Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 17 Sep 2012 (Monday) 13:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 HSM DG

 
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 19, 2013 21:45 |  #2056
bannedPermanent ban

Arob1000 wrote in post #15509785 (external link)
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.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 19, 2013 21:50 |  #2057
bannedPermanent ban

Arob1000 wrote in post #15509844 (external link)
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.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jan 19, 2013 22:01 |  #2058

kin2son wrote in post #15510128 (external link)
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 (external link)
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.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightdiver13
Unabashed nerd!
Avatar
2,272 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2010
Location: Bigfoot Country
     
Jan 19, 2013 22:13 |  #2059

agog wrote in post #15510071 (external link)
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.


Neil

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,171 posts
Likes: 2827
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jan 19, 2013 22:33 |  #2060

kin2son wrote in post #15510144 (external link)
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.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ekinnyc
Senior Member
Avatar
784 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Mar 2011
Location: New York, NY
     
Jan 19, 2013 23:41 |  #2061

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?


6D| 35mm f/2 IS
Buying/Selling Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Jan 20, 2013 00:23 |  #2062

ekinnyc wrote in post #15510426 (external link)
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.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightdiver13
Unabashed nerd!
Avatar
2,272 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2010
Location: Bigfoot Country
     
Jan 20, 2013 00:32 |  #2063

drzenitram wrote in post #15510504 (external link)
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.)


Neil

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Varago
Member
175 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver Wa.
     
Jan 20, 2013 00:41 as a reply to  @ drzenitram's post |  #2064

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


EOS R
Canon RF 24-105 f4 IS L, RF 24-240, RF 35 1.8 macro, EF 70-200 f4 IS L, EF 16-35 F4 IS L, 50 1.8 stm, 270EX II, 320EX, 430EX II
Sigma 1.4x tc1401
Tamron 100-400

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RMH
Goldmember
Avatar
1,000 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canterbury
     
Jan 20, 2013 00:46 |  #2065

drzenitram wrote in post #15510504 (external link)
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.



All the stuff I've owned at one time or another

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jan 20, 2013 00:47 |  #2066

ekinnyc wrote in post #15510426 (external link)
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)


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fuhrtographer
Senior Member
Avatar
586 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 26
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Menomonie WI
     
Jan 20, 2013 02:04 |  #2067

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i187.photobucke​t.com …/IMG_1109_zps9d​9d9465.jpg (external link)


Out of the box no PP and MA taken with a 7d.

Fuhrtographer's Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agog
Senior Member
258 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Likes: 280
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Bakersfield Ca.
     
Jan 20, 2013 02:11 |  #2068

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


70D, 6D, 50mm f/1.2 L, 70-300mm F4-F5.6L, 400 mm f/5.6L, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, 135 f/2.0L, 85mm f/1.2L, 70-200L II,
Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, 40mm f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agog
Senior Member
258 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Likes: 280
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Bakersfield Ca.
     
Jan 20, 2013 02:30 as a reply to  @ Sirrith's post |  #2069

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


70D, 6D, 50mm f/1.2 L, 70-300mm F4-F5.6L, 400 mm f/5.6L, Zeiss 2/35 ZE, 135 f/2.0L, 85mm f/1.2L, 70-200L II,
Zeiss 2.8/21 ZE, 40mm f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fuhrtographer
Senior Member
Avatar
586 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 26
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Menomonie WI
     
Jan 20, 2013 02:45 |  #2070

agog wrote in post #15510731 (external link)
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.


Fuhrtographer's Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

698,408 views & 2 likes for this thread
New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 HSM DG
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is joshuatheking
690 guests, 167 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.