Does anyone have experience with the Batis 40 and the new 35 f2? I own the Batis, but I'm mulling flipping it for the 35 and putting the excess towards the 24 or the 65 to complement the 45 I also own. The prospects of creating a full i series kit is enticing, the images shared so far look great!
I sure hope Sigma do 20 or 28mm lenses in this series next. Don't have much use for a 24, 35, or 65, unfortunately, but I love my recently acquired 45mm.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is a sequence showing specular highlights at f/2, f/2.5 and f/2.8.
There is noticeable optical vignetting wide open but it gets well controlled starting at f/2.5.
This is immensely helpful for me, thank you! Is there a 1/3 stop between f2 and f2.5? How does the lens perform there?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Wow, exactly like this! Thanks Tim. I have a new copy coming in just to confirm.
The guys at lenstip, testing at chart distances, show a bigger jump at f2.8 than some other, and then almost record breaking (and for a 35 actually record breaking) performance at f4 (a record which the GM broke a a couple of weeks later, but I doubt you could tell the difference at f4)
Of course it could well be that it improves more at close distances one stop down than at infinity.
Thanks to all for your input. All of your helpful photos and tests have prompted me to sell the Batis 40, cancel the Sony 35GM order, and purchase the Sigma 35i and 65i to accompany my Sigma 45. This site always costs me $, but it's informed $. Thanks!
Man those are some very nice colors! I am panasonic user and only thing keeping me away from this lens is the supposed to come pana 1.8 version.... but looking at your images gives me some major GAS.
FJR1 wrote:
Thanks to all for your input. All of your helpful photos and tests have prompted me to sell the Batis 40, cancel the Sony 35GM order, and purchase the Sigma 35i and 65i to accompany my Sigma 45. This site always costs me $, but it's informed $. Thanks!
I sold my Batis 40 a couple weeks ago and was going to buy the GM. Long story short my Sigma 35mm F2 will be here tomorrow. I really like the 65mm I bought. Hoping I feel the same about the 35mm.
Just got my 24mm yesterday and today went for an hour long walk with it before a meeting, in our current "winter wonderland" neighbourhood. Tried it out in pretty extreme lighting and temperature (-15 Celsius / 5 Fahrenheit) and it came out like a champ. Count me in as a huge fan of Sigma and their new I-series. Can't wait to have my 65mm as well, which I ordered couple days ago. Can't really find anything negative to say about this little gem. A keeper for sure.
Disclaimer: Yes, these are edited. Also one obligatory cat picture.
Nice winter scenery in your area (I'm missing snow here) and very nice shots According to weather forecast it will be up to +15 tomorrow and +17 C on Sunday in Tokyo...
Tonzah78 wrote:
Just got my 24mm yesterday and today went for an hour long walk with it before a meeting, in our current "winter wonderland" neighbourhood. Tried it out in pretty extreme lighting and temperature (-15 Celsius / 5 Fahrenheit) and it came out like a champ. Count me in as a huge fan of Sigma and their new I-series. Can't wait to have my 65mm as well, which I ordered couple days ago. Can't really find anything negative to say about this little gem. A keeper for sure.
DavidBM wrote:
The guys at lenstip, testing at chart distances, show a bigger jump at f2.8 than some other, and then almost record breaking (and for a 35 actually record breaking) performance at f4 (a record which the GM broke a a couple of weeks later, but I doubt you could tell the difference at f4)
Of course it could well be that it improves more at close distances one stop down than at infinity.
I don't see the results from lenstip with my copy (which is perfectly centered on my A7R4) but it performs just like the ephotozine's chart with a very slight improvement from f/2 to f/2.8 and a big jump from f/2.8 to f/4.
Also with the lenstip test, I don't see the big jump at center from f/2.8 to f/4. With my copy, the lens is already optimal at f/2.8 with pretty much no changes stopping down to f/4.
I believe both lenstip and ephotozone use charts at close distance for their results.
How does your copy perform at infinity? Similar to ephotozine or lenstip?
I have the 65 on the way to me and now considering the 35, but I need to see how the 35 GM performs first. It’s nice to get excited about a cheaper option, though.
Great series of images. Nice depth and richness to them. Thanks for sharing.
In your edits, did you touch the vignetting at all? If so, how much correction was required?
Tonzah78 wrote:
Just got my 24mm yesterday and today went for an hour long walk with it before a meeting, in our current "winter wonderland" neighbourhood. Tried it out in pretty extreme lighting and temperature (-15 Celsius / 5 Fahrenheit) and it came out like a champ. Count me in as a huge fan of Sigma and their new I-series. Can't wait to have my 65mm as well, which I ordered couple days ago. Can't really find anything negative to say about this little gem. A keeper for sure.
Disclaimer: Yes, these are edited. Also one obligatory cat picture.
These lenses are very intriguing. I picked up a copy of the 45 2.8 and I think a it's great, inexpensive and lightweight lens for everyday stuff. But these new f2 lenses intrigue me even more, as I think I'd love the 45 2.8 if it was f2.
What are most of you buying these for - to replace larger, more expensive options (24 GM, 35 GM etc) or to use in conjunction for less critical work? Or both
The vignette on the 24mm is out of control. I understand trying to let the camera or computer profile remove the very dark shading. That work fine for reasonable corner shading. But this is so bad it impacts exposure.
Sigma would have been better off making larger lens with vignette under control
Check this video at 7:20 for an example
&ab_channel=RichardWong
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't see the results from lenstip with my copy (which is perfectly centered on my A7R4) but it performs just like the ephotozine's chart with a very slight improvement from f/2 to f/2.8 and a big jump from f/2.8 to f/4.
Also with the lenstip test, I don't see the big jump at center from f/2.8 to f/4. With my copy, the lens is already optimal at f/2.8 with pretty much no changes stopping down to f/4.
I believe both lenstip and ephotozone use charts at close distance for their results.
How does your copy perform at infinity? Similar to ephotozine or lenstip?...Show more →
My copy also show essentially zero improvements from f4 till diffraction.
This thread is turning into another wallet danger zone thread. I love the images from all 3 lenses. 35 surprised me. I was not expecting it to be this good. 35 GM was sure going to be my next lens, but now I am leaning more towards this 35. I wish it was as small as 45 C or 35 ZA, but both of those are f/2.8 lenses.
I feel like 35C has the mojo of Bigma and GM with much lower price, much lighter weight, and arguably better (sexy) design. Is autofocus performance on the 3 new lenses better than 45 C?
For me the open question is infinity performance as a hiking/outdoor lens and am therefore anxiously waiting for Fred‘s tests. I have the cheap Tamron, currently one third the price and 2/3 the weight of the new Sigma. It is a little fatter but also shorter (particularly with the dome hood attached), and appears to be better at CA and perhaps resolution at f2.8-4 (at chart distances). I have both the Sony 35mm GM and the A1 on preorder, so don‘t yet see how the Sigma would fit in my kit.
At 65mm the choices are also difficult, as I do like the 70mm Art Macro and 65mm Voigtlander for my purposes. It is a great focal length though, reminds me a bit of medium format.
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
This thread is turning into another wallet danger zone thread. I love the images from all 3 lenses. 35 surprised me. I was not expecting it to be this good. 35 GM was sure going to be my next lens, but now I am leaning more towards this 35. I wish it was as small as 45 C or 35 ZA, but both of those are f/2.8 lenses.
I feel like 35C has the mojo of Bigma and GM with much lower price, much lighter weight, and arguably better (sexy) design. Is autofocus performance on the 3 new lenses better than 45 C?
Better than the 45/2.8 because the 35/2 is not as under-corrected for SA and therefore phase detect AF is way more accurate.
So far I don't have any miss focus even under dusk lighting.
engel001 wrote:
For me the open question is infinity performance as a hiking/outdoor lens and am therefore anxiously waiting for Fred‘s tests. I have the cheap Tamron, currently one third the price and 2/3 the weight of the new Sigma. It is a little fatter but also shorter (particularly with the dome hood attached), and appears to be better at CA and perhaps resolution at f2.8-4 (at chart distances). I have both the Sony 35mm GM and the A1 on preorder, so don‘t yet see how the Sigma would fit in my kit.
At 65mm the choices are also difficult, as I do like the 70mm Art Macro and 65mm Voigtlander for my purposes. It is a great focal length though, reminds me a bit of medium format....Show more →
I have the crops but I'm hesitant to post without testing another copy on Monday. However, I can already say it's a great landscape lens because it's flat field and at f/4 it's optimal and very sharp across the field. (61MP)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have the crops but I'm hesitant to post without testing another copy on Monday. However, I can already say it's a great landscape lens because it's flat field and at f/4 it's optimal and very sharp across the field. (61MP)
Do you want crops of mine at 42MP FF? Not sure if it's helpful for you
According to weather forecast it will be up to +15 tomorrow and +17 C on Sunday in Tokyo...