I guess this goes beyond my bokeh sensitivity threshold as I don't find either the porshe or swings offensive in any area...
A few pages before though, there was another car pic where the lights in the background were pretty intense, but I think it was post-processed this way...
The Dustin Abbott review is out, glowing marks all over. I'm really loving the samples in his video, and also here. A true standout among the (frankly huge) 35mm space. It keeps impressing me more and more.
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.
j4nu wrote:
I guess this goes beyond my bokeh sensitivity threshold as I don't find either the porshe or swings offensive in any area...
A few pages before though, there was another car pic where the lights in the background were pretty intense, but I think it was post-processed this way...
I assume you're talking about the photos I posted. If you'd like I can send you the RAW files to see what they look like.
saxguy wrote:
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.
Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.
patotts wrote:
Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.
Yep, I have similar feelings. No matter what output 50GM produces, it will not handle as nicely as 35GM due to its sheer size & weight...
patotts wrote:
Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.
I actually went with the 12-24GM for those lengths. I lose a little bit of DOF and low light advantage, but the lens really is amazing and my bag will always have the 12-24GM, 35GM, 50 1.2GM and My 100 STF, which I use for detail photos that have contextual backgrounds. If Sony makes a 100 1.4 GM I'll probably swap the 100 STF GM out for that lens and keep it for specialty photography.
saxguy wrote:
I actually went with the 12-24GM for those lengths. I lose a little bit of DOF and low light advantage, but the lens really is amazing and my bag will always have the 12-24GM, 35GM, 50 1.2GM and My 100 STF, which I use for detail photos that have contextual backgrounds. If Sony makes a 100 1.4 GM I'll probably swap the 100 STF GM out for that lens and keep it for specialty photography.
saxguy wrote:
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.
I'm keeping both of my GM 35 and GM 50. I personally don't see much overlap between these two focal lengths except both are extremely versatile for most uses. I do question my need for a GM 28 atm cause I can't find anything to dislike about the GM 35. I can see myself growing old with these GM lenses cause I don't see myself wanting more unless Sony can make significantly smaller and lighter replacements. Any differences beyond these lenses can provide is quite academic. Of course, I'm still waiting for that GM 100/1.4 and 200/2 .
Neither of those shots is a good one from which to judge bokeh, due to the subject matter. The background of the Proshce photo is a building with large dark windows and large pillars, both rectangular. No way to make those look less blocky, with any lens. The tree in the shot is turned to impressionistic blur, but it still sits on top of those geometric objects.
The swing photo is tricky, as it has in its background skinny pine trees and open space...again highly geometric, not able to blur well. Pine needles themselves diffract. Not easy subjects against which to judge bokeh.
There are a growing number of images on the Flickr groups devoted to this lens that have backgrounds more typical of what one would seek for portraits as well as environmental shots where the creaminess of the bokeh is obvious. Everyone's mileage may vary, but this is not a lens with Rokkor 58/1.2 nervous bokeh.
...Show more →
For sure for a buyng decision I will try myself.
Non because I’m more competent of others but because I know my main fields of application.
In the mean time I ‘m perplexed looking at some bokeh pictures here.
Don’t you.
Take the Porsche picture, do you really like the bokeh?
Or the one withe swings.
But to be honest a lot of others seems to me pretty nice in regard of bokeh.
Razeus wrote:
I really need to see real world Sigma 35 1.4 DG DN photos. I'm on edge!
The best comparison I've seen so far is Dustin Abbott's 35GM review, so I recommend reading/watching it.
He pinpoints all the small differences you pay the extra for in 35GM...
Yes, it's a tricky scene - that's why I chose it.
Spoiler alert, the bigma would not really render it much better...
Grenache wrote:
Neither of those shots is a good one from which to judge bokeh, due to the subject matter. The background of the Proshce photo is a building with large dark windows and large pillars, both rectangular. No way to make those look less blocky, with any lens. The tree in the shot is turned to impressionistic blur, but it still sits on top of those geometric objects.
The swing photo is tricky, as it has in its background skinny pine trees and open space...again highly geometric, not able to blur well. Pine needles themselves diffract. Not easy subjects against which to judge bokeh.
There are a growing number of images on the Flickr groups devoted to this lens that have backgrounds more typical of what one would seek for portraits as well as environmental shots where the creaminess of the bokeh is obvious. Everyone's mileage may vary, but this is not a lens with Rokkor 58/1.2 nervous bokeh. ...Show more →
.
.
.