@Arty73 kinda in line with most reviews/samples I've seen at this point: not exceptional like the 35 sonnar/31 limited/45 C but very good. The lenses are attractively well behaved in every aspect.
@fred & JVan_02, the smaller apertures caught my eye too, however I look forward to real life reviews from the forum members. I plan to buy the whole I series and. For now it looks like the 24 & 45mm will have a different character than the 35 & 65mm
Arty73 wrote:
@fred@ & JVan_02, the smaller apertures caught my eye too, however I look forward to real life reviews from the forum members. I plan to buy the whole I series and. For now it looks like the 24 & 45mm will have a different character than the 35 & 65mm
Not sure the 24 has similar rendering like the 45. Too hard to tell from all the samples so far.
Oddly, I thought the same about the 45/2.8C, but - at least on the Sigma fp - the implementation is such that the aperture closes in a slower, delayed manner. So in practice, it looks exactly like a clickless aperture when changed while video is rolling. It's similar to how the fp handles auto ISO and WB adjustments- less abrupt and jarring. Can't speak for the Sony, but maybe someone who has one can shoot a video and change aperture during recording to check?
timerickson wrote:
Well, these definitely won't be useful for video. Massive focus breathing and the aperture ring cannot be declicked.
imagesfromobjects wrote:
Oddly, I thought the same about the 45/2.8C, but - at least on the Sigma fp - the implementation is such that the aperture closes in a slower, delayed manner. So in practice, it looks exactly like a clickless aperture when changed while video is rolling. It's similar to how the fp handles auto ISO and WB adjustments- less abrupt and jarring. Can't speak for the Sony, but maybe someone who has one can shoot a video and change aperture during recording to check?
what about the induced vibration in the footage when you have to go through the clicks?
AirbusA380 wrote:
I'm not sure why everyone is hyped for the 35mm since we already have so many options.. can anyone elaborate?
According to your username you probably like giant lenses, so yes for you it might not make any sense since we already have some excellent options.
However, many (including me) do not even consider to buy heavy / bulky lenses, but still want a reasonably bright aperture.
that leaves us with 3 (AF) options:
- the Sony 35/1.8
- the Samyang 35/1.8
- this new Sigma 35/2
The Sony was a bitter disappointment at least for me (bad rendering, terrible CA / Coma) and the Samyang hasn't fully convinced me either. The Sigma however might just tick all the boxes, i.e. could be the best compromize for anyone looking for a high quality compact 35mm AF lens. And I just love the build quality of the Sigma lenses (call me crazy but this actually makes a difference in user experience).
keepcoding wrote:
According to your username you probably like giant lenses, so yes for you it might not make any sense since we already have some excellent options.
However, many (including me) do not even consider to buy heavy / bulky lenses, but still want a reasonably bright aperture.
that leaves us with 3 (AF) options:
- the Sony 35/1.8
- the Samyang 35/1.8
- this new Sigma 35/2
The Sony was a bitter disappointment at least for me (bad rendering, terrible CA / Coma) and the Samyang hasn't fully convinced me either. The Sigma however might just tick all the boxes, i.e. could be the best compromize for anyone looking for a high quality compact 35mm AF lens. And I just love the build quality of the Sigma lenses (call me crazy but this actually makes a difference in user experience)....Show more →
Fair enough, thank you for clarifying! I love the build of Sigma lenses, too. Love my 35/1.4.
Nice pictures. But 24mm gallery is strange as majority of the pictures have focus distance almost in the semi-macro category.
Photographing mushrooms with a 24mm lens can produce stunning pictures but it is not the way how this focal length is normally used. I would like to see examples how 24mm/3.5 performs in landscapes, environmental portraits, architectural photography, against sun etc.
A 24mm as a semi-macro is a very interesting prospect. Nikon used to make a 5mm extension tube K1, which could be used with a 21mm lens. The K1 was a manual extension tube, so it was stop down metering only and of course no AF. Indeed the K1 shouldn’t even be used with AF lenses. The Zeiss ZF(.2) 25/2.8 focused down to 17cm but that lens didn’t feature any close range correction. There are also the trio of new Tamron wides going down to 1:2 enlargement.
All in all I hope that the Sigma 24/3.5 I-series will stand out as the quality choice for semi-macro wide angle photography. And hopefully it will double as a landscape lens as well.
If anyone wants to really play internet detective, he has the same bokeh demonstrations of all recent 35mm (and I guess the 40 CF, pre ver II firmware) that highlight bokeh shape, and several trying to demonstrate the transition zone.
Looking at his 35 samples, I guess I would still hold the general opinion it seems to be the best mid-speed 35mm on the Sony platform (would really like to see a comparison with the 35 1.8 s for pedantry) but it doesn't seem to be as well corrected as the 40 CF. He makes it show CA quite a bit in his torture test.
tuomkok wrote:
Nice pictures. But 24mm gallery is strange as majority of the pictures have focus distance almost in the semi-macro category.
Photographing mushrooms with a 24mm lens can produce stunning pictures but it is not the way how this focal length is normally used. I would like to see examples how 24mm/3.5 performs in landscapes, environmental portraits, architectural photography, against sun etc.
This one is revealing because it shows the transition zone. It's not bad but it's not smooth either:
but it is not the way how this focal length is normally used. I would like to see examples how 24mm/3.5 performs in landscapes, environmental portraits, architectural photography, against sun etc.