Sigma 35 f/1.4 Available for Preorder

[Drizzt321]

This seems very attractive, although maybe a bit too much for me right now. I'll be very interested in the IQ/sharpness/etc are very good, and the build quality is decent. That and I'll probably end up waiting for a sale or for it to come down in price $100+.

[cliffwang]

I've been pining for a 35mm prime for a long while now.  The 35L put me off because of cost and bulk.  The old 35/2 just seemed too dated in too many ways.  Now there are two new options: this sigma, and the new EF 35/2 IS.  Similar price - high but doable.  Sigma is significantly bulkier (twice the weight, a bit longer).  Sigma has f/1.4, but Canon has IS.  Tough decision.

I thought the reasons we buy prime lenses: sharp and bigger aperture(faster shutter speed)

"IS"....ummm I'm not sure.

+1
35mm with IS is making sense for me if I use it for F/8.0 or smaller aperture.  However, I don't see why I need buy a 35mm F/1.4 lens for small aperture.

[tron]

I thought the reasons we buy prime lenses: sharp and bigger aperture(faster shutter speed)

"IS"....ummm I'm not sure.

I also buy them for small size.  If I had the option of an IS vs. a cheaper, otherwise identical non-IS lens, I'd go non-IS, but I don't see IS as a negative.

Same here, IQ and small/light. I like both, but I'd probably bring the Canon 35 f/2 IS more often than a bigger bulkier, heavier 35 1.4.

Plus, pair it with the 85 1.8 and you have a very portable useful setup

Get that 85 1.8 soon enough ( before Canon introduces a new one at 1200$    )

[cliffwang]

I bet the USB port was included to reduce the number of warranty service requests.  The Sigma 50mm 1.4 has some of the worst focus shift I have ever seen.

That's true.  I have Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  I really love it.  However, this lens has to be AFMA @ +13.  The number is really high.  If my camera doesn't have AFMA feature, I surely will be one of the person to complain focus issue.

[RafaPolit]

Perhaps because I have never seen a Vignetting graph before... but is anyone else completely astounded by the Vignetting graph of this lens at f/1.4? Shooting into a white wall will yield a white canter and almost pitch black corners!  It drops to 20% of light in the corners!

I'm sure that borders the 'unacceptable' range for most images other than very 'artistic' portraits.  While some vignetting can be correct in post, upping more than 2 fstops of difference is really not my ideal lens .

Of course, neither is Canon's ultra pricey f/2 version!  I'd much rather have f/1.4!

Rafa.

[Dianoda]

Perhaps because I have never seen a Vignetting graph before... but is anyone else completely astounded by the Vignetting graph of this lens at f/1.4? Shooting into a white wall will yield a white canter and almost pitch black corners!  It drops to 20% of light in the corners!

I'm sure that borders the 'unacceptable' range for most images other than very 'artistic' portraits.  While some vignetting can be correct in post, upping more than 2 fstops of difference is really not my ideal lens .

Of course, neither is Canon's ultra pricey f/2 version!  I'd much rather have f/1.4!

Rafa.

Actually, 2.3 stops of vignetting wide open is decent for this class of lens.  For comparison, the 35L light falloff is about 3 stops in the corners wide open (according to the-digital-picture.com, at least).

[RafaPolit]

Thanks for the comparative info @Freelancer and @Dianoda!  It puts it into some perspective.  My other surprise was the linearity of the falloff... I would have expected light decay to be more like it looks at f/5.6... as it is, it really drops fast! 

@Freelancer... that MTF chart I believe is incorrectly color coded (or the legend was incorrectly labeled) so, assuming red is the usual f/8 and green is f/1.4... I'm not that impressed that there isn't a single point of the line at f/1.4 above, but that is true for Canon 35L as well.  My main problem is, again, the fast drop out of the nice zone.  By 1/3 of the frame you are below 0.7 and at f8 things are not much better .

Perhaps I'm being overly demanding?  Of course, I prefer samples rather than charts, so I'll wait for those

Rafa.

[Dianoda]

im a sucker when it comes to MTF charts...

can someon explain what he reads out of the MTF chart?

From what I understand, Sigma's MTF charts only provide result for the lens wide open (this is according to Sigma's own notes in their MTF Chart guide), and performance looks great assuming this is the case.  It basically matches the performance of the 35L stopped down to F8 (judging from Canon's own MTF chart) - which makes me think that I must be reading Sigma's chart incorrectly.

But seriously, that's too good, so I don't think that it's right.  I'm guessing that Sigma's chart is actually stopped down performance, which case it pretty much matches a stopped down 35L.  Either way, IQ should be pretty good.

[roguewave]

From what I understand, Sigma's MTF charts only provide result for the lens wide open (this is according to Sigma's own notes in their MTF Chart guide), and performance looks great assuming this is the case.  It basically matches the performance of the 35L stopped down to F8 (judging from Canon's own MTF chart) - which makes me think that I must be reading Sigma's chart incorrectly.

But seriously, that's too good, so I don't think that it's right.  I'm guessing that Sigma's chart is actually stopped down performance, which case it pretty much matches a stopped down 35L.  Either way, IQ should be pretty good.

That's my understanding too, that Sigma uses red lines for 10 lp / mm (constrast) and green for 30 lp / mm (resolution), both at max aperture.

However, I think comparing MTF charts between different manufacturers is not conclusive, as they use different procedures to arrive to their results.

[Marsu42]

can someon explain what he reads out of the MTF chart?

Sigma obviously only shows the lens "wide open" results, Canon also has the f8 graphs (see attachment).

Having read http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-mtf.shtml and http://www.sigmaphoto.com/pu-mtf-chart-guide ...

... [edit] I'd say leave I should only interpret mtf charts when I'm fully awake :-p

But charts are just charts, doesn't mean much - the charts predicted the new 24-70/2.8 to be "THE" lens, but in real life of course it isn't and no mtf chart tells you about distortion, flare or onion bokeh.

[Marsu42]

looking at the MTF from the canon.. why do you think the sigma is worse?

Argh, sorry, you're of course correct - I mixed up the two Canon lines comparing them to the Sigma :-p ... the Sigma has the "better" chart (or more aggressive marketing division), though the line indeed goes down after 2/3 of the frame.

[facedodge]

This is what the USB dock looks like.

[Daniel Flather]

onion bokeh.

Explain.

[Marsu42]

onion bokeh.

Explain.

Would you please care to elaborate your refreshingly short comment :-p ... explain what exactly?

[Daniel Flather]

onion bokeh.

Explain.

Would you please care to elaborate your refreshingly short comment :-p ... explain what exactly?

I know what bokeh is, I know and enjoy onions to the dismay of others, but what is onion bokeh?  I know I could google it, but that's too easy.