That said, I think there is a case to be made for the Sigma 35 f/2 being more of an all-arounder. I don't disagree with what Fred said in his review of the the Voigtlander 35 f/2 APO where he writes:
At infinity distance, the Sigma 35/2 DG DN is super sharp at center and although not in the same league as the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO in terms of "off-axis" performance, it is still strong in comparison to other 35mm lenses. I consider it an all-rounder capable of high resolution (for landscapes), low CA and pleasant rendering.
The Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO could be considered the ultimate lens for landscapes but some shooters may see it as a more specialized lens. Personally I am not sure if I will keep both CV 35/2 APO E and M mount versions but it's a keeper for sure.
That said I think for an all arounder the question is what compromises you are willing to make. Personally, although I like the Sigma 35 f/2, it wouldn't be my all-arounder because it isn't that great for close-up performance and for me I am willing to deal with some of the Voigtlander APO's weaknesses to have the better close up performance.
Jan 06, 2025 at 07:02 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
QuietOC wrote:
C/V APO-Lanthar often shows busy backgrounds and doesn't focus very closely. That doesn't sound like an all-around midsize/moderate weight lens.
I agree with the busy background assessment that sometimes is apparent with the lens, but I consider a .35M MFD to be pretty good and the performance at MFD as reviewed by Fred to be excellent:
When did you last get to vote on the 'will we do a 28mm' committee? Or 'how about a slow landscape set of lenses for serious usage?' I dont recall them approaching anyone I know on the pros and cons of the noble focal length of 28mm or anything like Leica's SEM 21mm and 24mm Elmar. So as these things go, I speculate as to why it is so, more so if a pattern emerges as it does in this matter of the FL ecosytem.
You sound knowledgeable about consumer attitudes on these matters. Can you direct me to any textual content that provides us cogent and comprehensive data reflecting consumer lens preferences of the major producers?
A lot of people would like to see more industry analysis and particularly prospective user sentiment regarding the tools they need - lenses. Not having a go at you here, I am genuinely interested in these things, I am a curious person, for good or ill. Both, at times. ...Show more →
Obviously, the manufacturers know what actually sells. And most of them do extensive data collection on what people want. Did you fill out the recent Sony survey, to which a link was provided in the forum? They were solicitous of users' opinions in detail.
Very few people want a set of slow manual lenses for landscape work, so there aren't many made, though there certainly are enough to do the work, just as people still manage to do 4X5 and 8X10 work. If the manufacturers thought there was enough demand for a 28mm lens to justify devoting resources to making one, they would happily do so (and by "demand" I don't mean twenty people on a photography forum). I am actually very pleased that Sigma has made the i series lenses, most of which are excellent and well-configured, like the 35mm f2 DG DN.
When you complain about the businesses' interest in money and finance, you are actually complaining about your own self-interest in how much you have to pay. It costs money to make a lens, and it costs more money to make a high-quality lens. Do you think they should all work for less or give up their own money in order to give you what you want?
Sigma made two 24mm iseries lenses and one 35. Anybody holding out hope they would make a 28 can wait forever. I would like a 28 but we are talking a very narrow range in focal lengths and a lot or resources put their already.
It doesn't seem like Sigma's last big 28mm was that popular. It is too bad since Sigma has a long history with the focal length. I read that their current CEO was a designer of the 28mm F1.8 High-Speed: https://www.sigma-sein.com/en/ohsone/28mm_2/
I am sort of interested in Sigmas big 28 1.4. It looks to be uncompromisingly good in most aspects. It is big and heavy but I have small lenses, so big good one is sort of what I am looking for. Performance wise on the used market it can be had for not a lot of money. Gives good punchy colors and creamy bokeh.
Optically, I think the best modern 35 I've used in the "all-rounder" category is the Tamron 1.8 with OIS. Built like a tank, fast focus, and I absolutely loved the photos from it. HOWEVER, it's an SLR lens and adapting it to mirrorless it's similar size to some of the smaller 35/1.4's in native mounts these days.
ISO1600 wrote:
Optically, I think the best modern 35 I've used in the "all-rounder" category is the Tamron 1.8 with OIS. Built like a tank, fast focus, and I absolutely loved the photos from it. HOWEVER, it's an SLR lens and adapting it to mirrorless it's similar size to some of the smaller 35/1.4's in native mounts these days.
Every lens has strengths and weaknesses.
I bought all the Tamron SP F1.8 USD primes and adapted them--several copies of the 45mms in multiple mounts. This was before the native 45's were released. Trying them right now again, the SP 35mm F1.8 Di USD focuses slower than the native 35mm F2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 which is one of the slowest native AF lenses. FWIW: the petal HF012 hood from the SP 35/45 F1.8s fits the OSD primes.
I still enjoy and use my 35i regularly. It’s my favorite native e-mount 35mm, all things balanced and considered.
Lovely images. Have you got a chance to compare this to a Voigtlander 35F2 APO? Deciding the Sigma vs the Voigtlander for hiking (pacific northwest), pairing with an a7rii.
james2441139 wrote:
Lovely images. Have you got a chance to compare this to a Voigtlander 35F2 APO? Deciding the Sigma vs the Voigtlander for hiking (pacific northwest), pairing with an a7rii.
CV isn't weather sealed...is the Sigma? I'd require that for tromping around the sometimes very wet PNW.
james2441139 wrote:
Lovely images. Have you got a chance to compare this to a Voigtlander 35F2 APO? Deciding the Sigma vs the Voigtlander for hiking (pacific northwest), pairing with an a7rii.
Thanks much!
No, I really have no interest in the 35 APO. Sorry, can't help you much there. To be honest, the 35i is even too corrected for me so I don't use it much (and a bit too bulky). I can tell you though, as a landscaper, the flare resistance with the sun in the frame (strongly backlight scenes) could be better and it would make the 35i a much better option. I have shot the 35/2 Ultron and 35/1.7 (which can work well on a Sony stack sensor with care and the flare resistance is wonderful). I would prefer both those to the 35 APO I believe. The 35i makes for a reasonable astro option too.
I wouldn't worry about the weather sealing thing. Sure, I'd prefer it. Realistically, I shoot mostly MF adapter lenses, lots of RF glass, and the only problems I've had in over 10 years in all sorts of very tough environment is when I took a couple falls.
No, I really have no interest in the 35 APO. Sorry, can't help you much there. To be honest, the 35i is even too corrected for me so I don't use it much (and a bit too bulky). I can tell you though, as a landscaper, the flare resistance with the sun in the frame (strongly backlight scenes) could be better and it would make the 35i a much better option. I have shot the 35/2 Ultron and 35/1.7 (which can work well on a Sony stack sensor with care and the flare resistance is wonderful). I would prefer both those to the 35 APO I believe. The 35i makes for a reasonable astro option too.
I wouldn't worry about the weather sealing thing. Sure, I'd prefer it. Realistically, I shoot mostly MF adapter lenses, lots of RF glass, and the only problems I've had in over 10 years in all sorts of very tough environment is when I took a couple falls. ...Show more →
Thanks! I found your thread of the 35s, and was amazed to see about the 35i close to the RX1 performance. The new version of RX1 was going to be my pick for hiking if not the exorbitant price. Now I am torn between a 35 for the A7rII or perhaps an older RX1r/ii.
james2441139 wrote:
Thanks! I found your thread of the 35s, and was amazed to see about the 35i close to the RX1 performance. The new version of RX1 was going to be my pick for hiking if not the exorbitant price. Now I am torn between a 35 for the A7rII or perhaps an older RX1r/ii.
Nothing like the RX1 Sonnar and I prefer it over the 35i, but the battery life and lack of IBIS are deal breakers for me for that type of situation. Especially the battery.
Has anyone found there are issues with the Lightroom profile for the 35mm f/2? I'm finding I have to do manual distortion correction, when the in-camera jpegs look fine. In some cases, enabling the lightroom profile causes the images to be wildly distorted.
Edit - the L mount profile works as expected, not sure why the E mount one isn't applying.
