Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

[HughHowey]

Wow...I might have to pull trigger on this baby.

I just did. Excited about this lens. Also finally caved and ordered the 70-200 2.8 II. Early Christmas!

 

[jukka]

And when we are discussing AF and micro adjustments , there are minor variations in the AF system, this together with 1. camera AF is incorrectly calibrated 2. the lens AF is incorrectly calibrated 3. Both the camera and the lens is faulty. 4. minor variations, its means, take a series of 5 shoots and place your hand in front of the lens so every shoot against your target will be a new AF measure, then you can se in a series of pictures that the absolute sharpness varies / focusing accuracy and can look like this.
Number of incorrect parameters can therefore be many .

 

[sarangiman]

it depends, try to micro adjust a 105 macro or a zoom from the macro mode up to infinity . the best solution is to have all Canon lenses adjusted by a canon service center, a zoom for example 24-105 are adjusted in 8 different positions in the zoom range, in 5dmk2 we have one, and in 5dmk 3 we have 2 adjustments points.

Thanks for that info on the 8 different positions at Canon FSC. Did not know that.

I've always wondered about this though. Since AFMA can only be accurately set for one subject distance, is it better to get a lens that has a AFMA of 0 with your body than to adjust a lens to, say, -12 for 25x focal length subject distance?

For that matter, is it even possible to get a lens that focuses perfectly (AFMA=0) for both near & far subject distances?

I would guess so, as AFMA appears to me, in my understanding, to simply be an extra correction factor on top of all other correction factors (e.g. correction due to spherical aberration, etc.; more here: http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=109296); and a simple multiplier (or whatever exactly AFMA is) may not hold across the entire range of subject distances.

 

[AprilForever]

I am getting one of these... I think... Or Canon 24 1.4?

 

[sarangiman]

Oh, also: 9 blade aperture primes for Canon FTW!! I can finally get my 18-point sunstars

 

[adhocphotographer]

Hmmm...

I am looking for a prime around here... lets see how the 35 f/2 IS stacks up with it... still, maybe a shorty40 is still the best option? who knows! Too many options drives me mad, but too few is worse!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Sigma are certainly not doing too bad. The original 30mm was one of the greatest lenses ever.

Mine was a dud; poor AF performance and a squeeky focus ring. It did however produce that fabulous bokeh

I now have the Siggy 50/1.4 and 20/1.8. Both of these are fabulous lenses and I have no issues with them whatsoever, they are exemplary copies.

Now for the 35 mm: I had the 35/2 from Canon but it was was an old, second hand copy that was less than stellar. It made me wonder if 35mm really is the focal length for me, but these new lenses make me re-consider.

The first results from both the new Canon 35/2 IS and the Sigma 1.4 seem very good. Price-wise they are roughly in the same ball-park so that makes it very interesting to compare them head-to head. I consider the compactness of the Canon a real advantage though, it doubles as a good low-light lens for travel (the example shots on the Canon website are typically the kind of photo's I'd use this type of lens for).

 

[cliffwang]

It might be the time to say goodbye to my Siggy 50mm and get this 35mm. Just let's see more reviews and I will make the final decision.

 

[Marsu42]

It might be the time to say goodbye to my Siggy 50mm and get this 35mm. Just let's see more reviews and I will make the final decision.

Don't you feel these focal lengths are so different you cannot just replace them even if the newer lens is better (and more expensive, btw - often forgotten)?

 

[infared]

I am so glad that someone like Roger is raving about this lens:
"OK...you can get out your crayons and color me fanboy!"...LOL!..I,was considering waiting 4 the new "rumored" Canon 35mm f/1.4...but I already own the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ( which is a FANTASTCIC alternative to my mostly "L"-Glass quiver in spite of the mixed reviews...GREAT LENS!), but with this praise From Roger and the $899 price tag it will be a joy to purchase this hunk of glass and thumb my nose to Canon's new pricing policies and loooooooooooooong waits for products to come to market.
COOL! Immediate cost- saving fun...I LOVE IT!
(regarding the above post..I have to agree:as a full-frame shooter, for me...the 35mm certainly cannot replace the 50mm...it is a nice addition to it...and helps me avoid buying the over-priced Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II...Can U say DOUBLE BONUS!).

 

[Zv]

I've never owned Sigma before. I was put off third party manufacturers after I bought a Tamron lens. I've started looking into Sigma since this new hype about the 35 and I've heard good things about the 50 and 85 too.

I'm looking to add another prime and possibly replace my Canon 50 1.8 II. This 35 might be the ticket.

Things are really heating up now with the 35 f/2 IS on the horizon also ...

 

[risc32]

After having a horrible time with sigma repair a few years ago, and not being to impressed with their IQ or build, i swore off sigma forever. Looking at their new 35mm, and reading what Roger has said about the apparent sigma company turnaround, and very kind words for this lens, i'm very strongly reconsidering.

in fact, i'd said i'm 90% sure i'll buy this lens in the next week or two. maybe later today. ?

 

[infared]

I've never owned Sigma before. I was put off third party manufacturers after I bought a Tamron lens. I've started looking into Sigma since this new hype about the 35 and I've heard good things about the 50 and 85 too.

I'm looking to add another prime and possibly replace my Canon 50 1.8 II. This 35 might be the ticket.

Things are really heating up now with the 35 f/2 IS on the horizon also ...
[/quote

As was mentioned by someone else earlier in the posts...How does a 35mm replace a 50mm? They are two completely different focal lengths.

 

[TommyLee]

I have only Canon L lenses at the moment...
am considering a wide, manual focus like a distagon...

I USED to have a sigma 30mm for a 20D..
it got played-with by Sigma and became fairly accurate..in focus
I remember loving the look...and the bokeh from this lens
(one shot I found - attached)

I have been waiting for a replacement to my 35L (good.. but some CA, etc)

this Sigma 35 looks interesting to me ...since the 30 f1.4

I actually HOPE this pushes Canon to immediately release the 35L II ...and that it is PERFECT
...I dont use 50mm...35 is normal for me.

interesting to see the report on this lens,,,need to see some hard tests from others though

TOM



SIGMA 30mm f1.4

 

[cliffwang]

It might be the time to say goodbye to my Siggy 50mm and get this 35mm. Just let's see more reviews and I will make the final decision.

Don't you feel these focal lengths are so different you cannot just replace them even if the newer lens is better (and more expensive, btw - often forgotten)?

You are right. I always use my 50mm F/1.4 at home for low light environment. However, my son is 2 year old now and very active. 50mm is very difficult for me to catch him. If I get this 35mm lens, I may not going to use my Siggy 50mm since I use it only at home. Let me think about it. I might get this 35mm and still keep my 50mm.

 

[Craig Richardson]

After having a horrible time with sigma repair a few years ago, and not being to impressed with their IQ or build, i swore off sigma forever. Looking at their new 35mm, and reading what Roger has said about the apparent sigma company turnaround, and very kind words for this lens, i'm very strongly reconsidering.

in fact, i'd said i'm 90% sure i'll buy this lens in the next week or two. maybe later today. ?

I am very wary of buying Sigma after my horrible copy of the 50mm. I will wait to see a full review from somebody who understands focus shift, like Lloyd Chambers, before making a decision.

 

[sgshum]

i want this lens!

 

[Marsu42]

As was mentioned by someone else earlier in the posts...How does a 35mm replace a 50mm? They are two completely different focal lengths.

... unless you dual-use them on two different sensor sizes - 35mm on ff = ~50mm on crop, a good combination and that's why the prime I'd get would be 35mm.

 

[Zv]

I've never owned Sigma before. I was put off third party manufacturers after I bought a Tamron lens. I've started looking into Sigma since this new hype about the 35 and I've heard good things about the 50 and 85 too.

I'm looking to add another prime and possibly replace my Canon 50 1.8 II. This 35 might be the ticket.

Things are really heating up now with the 35 f/2 IS on the horizon also ...
[/quote

As was mentioned by someone else earlier in the posts...How does a 35mm replace a 50mm? They are two completely different focal lengths

By sticking it on a 7D i get a 50, or there abouts.

 

[RGomezPhotos]

I used to use a Zeiss 35mm 1.4 with my Canon 50D and it was an amazing combination. I hope Sigma keeps up the good work...