photosbyjaron Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
j4nu wrote:
I still can't make up my mind about the new Sigma with the reviews being all over the place, Gordon Laing being on one end of the spectrum and Dustin Abbott on the other. Marc's review fits somewhere in-between, closer to Dustin's I guess.
I went through some pictures and I still can't decide whether it's closer to the GM or the Bigma in rendering...
All three lenses appear to be phenomenal with minor trade-offs here or there. The Sigma 1.2 trades off size and weight. The GM trades off price. The Sigma 1.4 seems to sacrifice overall sharpness for better bokeh and split the other trade-offs down the middle. At this point, the consumer can't lose with any of them (or the other cheaper options like the Sigma f/2 or Samyang f/1.8 for that matter). Either way, I'll be delighted to stay with the GM if I can find a nicely centered copy. Based on Fred's tests showing the GM flirting with 35 APO level resolution, it seems to perfectly fill the role I want of sharp resolution for landscape, small size for general purpose, and accurate AF for portraits. And when I don't want bitingly sharp, contrasty images, I can always throw on a diffusion filter. Also, I may have been more tempted to get the Sigma and apply the savings towards another lens if I had room in my bag for another lens, but my bag literally cannot fit another lens in it without ditching something else, and I love my current bag too much to find a different one.
|