New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 HSM DG

Arob1000 wrote in post #15509785
The one thing that does help as with any f/1.4 lens is using AI Servo mode, especially handheld.

Not sure if you saw my sample a few pages back, anyway here it is - https://photography-on-the.net …p=15507882&post​count=2007

5D3, single point (one of the off-centre crosstype point), focused on one of her eyes, al servo, f1.4, ISO640, 1/80.

How do you explain that? I mean it's not handshake as you can clearly see the bow on her shirt in sharp focus.

Arob1000 wrote in post #15509844
All the shots I posted have the full image and a crop of the point of focus from different ranges.

Arob1000 tbh your samples all look oof....they are not sharp by any means.

They only looked 'ok' at best due to the increased dof at longer distance. The focus is nowhere near bang on.

Bottom line, if you are happy with the samples you posted, then sure. But I personally can't/won't accept if I am getting similar results like yours.

kin2son wrote in post #15510128
How do you explain that? I mean it's not handshake as you can clearly see the bow on her shirt in sharp focus.

He doesn't have to explain anything. He just gave a tip about how a certain AF mode can help with fast lenses.

kin2son wrote in post #15510144
Bottom line, if you are happy with the samples you posted, then sure. But I personally can't/won't accept if I am getting similar results like yours.

I'm pretty sure that any fast wide angle lens wide open will deliver noticeably worse results at a distance compared to closer up. Not sure of the physics behind it, but something to do with lenses being optimized for certain distances.

That said, some of those samples do look a tad soft. Best way to find out is to do the same shot with LV as well as VF AF. If they're both similar, your lens is fine in terms of AF.

agog wrote in post #15510071
Don't have a dog in this hunt...just sold my 35L to help finance an 85L II but I am struck by the strange dichotomy occurring here and on FM. Here the lens appears to be universally accepted without qualification. Over on FM, however there is another uproar about focus issues on this one too. One poll garnered 30% of the respondents with issues. Now the poll was very small and the percentage may have changed since the early stages (haven't checked recently) but you would be hard pressed to believe that we are talking about the same lens. For a time, when I sold my 35L, I had considered reinvesting in the sigma. I did live through the lottery (Russian Roulette) of the 50 f/1.4 and though my 2nd copy was pretty good ..I spent my life with it waiting for it to let me down at a crucial moment. I was afraid to take it out of my bag and throw it on my camera in critical situations. Its gone. I'm happy and I still can't figure out why most here are happy and a lot over there are not.
Tim

Hey Tim,

Not sure how much of this thread you've gone through, but lately quite a few folks have been reporting focusing issues with their lenses here. If you only looked at the first half of this thread, I could see what you mean by universal acceptance, but the later half has taken a turn for the worse.

It's a worrisome trend, and I sure hope that it's not a repeat of the other Sigma lens issues. Looks like Alan's criticisms and worries are being proven right. Personally I still think it's too early to pass judgement, but this is starting to remind me a lot of when the Sigma 50mm was released.

kin2son wrote in post #15510144
Arob1000 tbh your samples all look oof....they are not sharp by any means.

They only looked 'ok' at best due to the increased dof at longer distance. The focus is nowhere near bang on.

Bottom line, if you are happy with the samples you posted, then sure. But I personally can't/won't accept if I am getting similar results like yours.

I agree. The shots from drzenitram look so much better.

i've been following this thread, but it seems that, for the same money, the canon 35 f/2 is a better piece of glass, with the tradeoff being less speed for better focusing and IS (for those who would need it)? is that a safe assumption?

ekinnyc wrote in post #15510426
i've been following this thread, but it seems that, for the same money, the canon 35 f/2 is a better piece of glass, with the tradeoff being less speed for better focusing and IS (for those who would need it)? is that a safe assumption?

some, and probably most copies of the sigma have perfectly functioning AF.

remember that of every 10 owners with good copies, only one or two may post a positive review, while of every 10 owners with bad copies, you'll most likely hear bad reviews from all 10.

drzenitram wrote in post #15510504
remember that of every 10 owners with good copies, only one or two may post a positive review, while of every 10 owners with bad copies, you'll most likely hear bad reviews from all 10.

Maybe us good copy folk need to be more vocal. I'll start... My lens works perfectly, and I love what it produces. Go Sigma! (Sorry to those having issues though. I know how bad that sucks.)

I have been following the thread in FM. The poll is on if you have FF,BF compared to spot on. A great many people have to FA not just because of the lens but also the camera. So even if its camera FF or BF then your in the 24% percent, so who really knows the percentage of erratic focus problems like some have had here and some on FM.

BTW its 17 of 71 that have BF or FF

drzenitram wrote in post #15510504
some, and probably most copies of the sigma have perfectly functioning AF.

remember that of every 10 owners with good copies, only one or two may post a positive review, while of every 10 owners with bad copies, you'll most likely hear bad reviews from all 10.

That is very true however, i wonder how many people have just never tested at 100 foot at f1.4.

As for all the 'it's your technique' comments...

Mine misses focus by about 50-60 feet at 150, so no, i'm not wobbling backwards 50 feet, and the focus ring on mine is so stiff i have to really make an effort to turn it. theres no way its geting nudged.

ekinnyc wrote in post #15510426
i've been following this thread, but it seems that, for the same money, the canon 35 f/2 is a better piece of glass, with the tradeoff being less speed for better focusing and IS (for those who would need it)? is that a safe assumption?

From what I've read (not much since I am absolutely not interested in the 35/2 IS), this is what I gather. The 35/2 has:
maybe, slightly, better focusing (properly working copies of both lenses), IS, smoother bokeh
The 35/1.4 has:
better everything else (build and IQ)

Neil you are exactly right I was basing the universal acceptance on the first 50 pages or so. There was immediate concerns brought up on the FM forum and for the first 28 pages there has been a steady stream of complaints. Probably about 10 to 15% of the purchasers. Again I am just trying to figure out
the yin and the yang of these forums vis a vis the initial reactions. A number of folks said they would reserve judgment until more was known. I considered the 85mm f/1.4 when I got my 85mm f/1.2LII
but my time with 2 Sigma 50s made the decision for me. Not fair to Sigma perhaps, but when you buy a lens for that amount of money the ownership properties should not include expecting it to fail and sending it and your camera to Sigma for a week or 2 just to be able to use their product. I had an issue (I thought) with 1 Canon lens and it turned out to be the body. I wonder if the FMers are a little more cynical as a group and maybe went looking for and (perhaps) found issues. I am not a member at FM but do enjoy the reviews and the have an excellent wildlife section. Maybe we pay too much attention to the quasi experts and maybe when we are told a lens is the second coming no-one remembers that the emperor is naked around 10-15% of the time
Tim

regards
Tim

Fuhrtographer: A real princess! Just curious as to what aperture setting was used.
If I didn't know what lens took it I would have guessed 50L wide open except the bokeh is wrong.
I love the texture of the shot, the pose and particularly the model but it also seems to me that the sharpest part of the photo is the Maroon Bear on her sleeper. Certainly doesn't detract from the overall excellence of the shot, and maybe the contrast is better on the bear, but if I were trying to get a sharp shot wide open, a little MFA may be in order. But again could be my monitor. Doesn't mean its not a framer.
Regards
Tim

agog wrote in post #15510731
Fuhrtographer: A real princess! Just curious as to what aperture setting was used.
If I didn't know what lens took it I would have guessed 50L wide open except the bokeh is wrong.
I love the texture of the shot, the pose and particularly the model but it also seems to me that the sharpest part of the photo is the Maroon Bear on her sleeper. Certainly doesn't detract from the overall excellence of the shot, and maybe the contrast is better on the bear, but if I were trying to get a sharp shot wide open, a little MFA may be in order. But again could be my monitor. Doesn't mean its not a framer.
Regards
Tim

Thank you!!
Taken at 1.4@1/50 at iso 160. Focal point was on the lead eye, probably front focusing a bit. I agree though a little MFA is in order.