wind30 wrote: j4nu wrote:
All great guys, but 35GM was promised to be the holy grail:
* small
* sharp
* smooth .
At least that's why I waited for it, ordered it, returned 35i when it just got announced for it and was going to sell the Bigma for it. Not so sure any more.
Ech, I guess you can't win them all.
one your 1:1 comparison shot, the bokeh of the gm seems pretty close to the bigma.
your later standalone gm samples bokeh does look a bit busy with quite some LoCA. Is the GM bokeh significantly worse or maybe the bigma behaves similarly.
I have the sigma f1.2 which I am perfectly happy with the IQ, just that it is too heavy...
Huh, it's difficult to say without shooting the same scene with both. That's why I think the best comparison is the one I posted, you can download fullsize jpegs and compare every area of the frame then. I find the Bigma to be smoother under such hard conditions.
In the standalone shots, I think the Bigma would also show some busyness, just with less outlining, maybe with more LoCA. So, it would not be perfect, because it was a heavily lit scene with branches, twigs, etc. and 35mm simply does not blur enough in this case.
I'm not such a bokeh aficionado as @Fred Miranda@ or @Nehemiahphoto@, but I've learned to value smooth rendering here. The GM is of course capable of smooth rendering, but it's less capable of handling challenging scenes. See, below 3 shots with different focus distance. To me, they are all smooth enough. This is again a heavily backlit scene with the setting sun on border of the frame. Fringing is also minimal for such a difficult scene imho.
If you saw Fred's recent 35mm comparison, I'd say that the GM looks closer to an even sharper but less corrected CV 35 APO than to 35i in its output.
EDIT: Fred tested another copy of the APO, which performs better in the corners so I guess we have to wait for a direct comparison @f2.
wind30 wrote: j4nu wrote:
All great guys, but 35GM was promised to be the holy grail:
* small
* sharp
* smooth .
At least that's why I waited for it, ordered it, returned 35i when it just got announced for it and was going to sell the Bigma for it. Not so sure any more.
Ech, I guess you can't win them all.
one your 1:1 comparison shot, the bokeh of the gm seems pretty close to the bigma.
your later standalone gm samples bokeh does look a bit busy with quite some LoCA. Is the GM bokeh significantly worse or maybe the bigma behaves similarly.
I have the sigma f1.2 which I am perfectly happy with the IQ, just that it is too heavy...
Huh, it's difficult to say without shooting the same scene with both. That's why I think the best comparison is the one I posted, you can download fullsize jpegs and compare every area of the frame then. I find the Bigma to be smoother under such hard conditions.
In the standalone shots, I think the Bigma would also show some busyness, just with less outlining, maybe with more LoCA. So, it would not be perfect, because it was a heavily lit scene with branches, twigs, etc. and 35mm simply does not blur enough in this case.
I'm not such a bokeh aficionado as @Fred Miranda@ or @Nehemiahphoto@, but I've learned to value smooth rendering here. The GM is of course capable of smooth rendering, but it's less capable of handling challenging scenes. See, below 3 shots with different focus distance. To me, they are all smooth enough. This is again a heavily backlit scene with the setting sun on border of the frame. Fringing is also minimal for such a difficult scene imho.
.
