Charlie wrote in post #18908477
Hey David, how are you feeling the 35 f1.2, has the aura worn off or is the weight worth it? IQ looks out of this world for some reason.... maybe the really good samples are clouding my judgement, the bokeh is as good as I've ever seen on a 35, and even better than most 50's?
I’m absolutely loving my Sigma 35mm 1.2! I agree that the rendering is superb. The sharpness at 1.2 across the frame is simply amazing to me.
To date I have owned or used the following 35mm lenses: EF 35L, EF 35L II, EF 35 2 IS, Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 ZE, FE 35 2.8 ZA, FE 35 1.4 ZA, Tamron 35 1.8, Sigma 35 1.4 (EF mount), Loxia 35, and now Sigma 35mm 1.2 . Of those the Zeiss Distagon (ZE) has the best bokeh and the EF 35L II is the best corrected (and very sharp). Imo the Sigma 35mm 1.2 is the best combination of sharp, well-corrected, beautiful rendering & bokeh.
The only thing not to like is its weight, and yet it somehow feels comfortable to me. I’m in a far better state of mind using this made-for-mirrorless lens than I was with adapting Canon lenses as I always felt like I was carrying around unnecessary extra weight from an empty adapter. 1.2 is always going to be a lot heavier than 1.4, so the extra weight is going towards a useful lens feature rather than a mere adapter.
I think the bokeh is very very good on the Sigma, but I would prefer it didn’t have cat’s eyes bokeh balls, but the blur quality really stands out compared to most lenses I’ve owned.