Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM

[Quasimodo]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

But you're overlooking that fact that the EOS system delivers.

Me or Dilbert? I agree, the EOS works great, and I have no plans on switching

 

[Sporgon]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

But you're overlooking that fact that the EOS system delivers.

Me or Dilbert? I agree, the EOS works great, and I have no plans on switching

dilbert. I also find his comments on Canon ahead in offering 'bells & whistles' strange, because Canon really offer less of this - IMHO - of course.

 

[Hobby Shooter]

With all due respect to the direction this thread has taken (talk about getting off topic!), Canon is still the leader in both patents filed and overall profit. It is a highly rated corporation that has a legacy of success that continues into the present. Do they frustrate me at times? Sure. Do I agree with every one of their priorities? No. But I love my Canon gear and it continues to provide me with great images that pleases my clients, stock agencies, and even magazines. I highly doubt bankruptcy is in their near future.

I hope that wasn't directed at me. On previous pages I tried contribute to the discussion. Maybe I should have added 'sarcasm' to my last note.

 

[Chosenbydestiny]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

They will probably go bankrupt before the end of the year.

Yes, and massive investment into R&D for companies that don't profit as much as Canon are a way to avoid bankruptcy. I'd be even more scared of owning a Nikon or Sony in this day and age. Sony also doesn't have the best track record for releasing products that are both successful and groundbreaking Uhh...Betamax anyone?

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

With all due respect to the direction this thread has taken (talk about getting off topic!), Canon is still the leader in both patents filed and overall profit. It is a highly rated corporation that has a legacy of success that continues into the present. Do they frustrate me at times? Sure. Do I agree with every one of their priorities? No. But I love my Canon gear and it continues to provide me with great images that pleases my clients, stock agencies, and even magazines. I highly doubt bankruptcy is in their near future.

I hope that wasn't directed at me. On previous pages I tried contribute to the discussion. Maybe I should have added 'sarcasm' to my last note.

It was more directed at the general tone the thread had taken, which was, in my opinion, getting a bit absurd.

 

[Hobby Shooter]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

They will probably go bankrupt before the end of the year.

Yes, and massive investment into R&D for companies that don't profit as much as Canon are a way to avoid bankruptcy. I'd be even more scared of owning a Nikon or Sony in this day and age. Sony also doesn't have the best track record for releasing products that are both successful and groundbreaking Uhh...Betamax anyone?

Agree, just look at their phones and TV sets also, there is rarely anything wrong with their technology, it's just they seem to have a hard time making money from it.

 

[QBNY]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

They will probably go bankrupt before the end of the year.

"Ahem"...
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/canon-is-number-1-for-10-straight-years/

 

[Hobby Shooter]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

They will probably go bankrupt before the end of the year.

"Ahem"...
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/canon-is-number-1-for-10-straight-years/

Look my other comment. I know I forgot to label it sarcasm, but I thought it was obvious

 

[marooni]

And I am sure that all of you know what I am talking about.

Sorry to sound like a therapist, but what I hear you saying is:

1. You prefer the look of images you make with the Canon lens.

2. You've had a bad experience with Sigma and don't trust them.

What I don't understand is your "wink, wink," you know what I'm talking about. Is there something you've said that I'm not hearing?

What everybody knows is that Sigma is a cheap brand and until now their lenses had problems with front/back focus, build quality, quality control, etc. I hope that Art lenses will be different, but this has to be demonstrated. 800 $ for a 35f1.4 with this performance is a great value, but you have to take into consideration the bad reputation of the Sigma brand.
Do you think they changed the quality control over night?

 

[marooni]

I tested Canon 35 f1.4 (that I own) and Sigma 35 f1.4 (that I jumped to buy immediately) and Canon lens has a more pleasing bokeh and image. I made the comparison on screen and paper (1000mmx700mm printed images).

Truly, the Sigma looks crisper, but I prefer a general beter looking image.
I made this comparison because I could sell my used Canon 35 f1.4 at the price of a new Sigma 35 f1.4 and I almost made the switch, but then I said to try the Sigma first.

I decided to keep my Canon lens from two reasons:

1. Sigma did not demonstrated yet that can make a working horse (I had a Sigma 50mm f1.4 and was extremely unreliable). I can`t afford to have bad working lenses or on repair for weeks in a row. This will be a disaster for me.

2. The images printed looked beter from Canon. The colours and general image are more appealing.

In the last years we are all looking at the numbers, but nobody looks at pictures anymore.

I got the idea that the Sigma is cheap, but I do not want cheap, I want the best Image and reliability.

And I am sure that all of you know what I am talking about.

no , sorry I don't

please show me, I have both canon 35/1,4 and the sigma 35/1,4

Might be because you did not own a Sigma before.
I owned "the 50mm" from Sigma and it was so unreliable. The "internet" is screaming of the problems that Sigma lenses has.
If Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Sony charge so much for a high performance lens, how Sigma did it so cheap? Has to be something wrong inside. Something that will crack when the lens will have to hork hard.

 

[bseitz234]

I tested Canon 35 f1.4 (that I own) and Sigma 35 f1.4 (that I jumped to buy immediately) and Canon lens has a more pleasing bokeh and image. I made the comparison on screen and paper (1000mmx700mm printed images).

Truly, the Sigma looks crisper, but I prefer a general beter looking image.
I made this comparison because I could sell my used Canon 35 f1.4 at the price of a new Sigma 35 f1.4 and I almost made the switch, but then I said to try the Sigma first.

I decided to keep my Canon lens from two reasons:

1. Sigma did not demonstrated yet that can make a working horse (I had a Sigma 50mm f1.4 and was extremely unreliable). I can`t afford to have bad working lenses or on repair for weeks in a row. This will be a disaster for me.

2. The images printed looked beter from Canon. The colours and general image are more appealing.

In the last years we are all looking at the numbers, but nobody looks at pictures anymore.

I got the idea that the Sigma is cheap, but I do not want cheap, I want the best Image and reliability.

And I am sure that all of you know what I am talking about.

no , sorry I don't

please show me, I have both canon 35/1,4 and the sigma 35/1,4

Might be because you did not own a Sigma before.
I owned "the 50mm" from Sigma and it was so unreliable. The "internet" is screaming of the problems that Sigma lenses has.
If Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Sony charge so much for a high performance lens, how Sigma did it so cheap? Has to be something wrong inside. Something that will crack when the lens will have to hork hard.

The "internet"? Meaning, not actually the Internet, but something posing as it? an intranet that really wants to be the Internet?

 

[infared]

... but what seems to to be hard for many is that it now seems that this particular third party lens is actually better than its original counterpart...

Canon has been over taken in the sensor department by Sony/Nikon and now they're being overtaken in the lens department.

They will probably go bankrupt before the end of the year.

"Ahem"...
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/canon-is-number-1-for-10-straight-years/

Look my other comment. I know I forgot to label it sarcasm, but I thought it was obvious

It was obvious to me...Too many blind, humorless Canon fanboys here!!! 8)

 

[marooni]

I had a very long conversation with a friend of mine who received (one week ago) as present for his birthday "all mighty" 35mm 1.4 Sigma.
He is saying that on close subject ( 1m and closer) the lens is amazingly sharp, but if you try to focus on something further than 3m, the the focus is out of control and for him was imposible to micro-adjusted. He likes the lens so bad that he never think to retur it and in the same time is totally frustrated by focusing.



Anyone else had this problem?

 

[macrodust]

I had a very long conversation with a friend of mine who received (one week ago) as present for his birthday "all mighty" 35mm 1.4 Sigma.
He is saying that on close subject ( 1m and closer) the lens is amazingly sharp, but if you try to focus on something further than 3m, the the focus is out of control and for him was imposible to micro-adjusted. He likes the lens so bad that he never think to retur it and in the same time is totally frustrated by focusing.



Anyone else had this problem?

My copy was already very sharp on both close ups and longer distances when I received it, and after AF micro adjustment it got even better, with simultaneous improvement on all focus distances. Your friends copy is faulty and he should return it, which shouldn't be a problem as it's only a week old.

 

[risc32]

with that USB docking thingy from sigma it looks like we can adjust focus at 4 different focusing distances for primes. Sigma posted a video of it in action. looks very clear and powerful to me.

 

[Quasimodo]

with that USB docking thingy from sigma it looks like we can adjust focus at 4 different focusing distances for primes. Sigma posted a video of it in action. looks very clear and powerful to me.

Link?

 

[risc32]

Sigma Optimization Pro and USB Dock Demo on Vimeo

can't get the thing to load correctly, but the link just under it seems to work.

 

[victorwol]

Received mine today.... Pretty impressed with it. Great flare control. Fast focus.

 

[Zv]

Watched the video demo of the USB dock. Very impressive, I wish I could AFMA all my lenses at four different points! How awesome would that be?

 

[GuyF]

with that USB docking thingy from sigma it looks like we can adjust focus at 4 different focusing distances for primes. Sigma posted a video of it in action. looks very clear and powerful to me.

I'm very pleased with my Sigma 85mm 1.4 and will probably get the new 35mm at some point however I do wonder if Sigma have produced the docking gizmo to get around the fact their quality control appears to be, um, lacking if you read/believe the various posts on the net. Instead of having customers returning new lenses for exchange or service centre tweaking, the customer can do it themselves by correcting for four different focus points via their gizmo.

Sounds like Sigma might be putting the solution to their own problem into the hands of the customer and this may fool some customers into thinking that Sigma are being "customer focussed" (no pun intended). Maybe Sigma should sort out quality issues at source rather than after the purchase has been made?

Just a thought.