Elisha82 wrote:
The upper body shot is beautiful. But you're not doing the lenses justice by photographing in such harsh lighting!
The little guy can hardly keep his eyes open!
It was shot at sunset, the light was very warm and soft, Sillas has some sensitivity to the direct light.
---------------------------------------------
charles.K wrote:
Thank you for the test comparisons!
Now I know why I like the 105/1.4G so much
I would love to see a comparison with the 135 Art and the 70-200 f2.8E FL. The AF with the new 70-200E is very fast and accurate
You are welcome, unfortunately I have only the 70-200mm VR I but I can try this week some test shots.
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
Elijah wrote:
Thanks for these shots Marcelo!
This comparison definitely confirms that I will be keeping my 105E. Not that I planned on buying the Sigma, I now see that it's not even worth considering on buying/trying it.
It's interesting to see how the bokeh quality and size on the 105E is better/bigger than 135A.
The overall image colors is also better on the 105E, assuming you had post process synced with all images.
You are welcome, the pictures are OOC and just applied some sharpening.
---------------------------------------------
d831 wrote:
Forgot to say, thanks again Marcelo!
You are very welcome, I am glad the post is useful for all the people with interest in this lens.
---------------------------------------------
traylorc wrote: ariel777 wrote:
The only really impactful difference that "I see" in the bokeh is the 200 which, expectedly so, melts it all away and creates a true 3D effect. It matters not from my perspective since as of Tuesday I will have all three in my bag, each of which will be used for a distinct purpose.
That is my assessment as well...IMHO the bokeh of the 200 is superior to the other two lenses.
However...I do not see a significant difference between the rendering of the 105 vs 135 to justify the price difference between the two. Is the bokeh and color on the 105 better than the 135?? Maybe...but is the difference worth the $800 price difference? For me the answer is no...that being said...I can respect the opinion of fellow photographers and forum members who believe otherwise.
I totally agree with your statement the 200mm f2 still the king, also about the difference of rendering between the 105 and 135 is just minimal but the strong points of the Sigma 135mm are price and focus speed, I could say it is very similar to the 200mm f2.
---------------------------------------------
Apr 10, 2017 at 08:50 AM
Previous versions of Lightsearcher's message #13994287 « Sigma 135mm f1.8 test shots »
