New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 HSM DG

ed rader wrote in post #15498948
No I owned the 35l a few years ago. I also rented a copy. Results at f1.4 -- f2 were soft, unusable to me unless I had no choice. I don't think anyone who has used both lenses will dispute that the sigma is better at least until f2.

Agreed. My copy of 35L f 1.4 is really a f 2 lens, but I'm still holding onto it since I need to test my copy of the Sigma 35 more.

I took some photos last night before my fever got worse and stood at the back of my house and focused on things 2 rooms over (definitely past 15 ft) @ f/1.4 but I didn't expect things to pop out but it did work like it was supposed (the AF I mean and didn't see focus shifting) to so I guess indoors I'll be okay. I haven't tried it outdoors yet been to cold here. I need to shoot more though possibly won't see a problem til I really run it through some sessions which could take weeks/months.

ed rader wrote in post #15498948
No I owned the 35l a few years ago. I also rented a copy. Results at f1.4 -- f2 were soft, unusable to me unless I had no choice. I don't think anyone who has used both lenses will dispute that the sigma is better at least until f2.

I have seen more issues with rented glass. My 35L is sharper at f2 than 135L at f2. I might rent sigma to test with my 35L. BTW - Here is my 35L at f2.

2Live4 wrote in post #15499686
Agreed. My copy of 35L f 1.4 is really a f 2 lens, but I'm still holding onto it since I need to test my copy of the Sigma 35 more.

Since you got both mind posting some side by side shots. Thanks in advance.

Both 35L's I have owned were perfectly fine wide open. I got very sharp results and used it below f/2 90% of the time (the reason I bought it). However, the Sigma does resolve much more detail and especially noticeable with distant subjects wide open. The 35L is not "soft" though, for what it is. The rendering (especially color) with the 35L is world class.

good results Bobby. the 35L i owned was excellent F2. this was back in the day when the brick was the standard for medium range zooms, tho.

it's a new day, and the choice is now between the 35 f2 IS and the sigma. i think the IS gives the 35 f2 the advantage over the 35L but wide-open-results also give the sigma a leg up the 35L.

now, the 35L may have some aesthetic qualities that escape me because i am no artiste. I am just judging the lenses on the basis of sharpness and usefulness to me in low light and my shortest stabilized lens is the 70-200L f4 IS.

This brand has me excited, actually. I've stopped caring about Canon lenses recently, they're just too expensive. Sigma seems to be taking the middle market with quality material at a lower price. They seem to be the brand for the working man. I can get behind that.

Now if only they'd update their 50mm and 85mm lenses!

I have a feeling that will come soon enough! (the updates). It looks like they are going to re-brand the entire company with better build quality, performance and customer satisfaction. I think some good things are in the works for Sigma.

ed rader wrote in post #15500397
good results Bobby. the 35L i owned was excellent F2. this was back in the day when the brick was the standard for medium range zooms, tho.

it's a new day, and the choice is now between the 35 f2 IS and the sigma. i think the IS gives the 35 f2 the advantage over the 35L but wide-open-results also give the sigma a leg up the 35L.

now, the 35L may have some aesthetic qualities that escape me because i am no artiste. I am just judging the lenses on the basis of sharpness and usefulness to me in low light and my shortest stabilized lens is the 70-200L f4 IS.

Old brick to me is one the worst work horse L lenses from canon. That is why I never bought it. Also hard to believe that 35mm f2 IS wide open at f2 is sharper or as sharp as 35L stopped down 1 stop.

Maverique wrote in post #15500514
This brand has me excited, actually. I've stopped caring about Canon lenses recently, they're just too expensive. Sigma seems to be taking the middle market with quality material at a lower price. They seem to be the brand for the working man. I can get behind that.

Now if only they'd update their 50mm and 85mm lenses!

Agreed here! Except for the 85... I'd be fine if they saved that one for last, as I've found it to be a magnificent lens as is.

bobbyz wrote in post #15500197
Since you got both mind posting some side by side shots. Thanks in advance.

Sure, give me a few days. But again my 35L is soft from f/1.4 to f/ 2 though.

It is official, I am going to stop reading this thread. The half-empty glass people here have me worrying for the last two weeks, testing my Sigma 35/1.4 under every possible circumstance to find something wrong with it. At the end of the day, I find that the lens is even sharper than the day before. Not only that, the IQ is wonderful, so. THAT IS IT. I am not going to read your negative stuff. This lens is wonderful, perfect, I love it.

Just one last comment: I also have the Sigma 70-200/2.8 OS. That lens is even better than the ART, it is great, and I chose it because it is better than the counterpart Canon. I still like the Canons I have, but these two sigmas are the best. Even better the Sigma 100-300/4 No-OS is also great!!

Pepe Guitarra wrote in post #15500761
Just one last comment: I also have the Sigma 70-200/2.8 OS. That lens is even better than the ART, it is great, and I chose it because it is better than the counterpart Canon. I still like the Canons I have, but these two sigmas are the best. Even better the Sigma 100-300/4 No-OS is also great!!

I know how you feel my 70-200 os, 85 1.4, and 35 1.4 were all perfect out of the box, performed exceptionally, and came at a great price. I wouldn't trade any of them for the canon version.

Pepe Guitarra wrote in post #15500748
It is official, I am going to stop reading this thread. The half-empty glass people here have me worrying for the last two weeks, testing my Sigma 35/1.4 under every possible circumstance to find something wrong with it. At the end of the day, I find that the lens is even sharper than the day before. Not only that, the IQ is wonderful, so. THAT IS IT. I am not going to read your negative stuff. This lens is wonderful, perfect, I love it.

Oh you'll be back! Sounds like you have a good one. I really don't suggest people go looking for problems. This has been my approach all along. They kept subtly presenting themselves after I had decided to just get on with loving the lens. Then I would find myself back testing and finding just enough to make me think mine was a little wonky. So, I def. do not consider myself a "half-empty" owner, just one that maybe needs a different copy of this sweet piece of glass. I think darn near everyone with the exception of a few are finding it to be just fine, albeit with bit of MA, which should be considered normal.