Wow, looks great!
However, while I can see the difference between 35GM and 35/1.2DN quite often, I wonder how often I would notice it between the Sigma and the Viltrox...
j4nu wrote:
Wow, looks great!
However, while I can see the difference between 35GM and 35/1.2DN quite often, I wonder how often I would notice it between the Sigma and the Viltrox...
The main difference I guess is the size and weight. The Viltrox show very high focus breathing too. One review also mentioned it does not work with ETZ adaptor which is weird. Another mentioned the aperture ring cannot be locked. For an unmarked ring, I think it is quite an issue.
KarmaKramer wrote:
I can’t see wanting any 35mm over the GM. Light, fast, sharp…stop making new 35s
I don't think the target market is people who got the 35mm gm. It is more for the people who got the 35mm f1.2 sigma...
If you can't tell the difference in IQ between the gm and the sigma, or feel it is worth the extra size and weight, no way will you get the Viltrox either.
At least it is not like nikon 35mm f1.2 which is the same weight size and slightly better IQ but so much more expensive.
If you're getting an f1.4 instead of an f1.2 because "there's no difference", you might as well get an f1.8 instead and save even more weight (and money).
jaygould wrote:
If you're getting an f1.4 instead of an f1.2 because "there's no difference", you might as well get an f1.8 instead and save even more weight (and money).
It’s not that "there's no difference", it’s more accurate to say there’s little noticeable difference for increased physical size and weight. I have preferred f1.8 primes to f1.4 primes for this very reason.
However, the 35mm f1.4 GM is on my wanted list because it’s a great balance of size/weight and optical performance from wide open:
mudlake wrote:
Agreed. The Sony 35GM is half the weight of this Viltrox! I doubt real world images will be distinguishable with the Viltrox over the Sony.
Not quite double the weight with the 35 GM weighing 524g and this new Viltrox 35 f/1.2 weighing 917g (according to Bastian's measurement in his review). So very close to 400g more for the Viltrox. If weight is a primary concern that would definitely pull for the Sony GM, but there are a lot of differences between the lenses. From the samples so far, it looks to me that personally the bokeh differences would drive my decision and would be as important and as much difference as the differences in weight to me. I have a small 40mm f/1.2 (the Voigtlander that is much smaller than even the GM, but it has a few optical weaknesses. This new Viltrox has such strong optical performance that I might want to get it for when I want an ultra fast and highly corrected lens.
From what I have read Sigma is making a new 35 1.2 lens for the E mount. Smaller and perhaps better. I don't need it, but if I did, I would hold out on the purchase to that lens comes to market. For a walk around 35mm lens size is a big factor I think. I am happy with my 35GM for a lot of reasons, but size is near the top.
wind30 wrote:
The main difference I guess is the size and weight. The Viltrox show very high focus breathing too. One review also mentioned it does not work with ETZ adaptor which is weird. Another mentioned the aperture ring cannot be locked. For an unmarked ring, I think it is quite an issue.
Yeah, for me it will come down to whether it goes under my personal "too big for casual use" threshold. I love the Sigma but I admit I have never taken it on vacation.
50/1.2GM on the other hand is completely ok for me, even for everyday use.
I think I like jpeg colors out of the Sigma more, the Viltrox seems a bit warmer.
The feel in hand is actually closer to 50/1.2GM on first impression.
Looks a bit sharper, but the blur is very nice too (though my samples are too up-close .to judge it well)
I'm mostly interested in how it fares against demanding backgrounds, but that will have to wait till the weekend .
I'm a bit worried about the last part as the Viltrox seems better corrected and more contrasty, and that never helps the bokeh...
Oh, I don't like the unmarked ring but I mostly keep it at "A" anyway .
Edit: just looked up the philllipreeve review again, they looked more similiar than different on their samples... makes me wonder about sample variances.
Edit: just looked up the philllipreeve review again, they looked more similiar than different on their samples... makes me wonder about sample variances.
I don't think it's sample variation. The Viltrox is I think at least as sharp (and contrasty) as the GM and it seems to be better corrected. This has to translate to harsher bokeh, unless some magic sauce is added . The Sigma's bokeh seems to be sprinkled with SAs for that extra smoothness...
The difference might simply come from the scene, as long as blur covers any transition zones, it is hard to distinguish between the GM / Sigma / Viltrox IMHO.
) lunch break so I didn't have any time for photos.