tsdevine wrote:
A bunch from the Sigma 65mm on my a7R III, all wide open. Tried to have a little light touch on processing.
It was 25 degrees and raw, got out just before it started snowing. I have these shots at other apertures as well, not sure anyone would want to see a specific shot stopped down a little more.
tsdevine wrote:
A bunch from the Sigma 65mm on my a7R III, all wide open. Tried to have a little light touch on processing.
It was 25 degrees and raw, got out just before it started snowing. I have these shots at other apertures as well, not sure anyone would want to see a specific shot stopped down a little more.
Thanks, it was cold and I only had a short window to shoot in the morning. It started to snow when I left, and I was heading into it heading back home.
I think it's a keeper, pretty happy with the sharpness and bokeh.
tsdevine wrote:
A bunch from the Sigma 65mm on my a7R III, all wide open. Tried to have a little light touch on processing.
It was 25 degrees and raw, got out just before it started snowing. I have these shots at other apertures as well, not sure anyone would want to see a specific shot stopped down a little more.
These look very good, better than I was thinking. Thanks for posting. I am tempted to pick on up after using my Sigma 35 this weekend. And I don't have an AF lenses longer than 35mm...
Also, the 35i has very good coma correction into the corners WO on 24mp, though it does vignette heavily and will sadly get funky ghosts on a bright moon like the G 20 which is a bummer.
tsdevine wrote:
Thanks, it was cold and I only had a short window to shoot in the morning. It started to snow when I left, and I was heading into it heading back home.
I think it's a keeper, pretty happy with the sharpness and bokeh.
I have had the 65i and 45i for a few weeks now, very nice. The 24i is on the way, will be a very enjoyable set, I still have some doubts about the 35mm, maybe the CV 35 1.2 is an interesting addition, someone with experience with mixing in the Voigtlander? What surprised me happily is the magnetic lens cap, first thought it was a gimmick, but it is actually super pleasant to use if you photograph without a lens hood, you place the lens cap in the palm of your hand without looking over to the lens, while your camera hangs on your shoulder, it plop easy on. Very nice.
Mystik wrote:
The big draw for the Sigma I series is that it brings a high level of optical quality and rendering in a compact form factor. I wish more lens makers would focus on bringing smaller aperture AF lenses with top shelf optical quality....usually f2 lenses are of the budget variety. Batis line had potential, but they made many of those lenses pointlessly large IMO.
I am curious to see how the 35GM compares, but the 35F2 is definitely favorable from a size perspective and pairs perfectly with the a7c.
Douglas Liu wrote:
Nice looking combo! What kind of lens hood is this?
Thanks!
I harvested the lens hood off my CV40. It looks cool but a deeper one is probably needed if you're legit trying to control flare. The Sigma supplied hood is beefy and detracts from the compact form factor of the lens, but I'd probably use it if shooting in harsh light.
I harvested the lens hood off my CV40. It looks cool but a deeper one is probably needed if you're legit trying to control flare. The Sigma supplied hood is beefy and detracts from the compact form factor of the lens, but I'd probably use it if shooting in harsh light.
Arty73 wrote:
maybe the CV 35 1.2 is an interesting addition, someone with experience with mixing in the Voigtlander?
I'm going to pair up the Sigma 24mm and 65mm with my CV40/1.2 which has pretty identical signature as the CV35/1.2. Should have the 24mm in a few days.
I’m very curious how the af on the 65 performs on older bodies such as the a7rii - I’m wondering if the af on these newer lenses is equivalent to upgrading the ios on my iphone, meaning, can my older body support the benefits of the new af system or does it seem more sluggish like phones so often do these days.
Got both, I love the build. They may be even more lovely than 45 with extra decorations metal work on the body.
My first impression is 35mm is larger than I thought and 65 is smaller than I thought. They are about the same size twin once put on camera(even not on paper spec) at least I can’t tell which is which if I am not careful. In that regard, 65 is a surprise, I worry about its size before.
This will probably sound really lame, but I rarely photograph people. Even if I tried to gauge, I don't feel I have enough frame of reference to say whether it's better or worse than average.
I imagine it will get in more people's hands over the next couple of days, and you'll get better feedback about eye AF.
I've been incredibly interested in this line of glass since Sigma released the 45mm. I'm so glad to see that there is at least one maker trying to put out optically competent, well built and small AF primes at very reasonable prices.
I picked up a used 45mm for my SL and just recently ordered the 35 and 65mm. The 65 arrived this afternoon and the handling on the original SL is honestly wonderful. I was so worried getting into the system that I was going to be saddled with enormous and expensive glass but these Sigma options are a delight.
I too found the 65mm somewhat of an odd focal length choice but I'm pairing it with the 28mm of my original Leica Q which gives me a very workable 2 camera system that's not too much of a burden to carry (I've been primarily an M user for the past several years)
I bought the 35 as it's something I wanted to try because I use the focal length on its own quite frequently but I may or may not keep it around, we'll see once it arrives.
I just picked up the 45 the other day but I'm interested in the magnetic lens cap that comes with the other focal lengths. Can anyone confirm if the lens cap still works with a polarizer attached?
tsdevine wrote:
This will probably sound really lame, but I rarely photograph people. Even if I tried to gauge, I don't feel I have enough frame of reference to say whether it's better or worse than average.
I imagine it will get in more people's hands over the next couple of days, and you'll get better feedback about eye AF.
I have to say, I have been using mine outside of testing, and I've decided I really like it. It's a very smooth, modern rendering that draws no attention to itself, balanced though slightly warm palatte (colors and contrast need a bit of liking to my preference), bokeh and onion rings are great except in very specific circumstances, and easily the closest thing to an RX1 (factoring in size). Build and haptics are superb. This is exactly the combination that I (and many others) have been hoping for with a premium mid-speed line of glass it seems. The terrific axial CA correction (leagues beyond the RX1, FE 35 or Samy) is a god send for stuff like this, which I often shoot. Sigma killed it. And, I'll be trying a 65/2 soon.
