This past weekend's trip to Block Island, RI for a family wedding. This shot was taken at sunrise from our rental home across the Mill Tail Swamp and Pond to the left.
Hi. I was wondering if this lens or the 24GM render more similarly to the RX1 Sonnar lens. I had an RX1 and sold it due to lots of misfocused shots. I was quite happy with the 24GM but felt like, its still not as good as the RX1's rendering. I liked the images I saw here, but I read somewhere here that the 24GM bokeh is better. It would be a waste for me to get this lens if the 24GM produces more similar to the RX1 than this lens. Thanks.
Rendering / bokeh is similar between all 3 lenses, but the 24 GM’s color and contrast are more similar to the RX1 than the Sigma 35i.
I have settled on the 24 GM after having a Sigma 35i and RX1R2. No doubt I miss the smaller sizes, but I appreciate the weather sealing and cropping ability of a wider lens.
Rahvin wrote:
Hi. I was wondering if this lens or the 24GM render more similarly to the RX1 Sonnar lens. I had an RX1 and sold it due to lots of misfocused shots. I was quite happy with the 24GM but felt like, its still not as good as the RX1's rendering. I liked the images I saw here, but I read somewhere here that the 24GM bokeh is better. It would be a waste for me to get this lens if the 24GM produces more similar to the RX1 than this lens. Thanks.
The 24/1.4 GM @32mm is the closest we have to the RX1 Sonnar 35/2’s look.
The Sigma has smooth transition zone and pleasant rendering around the center area but it’s not homogeneous across the field due to high optical vignetting.
Rahvin wrote:
Hi. I was wondering if this lens or the 24GM render more similarly to the RX1 Sonnar lens. I had an RX1 and sold it due to lots of misfocused shots. I was quite happy with the 24GM but felt like, its still not as good as the RX1's rendering. I liked the images I saw here, but I read somewhere here that the 24GM bokeh is better. It would be a waste for me to get this lens if the 24GM produces more similar to the RX1 than this lens. Thanks.
nandadevieast wrote:
I want to ask whats the size difference between this and 20 G? Is 20 G too big than this?
For reference i own 55/1.8 thats my biggest prime.
Sony 20G diameter x length = 2.89 x 3.33" / 73.5 x 84.7 mm. Weight is 13.16 oz / 373 g.
Sigma 35mm f/2 diameter x length = 2.8 x 2.6" / 70 x 65.4 mm. Weight is 11.5 oz / 325 g.
So, the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN is just slightly narrower and almost 3/4" shorter than the Sony 20mm f/1.8 G.
I’ve read through the entire thread. Im looking to buy a compact 35mm for when I want to go out with only my camera and a neck strap.
I’ve narrowed down my choice to the Sony 35mm f2.8 and the Sigma 35mm f2.
Sony 35mm f2.8:
Pros: super small, decent optical quality, already own some filters in this size.
Cons: f2.8, image quality is good but not excellent. Some long term durability concerns.
Sigma 35mm f2:
Pros: build quality, image quality, still decently small cons: still 2x the size of the above, a filter size that I don’t already own. Half-way defeats the goal of going out light.
All this said — is the optical performance of the sigma that much better than the Sony to justify more the double the weight? Does f2.8 vs f2 really matter at 35mm when bokeh won’t come that easy regardless? Does the Sigma give something “special” over a 24-70 f2.8 that the Sony wouldn’t bring to the table? Is the sigma 35mm still light enough to not really feel it slung over your shoulder on a a7riii? Welcome opinions.
FWIW: I found the smaller, lighter Samyang 35/2.8 to be better optically than the 2.8/35 ZA. The Samyang 35/1.8 is close optically to the Sigma 35/2 and much lighter. The Tamron 35/2.8 OSD is more or less better than these optically. The Sony lenses have better focusing.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I agree. We have so many options now but the Sigma 35/2 DG DN still ticks all the boxes.
When comparing Sony to Sigma lenses and also Sigma 35/2 DG DN to Sony 35/1.8, I have one nitpick, they seem to have a different color balance, Sony cooler and Sigma warmer. I find it easily noticeable. Any take on that. Is one better or more correct than the other?
Well just found this thread so I thought I would add to it.
I own the Sigma 35/2 DG DN Contemporary I Series along with the 24/2, 65/2, and 90/2.8 in the series. I luckily found all of them used on FM at a great price. These are the lenses I’m using in my small walk around kit with my A7C. Do use them on my other Sony bodies as well but created a special bag for this walk around kit. The have great build quality.
Admit I also own some of the larger GM f/1.4 versions that i use with my Alpha 1 but really like these.
I didn’t get to 20/2 because it’s size is not that much different than the Sony 20/1.8 G and it’s distortion seems pretty big from the reviews I’ve read.
I did also buy a FE 50/2.5 G which is nice but is a limited series it looks like so may not keep it. Wondering if Sigma will do a 50/2 DG DN Contemporary at some point. Will just wait and see.
