p.2 #1 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
Magnum PI wrote:
I had a torn tendon in my foot that took me of said foot for a year. This knee walker linked below saved me. Used it for grocery shopping, getting into my car, working, getting into the water at the beach, repairs around the house, even mowed my grass with it and went up a few leaders.
@Magnum PI, looks really interesting. Didn’t know a device like this existed. Will take a deeper look over the weekend. Really appreciate the link. Thank you. Steve
p.2 #2 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
Carles77 wrote:
I think best option for 35mm if you don't need autofocus is Voigtlander 35mm 1.2 Nokton SE. If you need autofocus... i had the sigma 35mm DN DG f2 and the Loxia 35mm, both not great at f2..... loxia better colors and render but softer and bokeh is average. Other option is Batis 40mm nice lens, light and good all-around lens.
Sony 35mm GM maybe the best but heavy to travel....
Best,
Carles.
So to be clear, I own quite a few 35mm lenses for the Sony E/FE mount.
For manual focus lenses I own
o - Zeiss Loxia 35/2 since it came out.
For Auto Focus I own the following:
o - Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM - the best of them all.
o - Sony FE 35mm f/1.8
o - Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary I- series
Also own the Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 CF
Used to own the Zeiss Distigon 35mm f/1.4 ZA
Used to own the Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f/2.8 ZA
I want to own two AF versions in my kit. Of course the GM is one. The second one I wanted to be smaller, lighter and of medium speed at a f-stop of f/2 or f/1.8 which prompted my original question in my first post. It seams the Sony f/1.8 is more popular but some prefer the Sigma f/2 as well. Maybe luck of the draw or for other reasons. Doesn’t look like I can go wrong with either one really. While I owned the Sony 35/1.8 new when it first came out I sold it when I moved up to f/1.4 and the Sigma Distigon. Did rebuy it used this past year, like the Sigma f/2 when I started this quest but now I think I will just keep them both. The Sony is nice and light and the Sigma is built great and has an aperture ring I really like. Which ever one I choose will be for my A7CII while most of the time the G Master will be use on my A1 or A7RV. My A7CR currently has the new FE 24-50/2.8 G zoom on it for convenience but the GM will be used on that as I’m sure.
So I guess there are really no bad choices. I appreciate all the feedback and feel free to contribute more if you like. Maybe I should do a poll on this? What do you think? To all take care. Thank you.
Take care
p.2 #4 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
I have been trying to outfit my A7CII with small primes, and have a conundrum at 35mm as well. I’ve owned most of the Sigma I-Series, and while I love the size and handling, the character of the rendering doesn’t stand out to me. But I’m kind of a sucker for the Zeiss look.
The Zeiss 35mm f2.8 is what I currently own, and my only issue with it - which is unfortunately a big one for me - is the MFD is too damn long. I wanna get closer!
p.2 #5 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
swldstn wrote:
I’m sure this topic has been discussed before but trying to decide what to carry in my travel bag.
I’m looking at the Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 versus the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary.
The lens chosen will be used on a Sony compact C body of either the A7CR or A7CII.
It will be used as the faster prime along side the new Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G zoom. At this critical focal length I wanted something faster but the Sony 35/1.4 GM to me is just a little too big and heavy even though I own it.
What is the experience of others here on which lens to use? I’m a fan of aperture rings but the Sony is just smaller and lighter (even if not by much). The other lenses I’m thinking of carrying in the bag will be either Zeiss Batis 85/1.8 or Sigma 90/2.8 at the long end and hopefully the new Sony 16-25/2.8 G zoom for the wide end.
Please share your thoughts.
Admit this might be a flawed decision that may need rethinking and just carry the bigger/better GM lens.
If you think I should do that let me know.
If you don't mind the 24-50 size and you have a CR I'd get the 24GM to compliment it. It's basically Identical in size (to the 24-50), gives you more flexibility, faster, better rendering than either of those 35's. Unless you are not OK with 26mp. But seems like you are if you are willing to use an A7cii (not a big difference between 26 & 33mp). I pair mine with the 20-70 for the same reason. I just prefer compression/reach at 70 look over the 2.8 50 look and the 20mm vs the 24. That said I'm using mine on an RV and IBIS is better so F4 is not an issue. When I had the CR I know it says only 1 stop difference but in real world use I at least found it to be 2 even 3 stops difference.
p.2 #6 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
I've experimented with various 35mm lenses and ultimately chose the 35 GM and 35 Loxia. Yet, I'm contemplating repurchasing the Sigma 35 f1.2. It seems to be an endless loop.
The primary concerns with Sigma lenses include minimum focusing distance (MFD), autofocus (AF) performance, and the weight, particularly of the ART series lenses.
The primary concerns with Sony f1.8 and slower lenses include their high cost relative to third-party options, subpar rendering, and inferior build quality. Conversely, Samyang lenses seem to offer everything one seeks in a Sony FE F1.8 lens at a significantly lower price.
The abundance of choices for Sony E mount lenses is a blessing, but every option comes with its trade-offs. The compact G and the older 35 FE lenses deliver decent images, yet they often lack the allure of the fast primes when compared side by side with GM and Sigma Art lenses. Personally, if I'm going to bother carrying a proper camera, I prefer not to compromise on image quality just to reduce weight slightly. For those times I do want to travel light, I'll just use my iPhone, though I understand preferences vary.
p.2 #7 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
nhsonyshooter wrote:
If you don't mind the 24-50 size and you have a CR I'd get the 24GM to compliment it. It's basically Identical in size (to the 24-50), gives you more flexibility, faster, better rendering than either of those 35's. Unless you are not OK with 26mp. But seems like you are if you are willing to use an A7cii (not a big difference between 26 & 33mp). I pair mine with the 20-70 for the same reason. I just prefer compression/reach at 70 look over the 2.8 50 look and the 20mm vs the 24. That said I'm using mine on an RV and IBIS is better so F4 is not an issue. When I had the CR I know it says only 1 stop difference but in real world use I at least found it to be 2 even 3 stops difference. ...Show more →
Interesting thought to use the 24 GM on the A7CR in APS-C mode to give me a 36/1.4 when I want that focal length and need the faster aperture. Am I getting that right? The 24 GM is definitely the smallest of the 24, 35, and 50 f/1.4 GM and your right no bigger than the 24-50/2.8 G I got. I will definitely give this a try. In reality it gives me two f/1.4 at to very used focal lengths.
Thank you.
p.2 #8 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
A 24/1.4 used in APS-C mode gives you the equivalent of 36/2.1. For example, because the image is cropped, for the the same subject magnification you will have to stand back further, so DOF will be greater (given your actual aperture isn't changing). Also, your exposure settings will still use f/1.4 but because you have used an APS-C crop you have to magnify the image more to get to the same image output size, so things like noise are magnified as part of the process. Whether that is a real world issue is a different question, and the answer depends on factors such as your intended output and your personal preferences.
swldstn wrote:
Interesting thought to use the 24 GM on the A7CR in APS-C mode to give me a 36/1.4 when I want that focal length and need the faster aperture. Am I getting that right? The 24 GM is definitely the smallest of the 24, 35, and 50 f/1.4 GM and your right no bigger than the 24-50/2.8 G I got. I will definitely give this a try. In reality it gives me two f/1.4 at to very used focal lengths.
Thank you.
p.2 #9 · Age old question - Sony 35/1.8 FE vs Sigma 35/2 DG DN C ?
JD07 wrote:
A 24/1.4 used in APS-C mode gives you the equivalent of 36/2.1. For example, because the image is cropped, for the the same subject magnification you will have to stand back further, so DOF will be greater (given your actual aperture isn't changing). Also, your exposure settings will still use f/1.4 but because you have used an APS-C crop you have to magnify the image more to get to the same image output size, so things like noise are magnified as part of the process. Whether that is a real world issue is a different question, and the answer depends on factors such as your intended output and your personal preferences.
For what I typically shoot at a focal length of 36mm the increased depth of field is not a real issue I think. Keeping the exposure at f/1.4, if I need it, is a nice to have. I will do some experimenting. I own the GM/G at 14mm, 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm so I have lots opportunity to play with focal length vs. field of view. It’s a great set of lenses that has taken me a long time to assemble and really enjoy Sony’s implementation.
