Aug 22, 2014 05:50 | #1 In the video of Lindsay Adler I saw she has a Sigma 35 1.4 Art AND a 50 1.4 Art. Sony A7 III | Metabones V | Sigma 35 1.4 Art | Sigma 85 1.4 Art | 70-200 2.8L II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 22, 2014 08:19 | #2 The difference is bigger than you'd think.. here is an image taken with a 35 , 50, 85mm all at the same aperture with the same distance between camera and photographer  
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aressem Goldmember  More info | Aug 22, 2014 11:43 | #3 *Jayrou wrote in post #17111123 The difference is bigger than you'd think.. here is an image taken with a 35 , 50, 85mm all at the same aperture with the same distance between camera and photographer Even with the aperture the same you clearly see more and more compression in the background the longer the focal length even though theyre all F/2 not to mention huge FOV difference - different beasts in my eyes. This comparison is pointless though. These images are all shot at the same distance. You wouldn't frame a shot differently just because you changed lenses; you would move closer or further and reframe the shot the same. Ryan Mackay WEBSITE
LOG IN TO REPLY |
snake0ape Goldmember  More info | Aug 22, 2014 11:57 | #4 Sure it's useful. It shows the FOV which is a big factor. However, yes, more information such as distortion and blur at a different distances will give one more about the lens differences. 5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters
LOG IN TO REPLY |
vipergts831 Has the TF retired? Or just being utterly lazy?  44,158 posts Gallery: 42 photos Likes: 559 Joined Apr 2009 Location: Taking better shots with an iPhone than MDJAK with a 1DX More info | Aug 22, 2014 12:03 | #5 I own the Sigma 35 Art and a Zeiss FE 55. Both serve a purpose. I would shoot a portrait with a 55 but not a 35 due to distortion. -Omar- Flickr
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000)  More info | Aug 22, 2014 12:43 | #6 10-22mm zoom is useless I guess since that's only 12mm difference? GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 22, 2014 13:49 | #7 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17111628 10-22mm zoom is useless I guess since that's only 12mm difference? And why did I bother getting it when I already had a 17mm? that's only 7mm difference! Silly me  Darn it. Now I have to cross the Tokina 11-16 off my want list. Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 22, 2014 13:52 | #8 Aressem wrote in post #17111505 This comparison is pointless though. These images are all shot at the same distance. You wouldn't frame a shot differently just because you changed lenses; you would move closer or further and reframe the shot the same. Its kind of my thought too. Maybe if the example had 6 pictures with the first set done like he did and then the second set done by moving the camera to get the same framing. I think just the difference in perspective of facial features on the hypothetical second set between the 35 and the 50 would have made a pretty good point as to why one would want both Arts. Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
vengence Goldmember 2,103 posts Likes: 108 Joined Mar 2013 More info | Aug 22, 2014 13:53 | #9 CanonYouCan wrote in post #17110927 In the video of Lindsay Adler I saw she has a Sigma 35 1.4 Art AND a 50 1.4 Art. Doesn't this is obsolete only 15mm difference! The bokeh/dof cannot be such a big difference for only 15mm, it's only 1 step closer. I know a 24mm & 35mm is a big difference and also fov, but 35 & 50 ?! I doubt this... ??? 24 to 35mm is virtually the same difference in framing as the 35 to 50....
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Ok I see the 35 1.4 as a portrait lens + environment, it doesn't have much distortion with the model further away, it's not meant to come close to the model. Sony A7 III | Metabones V | Sigma 35 1.4 Art | Sigma 85 1.4 Art | 70-200 2.8L II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
snake0ape Goldmember More info | Aug 22, 2014 17:51 | #11 I use my 35, 50, 85 all the time. If i can only take one of these lens, then I take the 50. However, I still prefer taking the 35/85 pair if I feel like carrying an extra lens. 5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters
LOG IN TO REPLY |
bobbyz Cream of the Crop 20,506 posts Likes: 3479 Joined Nov 2007 Location: Bay Area, CA More info | Aug 23, 2014 08:12 | #12 CanonYouCan wrote in post #17112158 Ok I see the 35 1.4 as a portrait lens + environment, it doesn't have much distortion with the model further away, it's not meant to come close to the model. Let's make it more difficult : is the Sigma 50 1.4 Art obsolete if you have a Canon 85 1.2L. Both lenses have the least or no distortion as in the link above. 1 step backward with the 85mm and you have 50mm. Why need any other lenses then. 2 steps forward and you got 135mm. 3 steps back, sigma 35mm art. Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is Marcsaa 1330 guests, 122 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
