p.2 #1 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
LawrenceJ wrote:
Wow, it seems some people hate an $800 lens competing and in some aspects outperforming a $1900 lens.
It is all too soon to call the ball based on basically the tests of a single guy and his lens.
The Sigma sure looks like a very good lens, if the AF is up to scratch I might get one myself.
That said, there are just as many if not many more who will grab any excuse to hit on the 85L, so that more or less evens out the odds.
My take on the Sigma is based on the real world samples that are now increasingly being shown, just like my take on the 85L2 is based on my real world experience and the abundant material available on the i-net.
Like some of the early tests by the same source the effort is to be commended, but the execution and method certainly leave room for discussion.
p.2 #2 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
rhorta wrote:
It is all too soon to call the ball based on basically the tests of a single guy and his lens.
The Sigma sure looks like a very good lens, if the AF is up to scratch I might get one myself.
That said, there are just as many if not many more who will grab any excuse to hit on the 85L, so that more or less evens out the odds.
My take on the Sigma is based on the real world samples that are now increasingly being shown, just like my take on the 85L2 is based on my real world experience and the abundant material available on the i-net.
Like some of the early tests by the same source the effort is to be commended, but the execution and method certainly leave room for discussion.
head over to POTN at the Lens sample section, lots of samples popping up, the flower shot and portraiture looks GREAT, quite a few night club shots with this lens as well. The AF accuracy, speed and consistency trumped the 85L according to user feedback ....you coudn't get any more"real world" then most samples over there, I didn't see any test chart in that thread.....none that I can recall anyway.
p.2 #3 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
rhorta wrote:
Like some of the early tests by the same source the effort is to be commended, but the execution and method certainly leave room for discussion.
Ruy
Well... People wanted real world test right? Would they settle for real world method where the variables aren't eliminated or even controlled?
p.2 #4 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
n0b0 wrote:
Well... People wanted real world test right? Would they settle for real world method where the variables aren't eliminated or even controlled?
you see, when you give some people an apple, they would ask you for an orange instead, and when you gave them an orange now they want you to go get a pear If I were Ernie I'd say "take it or leave it...if you don't like what you see then go get your own and test it yourself!!"
p.2 #6 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
I would like to point out that the OP did these test because people requested them. Look at the other threads and you will see that several people asked the OP to do this.
I think he is very accommodating and at this point, if I was him, I would tell all of you complainers to shove it. Go buy the lens and test it yourself.
p.2 #8 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Jim Victory wrote:
I would like to point out that the OP did these test because people requested them. Look at the other threads and you will see that several people asked the OP to do this.
I think he is very accommodating and at this point, if I was him, I would tell all of you complainers to shove it. Go buy the lens and test it yourself.
Jim
+1, if I was handing out $100 bills on the corner, there'll always be some complainers bitching that I didn't give them 5 $20's
p.2 #9 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
I saw all of his threads and did not find any real life shots. Maybe you can post link(s) to those threads? All I saw were shots of the newspaper. Since I do not shoot newspaper (and I am sure 99% of people here don't) I see this test as completely irrelevant and useless. Not just that, I see it as being manufactured because things just don't add up.
p.2 #11 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Geez people, how hard is it to grasp that these shots are exactly how the lens will perform in "real life" as well. No matter if it's a newspaper, person, tree, zombie, ect, the design of the lens is the same and thus it will perform the same. The best way to test lenses (like he did) is to have all the variables controlled (like he did) and see who comes out ahead. To say these tests don't show how the lenses will really work is just asinine, he showed the Bokeh, he showed the sharpness, and now he has shown 100% representations of a controlled test but yet it's not good enough. Yet alone the other users on other sites who in "real life" confirm these tests as being true.
Yes the Canon 85L is a bit sharper in the middle, by just a bit at that. But everywhere else the Sigma 85 trumps the 85L.
Oct 24, 2010 at 03:57 PM
Guest
Guest
p.2 #12 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Ugh, this is getting ugly... but I think this test is much needed, and was asked for in the previous installments of the Sigma threads. It shows technical quality - resolution capability, chromatic aberrations - that surely can't hurt, no matter the creative potential of a lens. These two are not mutually exclusive, as you all know.
p.2 #13 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
I own 3 Sigma Lenses. 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM - 50mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM and the 24-70mm f/2.8 and I absolutely love all three. I bought the 24-70 because i needed something to get me started two years ago and didn't have $1300 for Canon's L version.
p.2 #14 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
deepbluejh wrote:
While I appreciate the effort, taking pictures of newspapers is a waste of time. The very least you can do is go out and shoot a real subject (human being maybe?).
And again, it's been beaten to death, but it's worth mentioning. Corner sharpness at super large apertures is *irrelevant*.
Again, thanks for the effort, but the methods are flawed and the conclusion isn't terribly helpful.
When people post brick wall shots, some will tell them to use it in the 'real world'. When people post real world shots, some will refer them to the brick wall. You can't really go wrong with the brick wall test when looking at sharpness, but you can go wrong the other way around. It's not as if the lens will be amazingly sharp on brick and then soft as cotton on a person. Indeed there are aspects of glass that aren't being tested here, but some aspects certainly are. This is only half the test, and it's nowhere near being invalid.
Corner sharpness wide open is irrelevant until your subject matter is in the corner, and perhaps we're looking at more than sharpness in the corners? How about CA? Is CA irrelevant in the corners?
Though not exactly a scientific test, it's significantly more scientific than nothing at all. Instead of nixing these results, why not appreciate what you have seen, and simply wait for the outdoor test?
p.2 #16 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
I would like to add my .02 worth.I am on the prowl for a fast 85.My first choice obviously was the 85L.Then after looking at the thread on POTN for the Sigma 85, i said hey wait a minute .We might have a serious contender to the Heavyweight Champion of Fast 85mm.So i scrutinized the pics of the Sigma 85 - some already calling it the Kegma, it appears to be very sharp WO, bokeh very good and great control over what so many of us hate and that is LoCA,purple fringing etc.Sooo, what to do.I can buy 2 very nice lenses for the price of the Original Keg!! I am not a rich person, i have to scrape, save, trade and be very nice to my wife (i am nice to her all the time) when i am in lens purchase mode So it is a decision that i take very seriously.So what conclusion have i come to? Well i went back to flickr, searched pictures taken with the 85L and fell in love once again.So what is it that makes the difference to me.It is what some older photographers refer to as DRAWING STYLE. Never heard this expression before until i hung out on the Alternative Forum for a while.There is something that the 85L has, the way it renders the image that i do not see in the Sigma yet.Has nothing to do with sharpness,bokeh,or CA control.There is just something to the 85L images that makes them more appealing to me.Maybe others can chime in on this.So that is why i am now settled in my search for a fast 85.It will be the Original Keg - Canon's 85L! Also IMO the 85L is a better looking lens
-Jim
p.2 #17 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Matt Kerby wrote:
+1, if I was handing out $100 bills on the corner, there'll always be some complainers bitching that I didn't give them 5 $20's
Sadly that's how this world goes these days. I got asked by a bum for $2 and all I had was a $1 and he abused me for being a tight arse. He didn't any get money for that.
I know how boring these tests are to do and how much time they take, so well done for taking the time to present these results Ernie.
p.2 #18 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Thanks Ernie the tests are much appreciated and if you would of been a Nikon shooter and posted these posts in the Nikon forum you would of been treated much better. The bashing on these forums gets tiresome.
p.2 #19 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Yes it does, Bruce... some of the brothers get a little impatient and suppose that what I've posted so far is all I intended to post. Well, life teaches us patience, doesn't it?
p.2 #20 · Sigma 85 vs 85L II, round 4: printed page
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Sadly that's how this world goes these days. I got asked by a bum for $2 and all I had was a $1 and he abused me for being a tight arse. He didn't any get money for that.
Hahaha, no good deed goes unpunished! A friend had a bum hassle him in front of a coffee shop because he wouldn't buy him a mocha lol.
If I were Ernie I'd say "take it or leave it...if you don't like what you see then go get your own and test it yourself!!" 