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.
Doesn't the 45 also have horrific AF?
Well, IMO, horrific is an overstatement, but YMMV. The AF is certainly less than optimal and how much it is a problem to any one probably depends on how and what they shoot. Personally I don't find the AF gets in the way of my shooting, but I am sure it does for others.
+1
Understanding that this is part of the Contemporary series ... it isn't intended to be top tier (size & cost) AF performer. There are other lenses for that level of AF performance. The market it is intended for isn't likely to be using it to compete with the big guns.
If I build / buy a small dog house, why should I be surprised to complain that a horse won't fit inside it?
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.
Doesn't the 45 also have horrific AF?
Well, IMO, horrific is an overstatement, but YMMV. The AF is certainly less than optimal and how much it is a problem to any one probably depends on how and what they shoot. Personally I don't find the AF gets in the way of my shooting, but I am sure it does for others.
+1
Understanding that this is part of the Contemporary series ... it isn't intended to be top tier (size & cost) AF performer. There are other lenses for that level of AF performance. The market it is intended for isn't likely to be using it to compete with the big guns.
If I build / buy a small dog house, why should I complain that a horse won't fit inside it?
Dec 13, 2020 at 12:20 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #15433039 « Pre-order: Sigma 24mm f/3.5, 35mm f/2 and 65mm f/2 DG DN lenses »
