For me Sigma lenses have too big hoods. I have four art and two contemporary lenses from the mirrorless lens series, and I am using zero Sigma hoods. $2 aliexpress hoods do a good enough job while being smaller.
I think earlier the wait time for new Sigma lenses was not this long. I have ordered a few lenses on release but can't remember waiting for two months before this new 35mm.
RoamingScott wrote:
Dustin's complaint here is so goofy. No lenses in this class, and really short of huge teles, have a hood cutout for operating rotating filters.
He's also demonstrating it with a Polar Pro which has been reported WIDELY to be largely incompatible with bayonet hoods.
Increasingly this is a man that is getting harder to take seriously.
How is he hard to take seriously? As usual, a very solid and thorough review - 22 minutes and he spends 30 seconds pointing out that the bayonet hood doesn't work with a commonly used filter. I dunno, that's kinda worth knowing.
Ihmemies2 wrote:
For me Sigma lenses have too big hoods. I have four art and two contemporary lenses from the mirrorless lens series, and I am using zero Sigma hoods. $2 aliexpress hoods do a good enough job while being smaller.
I think earlier the wait time for new Sigma lenses was not this long. I have ordered a few lenses on release but can't remember waiting for two months before this new 35mm.
You can always buy a nice affordable 3rd party lens hood, I have a weak spot for the squared ones.
Jim Fisher of PCMag really likes it https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/sigma-35mm-f14-dg-ii-art
Less fringey, a bit shorter and lighter, an easy to use focal length, perfect for pets indoors and frozen fingers in winter perhaps ..
I just received the lens for Sony E-Mount and I love the size, weight, overall design and rendering.
The only thing I don’t like: It does make weird sounds, even when it‘s not focusing. Once it‘s attached to the camera and the camera is turned on, it makes those noises. Could someone confirm if that is normal? It sounds like something is scratching inside …
You can hear it here, especially at 14s — headphones recommended: https://www.icloud.com/photos/#/icloudlinks/03e73FSbUrdjG6xp9YsXl39Jg/
RoamingScott wrote:
Dustin's complaint here is so goofy. No lenses in this class, and really short of huge teles, have a hood cutout for operating rotating filters.
He's also demonstrating it with a Polar Pro which has been reported WIDELY to be largely incompatible with bayonet hoods.
Increasingly this is a man that is getting harder to take seriously.
I do like Dustin's reviews, and I refer to them often. They are well organized, easy to understand, and he usually addresses both practical and technical considerations. That said, I've definitely noticed some oddities in a number of his more recent reviews (ie. over the last couple of years).
This one here caught my attention because I just watched him completely dismiss the lack of a filter window on the new 100-400 f4.5. He calls it a gimmick for 100-400, but then considers then considers its absence a flaw for this 35mm lens. If you ever needed a filter window, it would be on a lens with a deep hood as opposed to a tiny 35mm lens hood. Yes, the 100-400 has the drop-in filter, but now way to rotate it, so I window would have made so much sense. Not to mention, I'm sure filters are being used on a 35mm far more regularly than on a telephoto. His logic doesn't make sense and isn't consistent on this topic.
Again, I value his reviews, but there have been small things here and there recently that make me raise an eyebrow.
I guess the lens is a bit smaller and lighter.
