Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really can't understand the nitpicking with the bokeh... I haven't met any photog who would choose bokeh over sharpness. Well, I guess if you've paid $1000+ for a 35L then the sigma has to be THAT bad...

Not me. I'm sold - I'm getting the sigma.
 
Upvote 0
jondave said:
I really can't understand the nitpicking with the bokeh... I haven't met any photog who would choose bokeh over sharpness. Well, I guess if you've paid $1000+ for a 35L then the sigma has to be THAT bad...

Not me. I'm sold - I'm getting the sigma.

It all depends on the photos you like to take and your aesthetic priorities; there are many situations when what's out of focus in a photo is as important as, or even more important than, what's in focus; and some of us (I doubt I'm alone) care quite a bit about what the out of focus bits look like even when they're relatively unimportant. This has nothing to do with L or price snobbery. The main reason why I bought a Sigma 50-500mm OS instead of the Canon 100-400L is that the former has smoother bokeh than the latter (or at any rate the copy I rented). In my Pentax days I preferred the dirt-cheap, technically shoddy, 100-300mm lens I bought second hand (it was long out of production) to it's sharper, more expensive, better made replacement for the same reason. Besides, in my (rather limited, admittedly) experience, differences in bokeh among lenses are usually more noticeable than differences in sharpness in most uses.
 
Upvote 0
There is a full review on dpreview and also DxO have the following comment:

"This Sigma lens scores higher than any other lens in its focal length, including many that are much more expensive, and is among the highest, for sharpness, of any tested by DxOMark on a Canon body."

Mine is getting delivered today via FedEx - woo hop!

ET
 
Upvote 0
i don't think this would qualify as thread jacking, but i've seen a few shots from the 50L that showed very nervous bokeh that was really a mess. so much so that photozone even pointed it out in their review. I'm not saying the 50L is a mess, i'm saying that even lenses known for their great ability can trip up sometimes. Most of the early samples i saw on the net of the sigma looked a bit nervous to me, but in my use, so far anyway i haven't seen a problem.

BTW- and this probably is thread jacking, most people love leica bokeh, and almost everything i've seen from them is clearly a bokeh disaster, so who knows? perhaps dropping that level of cash on something can cloud your vision. hey, i made a pun, hi five!
 
Upvote 0
EvilTed said:
There is a full review on dpreview and also DxO have the following comment:

"This Sigma lens scores higher than any other lens in its focal length, including many that are much more expensive, and is among the highest, for sharpness, of any tested by DxOMark on a Canon body."

Mine is getting delivered today via FedEx - woo hop!

ET

I'm jealous! UPS isn't bringing mine till Monday end of day.

Woo hop? :o
 
Upvote 0
risc32 said:
i don't think this would qualify as thread jacking, but i've seen a few shots from the 50L that showed very nervous bokeh that was really a mess. so much so that photozone even pointed it out in their review. I'm not saying the 50L is a mess, i'm saying that even lenses known for their great ability can trip up sometimes. Most of the early samples i saw on the net of the sigma looked a bit nervous to me, but in my use, so far anyway i haven't seen a problem.

BTW- and this probably is thread jacking, most people love leica bokeh, and almost everything i've seen from them is clearly a bokeh disaster, so who knows? perhaps dropping that level of cash on something can cloud your vision. hey, i made a pun, hi five!

Yeah! *high five*
Even Leica glass has comma and nervousness that can make anyone wonder why all the cash for a few pieces of glass.
But as for me, I love nervous background bokeh, I want a crazy vortex of light and colors! But not always, it does get quite distracting.

Photozone is right, the 50L produces crazy bokeh in the corners, and I've come across several examples of that, nervous triangles tearing apart the rest of the smooth OOF background. I've seen tons of great example with the Sig 35, and like anything, you look for trouble and you'll find it, nit pick and try and find what doesn't look good and yeah, any lens will show a flaw/something dissatisfactory to someone.
 
Upvote 0
sarangiman said:
Nishi Drew said:
I don't recall anyone nitpicking a lens so much for it's bokeh when everything else is fab, generally the consideration for the quality of bokeh of a lens, especially at these price points and class of lenses is always there, but this must mean though that Sigma just has no other faults to look at, so everyone wants to point at something it's not the absolute best at. And talk about onion highlights? The 35L can produce those onions too!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pong0814/5596735626/#

And, unlike the Sigma, the 35L doesn't keep rounded circular highlights when stopped down if that matters for anyone.

+1

Very, very well said.

I've always complained about Canon's 8-blade apertures... you start seeing octagons in OOF highlights when you stop down even 2/3 of a stop on many of Canon's primes (e.g. the 'venerable' 85/1.2). What I hate even more is that 8-blade aperture lenses produce 8-point sunstars.

Just adding one blade gives you 18-point sunstars. AND circular OOF highlights.

Nikon's had 9-blade apertures for a while now.

What took Canon so long?

Mmm, yeah, the more I look into these things the more I wonder why I'm with Canon... well, if Sigma made competent cameras along with FF sensors then I'm lookin' at them, I'll practically be all-Sigma after I get that 35mm, just need to see if I'll keep Canon's 50 1.4
 
Upvote 0
It is clear we have the sigma crowd in full PR mode here on this thread now ;)
35L warts and all produces a pleasing bokeh ... Tough to put your finger on it. Looking at the sigma shots they all have that slightly disquieting bokeh...and nervous is a great word... If that is your thing more power to you. But I will never buy the idea that sharpness is all that counts.
 
Upvote 0
I will however leave the door open till more head-to-head bokeh comparisons of the two lenses trickle in from unbiased sources, before I throw my canon 35L over and join the sigma bandwagon. I would wait to see comparisons of real world backgrounds, trees, indoor shots, etc. not set up OOF night lights we have seen in the limited samples. Lens rentals Roger's and the Korean site are the only two galleries with several real life shots and they both suggest sub-par bokeh and that odd color rendition for the sigma lens. It is what it is and you like it or you don't, but those who don't know it when they see it. And i don't like what i see so far. But I will leave the door open till we have more data...unbiased data that is :)
 
Upvote 0
OK, so I got my copy yesterday and it's getting returned today.

Sharpness? - it's nothing to write home about.
I think the 24mm F/1.4 II is sharper and has better color and contrast.

The biggest problem for me is the lousy AF.
I tried all the different focus point settings and it misses focus roughly 50% of the time.

Maybe I got a duff copy :(

ET
 
Upvote 0
EvilTed said:
OK, so I got my copy yesterday and it's getting returned today.

Sharpness? - it's nothing to write home about.
I think the 24mm F/1.4 II is sharper and has better color and contrast.

The biggest problem for me is the lousy AF.
I tried all the different focus point settings and it misses focus roughly 50% of the time.

Maybe I got a duff copy :(

ET

In all fairness, before bailing, you should get a second copy at the very least. Then your input will be valuable.
 
Upvote 0
Another issue is the over-hyping by the sigma fan club here....contrary to helping sigma's cause this sets the expectations so high for the new lens that no real lens is going to be able to deliver all that and fix the morning coffee... What are you basing this on? All this started with Roger from lensrental suggesting it is sharp and for once he can give sigma the kudos for turning the corner ... But upon reading his further blogs (including a subsection in canon 35 f2 review where he provides some more info on the sigma 35 f1.4 ) he clearly indicates the bokeh is less than stellar with sigma. Interim, with most stores back ordered for this lens all we have is hype..and more hype.

One could argue that the reason they are now back ordered is because this hype has worked perhaps too well and too many have jumped the cliff with limited evidence on the overall quality...

Overall quality in addition to sharpness includes bokeh, yes, but, it also includes the all important AF performance in real world situations. Sigma has struggled for generations with AF even when AF was a lot more simpler and let's face it ...seamless AF performance with rather complicated algorithms of the advanced AF systems in 1dx and 5d3 should await further input from more unbiased users. I am open to such a possibility, but I am skeptical without further hard evidence at this time. We will simply have to wait.

So tone it down sigma fanboys... Let more people get their hands on this supposed Cinderella of a sigma lens, and before we whip the step sister Canon 35L as an ugly has-been ...lets get more data.

When you jump on every new bandwagon because fanboys on forums go rabid... You end up with buyer's remorse. Hard cheese! :)

I for one am happy with the old 35L ... it remains in my collection because it is a damn good lens. I may consider version II if it ever comes out but I seem to use this prime seldom... So will have to reassess if ~$1500+ can be justified at that time (so, canon, shall we say... 2017? 2019? ... 2021?) :P
 
Upvote 0
EvilTed said:
Good point, but I don't tolerate poor quality from any manufacturer.
Canon may be a bunch of shisters for price, but the quality is always top notch...

ET

The first 70-300L I bought this year was no better than my 70-300 non-L, so I returned it (the second one I bought is marvelous, but failed after 3 weeks; it's now fine again - for now, at least). On Black Friday I bought a (brand new) 70-200 L IS II and was dismayed to see that it produced images that were soft along the right edge, in the bottom right corner (extending well into the image) and along the bottom edge, along with dreadful colour fringing in the same area; I returned it too. So no, not always....
 
Upvote 0
Ray2021 said:
Another issue is the over-hyping by the sigma fan club here....contrary to helping sigma's cause this sets the expectations so high for the new lens that no real lens is going to be able to deliver all that and fix the morning coffee... What are you basing this on? All this started with Roger from lensrental suggesting it is sharp and for once he can give sigma the kudos for turning the corner ... But upon reading his further blogs (including a subsection in canon 35 f2 review where he provides some more info on the sigma 35 f1.4 ) he clearly indicates the bokeh is less than stellar with sigma. Interim, with most stores back ordered for this lens all we have is hype..and more hype.

Here is CR. I believe most people here are Canon fans, not Sigma fans. You see many people post like "No red ring on it", "I buy only Canon", or even "I don't care how the reviews are, it's not Canon".
I assume you know how to use google search. Please search Sigma 35mm F/1.4 review, and tell me how many reviews say Sigma/Canon better. If you do believe most of the reviews, that's fine. However, I believe there must a reason most reviews give Sigma the crown. Don't even forget the price between Canon and Sigma is very different.
 
Upvote 0
cliffwang said:
Here is CR. I believe most people here are Canon fans, not Sigma fans. You see many people post like "No red ring on it", "I buy only Canon", or even "I don't care how the reviews are, it's not Canon".
I assume you know how to use google search. Please search Sigma 35mm F/1.4 review, and tell me how many reviews say Sigma/Canon better. If you do believe most of the reviews, that's fine. However, I believe there must a reason most reviews give Sigma the crown. Don't even forget the price between Canon and Sigma is very different.

Actually this does not address issues raised in my post which you are not quoting...as to your reasoning "that lots of people say this is so" doesn't convince me any... rather some "group-think" is obvious and "me-too" blogs and reviews that follow the original lensrental format or even directly reference it...are not exactly "unbaised" nor always competent.

Lensrental's own blog, it must be said, is rather measured pointing out the bokeh could be a weak spot. I agree there are a couple more out there which I would believe but they are all careful to not over emphasize either the bokeh or the autofocus issues that may well emerge and rather stick to sharpness and the clear price advantage.

I had no beef about the better sharpness, but my posts (scroll back a few not just the last one) raises at least three seperate issues which none of the "Ra Ra Ra!!! reviews" address...certainly with no careful analysis or openly available data.

Only exception is lensrental blog which in fact reinforces the concern about the bokeh with graphs to boot!
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/12/another-35mm-lens-for-canon

This kinda blog is more reliable than someone just stringing words together saying "I think this is one awesome lens!"

The bokeh, and the odd "sigma" color pallet apparent in the galleries that me and others have mentioned are issues to consider.

But perhaps the most important issue that is not clear yet is the autofocus abilities of the Sigma lens (based on Sigma's dismal record with AF to date). Unfortunately you do not quote what I said there:

Ray2021 said:
Overall quality in addition to sharpness includes bokeh, yes, but, it also includes the all important AF performance in real world situations. Sigma has struggled for generations with AF even when AF was a lot more simpler and let's face it ...seamless AF performance with rather complicated algorithms of the advanced AF systems in 1dx and 5d3 should await further input from more unbiased users. I am open to such a possibility, but I am skeptical without further hard evidence at this time. We will simply have to wait.

So, I am afraid referring to "look at what others say in one-page fanpages" without addressing specific concerns being raised does not provide any clarity. So we will have to wait and see...I hope the sigma hype is true and this induces Canon to up the ante.
 
Upvote 0
ScottyP said:
Hmmmmm... Yes, but isn't it often the intangible qualities that purchasers of overpriced, er.., I mean Premium Equipment, will use to assuage nagging fears that they maybe overpaid?

"Bokeh" is getting tossed around here in this thread a lot. And don't forget the one you hear the Zeiss-waffe tossing around so much, which is "color." Qualities like bokeh are somewhat subjective compared to the more easily quantified things like "sharpness" or "distortion", etc., so sometimes you may tend to see exactly what you want to see when looking at bokeh or color.

The thing has 9 rounded aperture blades, not 5 flat paddles like my Nifty Fifty. And even the Fifty's bokeh does not bother me much. I don't even notice it at all unless I am shooting at twinkle lights with it stopped down. If "uninspiring bokeh" is the biggest knock against this thing, but you are not seeing sharp little pentagons or hexagons floating around on your images, maybe it's not something to lose much sleep over if the price is reasonable.

Again, this is focusing on one aspect of what I said after tweaking it slightly to bring in the 35 f2 with 5 blades (not the IS version in Roger's blog or the real comparison of 35 1.4L) and then finishing with a punch line that has no relevance to the original statement... rather a cheap ploy to make a point and is no better than the three card trick... that allusion or comparison was never made in my posts regarding the sigma bokeh.

The primary issue raised that every sigma supporter has skirted or avoids addressing is the dismal rap-sheet with regards to AF that Sigma has over the years accrued, that is longer than my 70-200 2.8L II (with the hood on)!...

And my point was not to dismiss the sigma off hand, but to point out concerns that have been raised and to "wait and see" how this pans out. This was not a broadside attacking anyone's fealty to Sigma brand name.

If you like it from what you have seen, go get one ;)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.