That's an intriguing comment as I was ruling out the laowa based on Matt Grangers test. I wonder if he received a bad copy as it was not on par with the sigma or nikon.
I would love to be able to get the laowa in EF for my r6 ii..
Alex Phan wrote:
I own sigma 200. If Laowa sent me the lens 2 week earlier, I wouldn’t buy the sigma.
InFocus2014 wrote:
I like the contrast of the second image slightly better (both are excellent). They are both labeled as Laowa, so I do not know which is the Sigma.
Laowa has certainly come a long way from the mediocre Zero D lenses I had purchased some years ago.
I remember Granger saying the Laowa was shorter so unless he moved while taking the photos, I would guess the one with the smaller subject is the Laowa.
Would love to know for sure since a 200mm F2 for the price of the Laowa would be easier to digest than the Canon EF 200mm F2
GabrielPhoto wrote:
That's an intriguing comment as I was ruling out the laowa based on Matt Grangers test. I wonder if he received a bad copy as it was not on par with the sigma or nikon.
I would love to be able to get the laowa in EF for my r6 ii..
I have both Z mount and E mount version of this lens. For some odd reason the E mount AF better compare to the Z mount
lol Joshua, I don’t want to upset my Z9 friends 😁😁
Here’s a quick rundown:
Laowa and Sigma are neck and neck! Sigma has a slight edge in sharpness because it uses a mirrorless optic formula, while Laowa uses a DSLR formula. Sigma is also a bit lighter. Laowa shines in extreme low light (check out the video!). Laowa has a rear filter, but Sigma doesn’t. The hood on Laowa feels a bit cheap compared to Sigma. Laowa doesn’t have the lock f-stop ring, and I accidentally pumped the stop a few times. The foot rotation ring on Laowa doesn’t have any markings, making it tricky to level when on a tripod.
Both lenses have fast and responsive autofocus. I don’t miss any shots on AF-C with A1, but I do miss about 10% with Z9.
In the end, the color rendering of both lenses isn’t quite up to par with the 200IS or 200VR ii. Those are tough to beat, but the weight, cost, and service for those two older lenses are a bit of a concern. I’ve got the Sigma 200, and I’m planning to trade it in for something else and enjoy the Laowa 200.
How smooth is the Laowa bokeh compared to the Sigma and Nikon?
I was going to get a Canon ef 200 f2 or maybe even 1.8 but wouldn't mind the laowa if it's comparable as it would be new and I prefer non white lenses lol
Thanks
Alex Phan wrote:
lol Joshua, I don’t want to upset my Z9 friends 😁😁
Here’s a quick rundown:
Laowa and Sigma are neck and neck! Sigma has a slight edge in sharpness because it uses a mirrorless optic formula, while Laowa uses a DSLR formula. Sigma is also a bit lighter. Laowa shines in extreme low light (check out the video!). Laowa has a rear filter, but Sigma doesn’t. The hood on Laowa feels a bit cheap compared to Sigma. Laowa doesn’t have the lock f-stop ring, and I accidentally pumped the stop a few times. The foot rotation ring on Laowa doesn’t have any markings, making it tricky to level when on a tripod.
Both lenses have fast and responsive autofocus. I don’t miss any shots on AF-C with A1, but I do miss about 10% with Z9.
In the end, the color rendering of both lenses isn’t quite up to par with the 200IS or 200VR ii. Those are tough to beat, but the weight, cost, and service for those two older lenses are a bit of a concern. I’ve got the Sigma 200, and I’m planning to trade it in for something else and enjoy the Laowa 200.
GabrielPhoto wrote:
How smooth is the Laowa bokeh compared to the Sigma and Nikon?
I was going to get a Canon ef 200 f2 or maybe even 1.8 but wouldn't mind the laowa if it's comparable as it would be new and I prefer non white lenses lol
Thanks
I don't have the Nikon 200VR so i can't compare it.
