the most spacious and enveloping imaging. A sense of "being there" that no other cables can match. Best spatial separation and 3D pop ever. The instruments just jump at you out of the orchestra, with great presence and authority!
p.17 #15 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
I guess serious pixel peeping is not my thing. I see no difference in those images that would cause me to accept or reject an image made with either lens. For sure nothing that would affect my enjoyment of an image made with either lens.
We are so fortunate with the level of quality in our equipment these days. Not limited to just photography.
This is not a criticism of those who enjoy this hobby with pixel peeping a part of their interest in it. I enjoy reading and learning from them.
p.17 #16 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
tsdevine wrote:
So it wasn't as clear as I would have liked it, but it hasn't been clear on a day I was able to get out and do this, so I figured this might be good enough. Late afternoon sun gives some contrast to work with. All processed through Photo Ninja, I wanted to have more control over corrections. Didn't have much time, all the shots were a little underexposed.
Notice the depth of field wraps back toward the camera more with the CV 110. I believe Fred noticed some field curvature with the CV, not sure if that's part of it.
Tim, thanks for this comparison. I got in a front of a monitor (not phone) and so far examined only these 2 pics at f/2.8.
As another poster has noticed, the left side is sharper on the CV, the building with a blue roof and the building left to it are quite telling. However, once we move to the right side, the situation changes. Looking at the top of the tallest tower - the one with wires on top - although the CV benefits from a little bit more magnification, it's the Sigma that I perceive as being crisper and more detailed. This also shows to some extent with the other 2 towers.
So what I think is happening here is that the exact focus distance is a little bit different between the 2 shots. This will be giving you some trouble in future tests too, since, like most macro lenses, none of these two is geared for very fine stepped focus adjustment at long distances.
p.17 #18 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
I focused, as best I could, on the same spot, and realistically not everything is in the same focal plane. Nor can we be guaranteed both lenses act exactly the same at distance.
When conditions are better, and I have more time, I'll reshoot and see if I get different results. I have not tested the Sigma at infinity to see if it is well centered, but informally I get the impression it is.
-Tim
vdo1 wrote:
Tim, thanks for this comparison. I got in a front of a monitor (not phone) and so far examined only these 2 pics at f/2.8.
As another poster has noticed, the left side is sharper on the CV, the building with a blue roof and the building left to it are quite telling. However, once we move to the right side, the situation changes. Looking at the top of the tallest tower - the one with wires on top - although the CV benefits from a little bit more magnification, it's the Sigma that I perceive as being crisper and more detailed. This also shows to some extent with the other 2 towers.
So what I think is happening here is that the exact focus distance is a little bit different between the 2 shots. This will be giving you some trouble in future tests too, since, like most macro lenses, none of these two is geared for very fine stepped focus adjustment at long distances. ...Show more →
p.17 #19 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Besar wrote:
My opinion is - both lenses are fantastic
That seems fair. Modern lenses are sharp enough already. For me, the important optical quality is color aberration (LCA, TCA) and color fringing in defocussed areas. Unless one does copy work, single-shot macro will have defocussed areas, either in the b/g or on the subject itself due to finite DOF. It is the C/V 110 that has moved to the next level: not surprising given the insane number of UD elements (8/14).
...
.
