I always get perplexed with the launch of a new lens by having people oohing and aahing how fantastic it is e.g. Sigma 35/1.4 and other people trashing the lens.
I don\'t mind either way as long as whomever does the so called testing is not economical with the truth.
Let us have a look at what we know so far:
1- It is an ugly lens
2- It is a heavy lens with a Nikon or Canon full frame bodies
3- It is an expensive lens
4- Do I expect sharpness. I sure do
5- Do I expect nice Bokeh. Yeps
6- Do I expect color IQ. You bet your bottom dollar I do
7- Does the test available confirm the expectations. It kind of does!!!! with a lot of reservation.
So what gives? What gives is this is exactly what I expect from a $4000 lens and this is what I get from the top CaNikon 50\'s in all their variations ...to some extent at a lower price point.
What would be the litmus test with a lens with a trillion coating and triple bypass quality control and more specifically layers upon layers of APO corrected glass.
I would like to see a long shot of lights illuminating a street and a close up of the light as to how they are rendered whether cat eyes or more towards a circle. Call it Ca CM CI or whatever Cee you like.
Until then, wake me up when someone bother to do a \"real\" test of this lens preferably a side by side test and not a \"shoot as you talk\" lens test.
