p.3 #2 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
Meta is being sued for consciously creating “addictive” content. Can we do the same for lens manufacturers? I was happy with my GM 85mm f1.4 II… until today,
p.3 #5 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
Sounds interesting but it is 240 grams heavier than the Sony 85 GMII.
Granted the Sony is more expensive but can anyone seriously see differences between the excellent f/1.4's from Sigma and Sony and the f/1.2's?
Let's do the math...The DOF at 10 feet for an 85mm lens @ f/1.2 is 3.72 inches, for an 85mm lens @ f/1.4 it is 4.44 inches, a difference of 0.72 inches, less than one inch.
p.3 #6 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
doc4x5 wrote:
Sounds interesting but it is 240 grams heavier than the Sony 85 GMII.
Granted the Sony is more expensive but can anyone seriously see differences between the excellent f/1.4's from Sigma and Sony and the f/1.2's?
Let's do the math...The DOF at 10 feet for an 85mm lens @ f/1.2 is 3.72 inches, for an 85mm lens @ f/1.4 it is 4.44 inches, a difference of 0.72 inches, less than one inch.
p.3 #7 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
A hair over half a pound heavier. That makes me more excited for my inbound Sony, however that weight difference wouldn't at all deter me from using the sigma regularly. I need to see some AF accuracy testing to make a decision between the two tho.
I had both the RF 85 1.2 and EF 85 1.4 IS, and the IQ / bokeh difference was pretty stark to me, in favor of the RF.
p.3 #8 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
A hair over half a pound heavier. That makes me more excited for my inbound Sony, however that weight difference wouldn't at all deter me from using the sigma regularly. I need to see some AF accuracy testing to make a decision between the two tho.
I had both the RF 85 1.2 and EF 85 1.4 IS, and the IQ / bokeh difference was pretty stark to me, in favor of the RF.
I just pre-ordered this lens, but will keep using my Sony 85mm f1.4 II. Like my 35mm’s, I use my Sigma 35mm f1.4 II when traveling or when kit weight matters and my Viltrox 35mm f1.2 for special image sessions. I expect to do the same thing with the 85’s.
Of course, for those measuring incremental performance gains versus cost and size, these f1,2 lenses may not make sense; however, for those of us willing to accept the diminishing returns offered with the subtle rendering improvements, this new lens is most welcome. I’ve been waiting for an FE 85mm f1.2 for what seems like forever.
p.3 #9 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
InFocus2014 wrote:
I just pre-ordered this lens, but will keep using my Sony 85mm f1.4 II. Like my 35mm’s, I use my Sigma 35mm f1.4 II when traveling or when kit weight matters and my Viltrox 35mm f1.2 for special image sessions. I expect to do the same thing with the 85’s.
Of course, for those measuring incremental performance gains versus cost and size, these f1,2 lenses may not make sense; however, for those of us willing to accept the diminishing returns offered with the subtle rendering improvements, this new lens is most welcome. I’ve been waiting for an FE 85mm f1.2 for what seems like forever. ...Show more →
Yeah, I might order one as well and do a comparison with my, now old, Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN ...
p.3 #10 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
doc4x5 wrote:
Granted the Sony is more expensive but can anyone seriously see differences between the excellent f/1.4's from Sigma and Sony and the f/1.2's?
Let's do the math...The DOF at 10 feet for an 85mm lens @ f/1.2 is 3.72 inches, for an 85mm lens @ f/1.4 it is 4.44 inches, a difference of 0.72 inches, less than one inch.
In looking at the Flickr gallery, unless I am misjudging the proportions of the subjects, the distances to the dancers or ballerina are pretty generous - maybe even 20 feet or so in order to frame some of the environment around them. I would think even at f/1.8 either Adobe's or DXO's depth-mapping algos would pretty effectively mask the subject from the background. As sacrilegious and it may sound, feels like it would be easier to capture more detail in camera and then blur it later.
I should probably get a head start running for the hills after this suggestion.
p.3 #12 · Sigma announces development of 85mm f/1.2 DG Art - ETA September `26
The first (?) text review out there: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sigma-85mm-f-1-2-dg-art-lens-review-37603
I'm tending to take EPZ's reviews with a little bit of salt since they're more often than not suspiciously glowing, but it looks like Sigma did hit it out of the park with this lens (and why wouldn't they, given how good most of their gear has been in the last... 15 years at least?)
) ...