35 f/1.4 ART-isn't the bokeh "disturbing"?

I was thinking about the OOF areas when using Sigma 35 mm lens. It looks distracting...differen​t to other lenses I have. Typically it is smooth and really OOF, but in this case it is busy, fuzy, disturbing. Something wrong with my shots or it is the case for all?

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

try some different backgrounds, I think it may have been the locations you chose.

But you see, theese are two different places and....it should work well in all locations...

I like it. Bokeh is a question of taste, after all.

The second one does have a lot of contrast in the background, that's not the lens' fault.

Tom

I actually like it in both shots. But that's the nature of a photographic quality that is entirely based on opinion.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16785756
But you see, theese are two different places and....it should work well in all locations...

I meant backgrounds that have less things going on in the background, or shoot a bit further back then crop so the composition is how you want and the bokeh less pronounced. However I will say I do like the images a lot and don't find the bokeh "disturbing" as you put it, in fact I think in both cases it adds a unique look to the images.

Those are some pretty crackin' shots, IMO. Makes me want the lens even more.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16785699
I was thinking about the OOF areas when using Sigma 35 mm lens. It looks distracting...differen​t to other lenses I have. Typically it is smooth and really OOF, but in this case it is busy, fuzy, disturbing. Something wrong with my shots or it is the case for all?

If you are comparing the bokeh quality against the 70-200 in particular or the 24-105 at the long end, the characteristics of the bokeh will be very different with the Sigma 35 Art. It sounds, to me, that you prefer the bokeh of longer focal lengths which will have a higher degree of background blurring.

The Sigma 35 Art uses rounded aperture blades so getting the more "jagged" bokeh which is characteristic of older or consumer-grade lenses with straight aperture blades is not a problem here. The bokeh in the sample images you posted look like what I would expect given that lens, to me.

After all is a 35 not an 85...

If you want more blurred bokeh, you have to get closer to your subject, but don't complain then about perspective distortion...

The bokeh looks good to me. But if you're not pleased with it then a differet lens might be better for you.

If you more background blur try a different focal length or love your subject further from the background.

I do agree with the TS. I am not a big fan of the bokeh of my 35. I think there is to much contrast in the optics which are still visible in the OOF area's. The 85LII does have a pretty low contrast so the oof area's are also not so contrasty which is better in my opinion.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16785699
It looks distracting...differen​t to other lenses I have.

Of course it is. Bokeh is less pronounced at wider focal lengths than it is at longer focal lengths. Test it out... take your 70-200 and take two shots, both at f2.8, at 70mm and 200mm. Try to keep the subject filling about the same amount of the frame in both shots (you'll need to step back a few steps for the 200mm shot). The bokeh characteristics will not be as smooth at 70mm as it will be at 200mm.

That's what's happening at 35mm, even at f1.4. People don't generally buy 35mm for its bokeh characteristics. There is some separation of the subject from the background, but 35mm lenses are not known to give people the sense of creamy bokehliciosness.

The quality of the bokeh is not merely a focal length thing - lens design does have something to do with it.

I had the Sigma 35 Art and the Zeiss 35mm ZE at the same time for a while (eventually sold the Sigma) and the Zeiss has a superior bokeh (Sigma is actually superior in most other ways).

I'm not suggesting the Zeiss to the OP, who is well-experienced with it, just contending that lens design does have a significant role in the way the out-of-focus blur is rendered.

Not sure what to suggest to the OP as an AF alternative. The Sigma is really the best option at the moment. I hope Canon releases a version II of their 35L sometime soon.

Not claiming it's strictly a focal length thing... however, it doesn't sound like he's comparing the Sigma to other 35s... he's comparing it to his other lenses.

Normal for the lens.