I am with you on 65mm. But it is mostly from focal length. Most of lenses at this focal are out of box good. Maybe latest glasses have better color correction than old f1.8/f2 ones.
Rendering is quite hard to tell apart once they reach certain level of performance, “sterile“ look check APO SL cron. I have the same feeling about fast modern 85mm/135mm glasses. It is rare I see some interesting but at the same time, it is rare I see something to complain about.
Then, we have to come back to size, rice and build when looking for this focal. It will be a popular set.
The indoor headshots provide the closest rendering comparison I've seen so far.
My guess is that reviewers have a big impact on sales (or just the perception for manufacturers). The 45 received some flat reviews because it didn't offer a wide aperture and needed to be stopped down at shorter distances. I suspect the 35 will sell better with the help of more positive reviews, which is a shame.
At the moment, I'm leaning heavily towards saving my money and making do with the 45.
Opinions:
- 65 has a sterile look - similar to budget lenses optimized for sharpness
- 65 doesn't offer better subject isolation than 45
- 35 has an interesting look - probably fickle lens for travel
It would have been interesting if Sigma offered these lenses with some moderate apodization filters to help with the not-so-good rendering.
Dec 13, 2020 at 12:20 PM
Previous versions of zhangyue's message #15433038 « Pre-order: Sigma 24mm f/3.5, 35mm f/2 and 65mm f/2 DG DN lenses »
check APO SL cron. I have the same feeling about fast modern 85mm/135mm glasses. It is rare I see some interesting but at the same time, it is rare I see something to complain about.