p.4 #4 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
So it was in the 90's again today, but the dew points were slightly lower, and it was a little less hazy. Did some imperfect tests with the 28-45 and Loxia 25, CV 35 APO, & CV 50 APO. (Yeah, the Sigma 28-45 isn't a 25 or 50). I generally tried to put the same subject in the upper left corner. Yes, it was hot....yes there was heat distortion. Yes, I took the shots, which puts both lenses at a disadvantage.
All shot with a Sony a7R V. Default LR sharpening, remove CA checked, distortion and vignetting correction on. I did bump up the vignetting correction for the Loxia as the default setting still leaves quite a bit of vignetting. Not complaining, but for this comparison it seemed wise to dial in more correction.
I believe the Loxia 25 has a bit of field curvature, and I did focus on a point near the center. So the corners and edges may suffer a bit in this comparison, notice the increased depth of field in the foreground.
I could have tried to focus the Loxia to split the difference between center and corner sharpness, but I didn't in these tests. I actually use this bit of field curvature to my advantage in some of my shots using the Loxia 25.
>> Download the full size files using the link under the photo. Yes, I didn't carve out thumbnails of the center, mid-zone and corner. <<
p.4 #7 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
Thanks tsdevine for your comparisons and especially for being an early adopter! My copy will be arriving in a couple of weeks and I'm planning to compare against 24/1.4 GM, 50/1.2 GM and Samyang 35-150, I'd like to post here if you don't mind my hijacking your thread
p.4 #8 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
Definitely wouldn't be hijacking this thread, it's exactly what it's for!
ryanli wrote:
Thanks tsdevine for your comparisons and especially for being an early adopter! My copy will be arriving in a couple of weeks and I'm planning to compare against 24/1.4 GM, 50/1.2 GM and Samyang 35-150, I'd like to post here if you don't mind my hijacking your thread
p.4 #9 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
Here's stopped down performance. I have other apertures, but not sure anyone wants to see them.
Again, the Loxia has a bit of field curvature. Stopping down lets the far corners fall within depth of field, and it has a depth of field advantage now in the foreground corner.
p.4 #12 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
On a side note, no one has ever given me a rough time shooting lens tests shots of the view of Hershey and Hersheypark, even though I probably look odd doing it. My camera is tilted, I'm constantly switching lenses, have a big tripod, etc. I shoot these from the Hershey Gardens parking lot, and within the past year or so, there have been signs put up about the parking lot being private property....for use by guests, etc. So I did buy a season pass this spring, which means I can go into the gardens whenever I want. When I do these tests, I'm there less than an hour, and I don't take any real "primo" parking spots.
Some of you may have notice I did a test or two overlooking Harrisburg Pennsylvania, which I did from Negley Park. I know there are more issues shooting over water, leading to heat distortion. But part of the reason I did tests there was due to it being a public park.
I envy those who have perfect spots to do lens testing.
p.4 #17 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
We always have to factor in the need to see a range of images, hopefully shot by more than a few of us. And it might matter how much you rate that extra what, 10-15% of performance we get from the very reliable 35/2 and 50/2 APOs.
But it should not blind people to seeing how good the others are, and here is a very handy zoom covering a lot of useful range. Good enough to crop some at the long end too.
There's very little to complain about in the general look of these above. You wonder how a similar range f2.8 would go, at say, 600 grams. They could reduce the large front too, it's 82mm filters.
But if you add up what you need to do as well or little better than this one with f2 primes, you will need three lenses weighing at least the 950g of this one. (we're all oddballs, I think its clear, lol, it goes with the territory). cheers and thanks again.
p.4 #18 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
philip_pj wrote:
We always have to factor in the need to see a range of images, hopefully shot by more than a few of us. And it might matter how much you rate that extra what, 10-15% of performance we get from the very reliable 35/2 and 50/2 APOs.
But it should not blind people to seeing how good the others are, and here is a very handy zoom covering a lot of useful range. Good enough to crop some at the long end too.
There's very little to complain about in the general look of these above. You wonder how a similar range f2.8 would go, at say, 600 grams. They could reduce the large front too, it's 82mm filters.
But if you add up what you need to do as well or little better than this one with f2 primes, you will need three lenses weighing at least the 950g of this one. (we're all oddballs, I think its clear, lol, it goes with the territory). cheers and thanks again....Show more →
I find it funny how one equates the weight of three lenses to one zoom. What is not mentioned is the weight of the zoom is fully hanging off the camera where as the weight of the two primes that are not attached to the camera are n a pack … much easier to carry than hanging off the camera.
Zooms have one advantage…they can be used at various focal lengths without changes lenses…that’s it. Comparing the weight of a zoom with a set of primes is just a fools game.
p.4 #19 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
I find it funny when people constantly think that everyone must think alike, and even funnier when someone thinks that everyone must think like they do.
p.4 #20 · Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8 DG DN Art Prime Comparison / Image Thread
tsdevine wrote:
I find it funny when people constantly think that everyone must think alike, and even funnier when someone thinks that everyone must think like they do.
We can all say what we find is funny right?
Sorry I p*ssed into your cornflakes…but what I posted is very true. Trying to justify the weight of a zoom by tallying up the weights of a set of primes is just totally wrong thinking and just a measure of justifying the weight of a zoom. I get it…you like this lens, but don’t go telling me that the weight of the zoom is less than the equivalent primes…because that math is flawed in many ways.
