Carping about the price by comparing them with any other still lenses is pointless. These are purpose-designed and built lenses for cine applications.The total production run of any of these lenses is exceeded by the daily production of any of Canon's kit lenses.
These are used by people whose business is making motion pictures that even with the most frugal of budgets exceeds 5 figures.
These lenses are to hobbyist lenses what a 64" Epson is to your all-in one desktop.
Micky Nixgeld: @solarskyOr medium-format like the Hasselblad. Digital "Large-Format". 50mp.Canonusers are somewhat behind the time.
I have to agree with George Lepp on that one. The Gigapan photo of the inauguration of Pres. Obama became an internet sensation because of it seemingly uneneding resolution and that was done with a Canon G12 IIR.
mrdancer: I noticed a few folks here are using Photoshop. I've tried using Photoshop several times in the past, but it seems to take forever to construct panoramas, and the results are usually less than satisfactory. More importantly, it locks up on larger files (I usually stitch several dozen images at a time). I've found that M$ ICE seems to work the best of any stitching software I've used. It is fast, super-easy and very forgiving. Best of all, it is free. Just wanted to throw that out there for those of you suffering with Photoshop...
It would seem that maybe there are some shortcomings in your technique or your computer.I regularly stitch 9-15 22MP frames on a Mac mini with 8GB RAM and PS CS6 does a splendid job. In addition the adaptive wide angle feature is (for most) an undiscovered gem.I have used PTGUI in the past but found PS as good and very quick.
ulfie: DxOMark test results/specs are great yet the actual image quality even for the "originals" are really no better than say the Panasonic 20 f1.7's which costs about 1/3 and is only a tad slower f-stopwise and a tad tighter FOVwise.
Duck: Speed is speed. You are confusing comparative DOF with the actual speed.
Photomonkey: For all the quacking about bokeh, I notice that very few of the samples can really muster much of an OOF background despite shooting wide open and being close to the subject.Those preoccupied by that issue should look to longer lenses.
The quality of OOF is fine but as to be so slight as to question the obsession with it as one needs to be about three feet from the subject. My point being that if one is obsessed with the fashion of shallow DOF as so many seem to be this lens delivers small quantities of it. Quality has not been questioned. So you have interpreted my statement incorrectly.I am convinced that this lens is superb and intend to acquire one bt shallow DOF is not why I am getting it.
For all the quacking about bokeh, I notice that very few of the samples can really muster much of an OOF background despite shooting wide open and being close to the subject.Those preoccupied by that issue should look to longer lenses.
Kodachrome200: I struggle with the bokeh. I am not a pixel peeper. I'd rather my optics were pleasing. for the price it might be a win. but do you reall want to shoot this at f 1.4 given the OOF. its not a deal if the max app isnt very usable.
The max aperture seems eminently usable as it is sharper than the competition and the user is just as likely to miss focus wide open.
Jaelkay: I'm sure Sigma cherry-pick the lenses they send to DP Review and other reviewers.
The Sigma 35 f1.4 I have is nowhere nearly as good as my Nikon 35 f1.4. The borders on the Sigma are very soft when compared with the Nikon.
Then I would exchange it for one that bests your Nikon.
Kind of fun to watch people get outraged about TOS on a free service. Also fun to see business people try to figure out how to make money with their free service without enraging the users.
Infared: Really can't learn much about this lens from these photos.
Which actually proves, that irrespective of the lens, images in the field really do not show their absolute optical capabilities.Take home lesson: stop obsessing and enjoy.
The edges seem soft....
Operator: Why does the iOS version support so much more features than the Android version?
iOS:Timelapse ModeTimeWarp™ ModeSound sensor ModeShock & Vibration sensor ModeMetal & magnetism sensor ModeFacial recognition ModeLE HDR ModeLE HDR Timelapse ModeDistanceLapse™ ModeMotion detection ModeCable Release ModeStar trail ModeBulb Ramping TimelapseWi-Fi Slave ModeWi-Fi Master Mode (trigger other devices running Triggertrap MobileSunset & Sunrise CalculatorLag-o-Meter
Android:Timelapse ModeTimeWarp™ ModeLE HDR ModeLE HDR Timelapse ModeDistanceLapse™ Mode)Cable Release modeStar trail ModeBulb Ramping TimelapseWi-Fi Slave ModeWi-Fi Master Mode (trigger other devices running Triggertrap MobileSunset & Sunrise Calculator
Will the Android Version always be crippled or will we become a update?
Possibly because despite the majority of smartphones being Android powered, data shows that users (maybe not you) utilize the smartphone features FAR less (60% vs. 20%) than iOS users. Not being snarky just noting the data that would move a developer to the more active platform. Us Apple users know all about being slighted ;).
undergrounddigga: $899and how many people were crying over the $499 Oly is charging for its M.Zuiko 17mm (34mm equivalent) f1.8?
not saying this doesn't worth it, only saying that crybabies are pathetic. The single problem is that the Oly M Zuiko 17mm f1.8 wasn't released for APS-C, FF or NEX. Nobody would be complaining if they would have, especially at $499!! :)
as for Sigma, keep up the good work. great to see good products released by them.
The comments usually devolve to a whine festival about price and relative aperture if they aren't complaining about samples that look like their own photography.
My only observation is that when I owned the Tamron 28-75 2.8 ( good IQ, fair AF speed) it fell surprisingly short of its stated 75mm max FL . It seemed to be only about 65mm compared to the angle of view on my 70-200 Canon.
If this is similar, then the range is even more truncated. Of course I have no way of knowing but the true FL of any lens seems to rarely measured. In primes it may be less of an issue but it sure bothered me in that zoom.
shaocaholica: Is front/back focus really an issue with the lens? Generally speaking of course. I don't see how a camera with perfect sensor registration, perfect AF sensor registration and perfect viewfinder screen registration would front/back focus with any lens. The AF module keeps turning focus until it sees light in phase at the given focus point. Can someone explain how the phase detect AF module would think its in focus while the image projected on the sensor would not be in focus and all this the fault of the lens?
@scales, the AF module may calculate the position but isn't it an iterative process as Shaocoholica indicated? Small discrepancies then would be self correcting.
Photomonkey: These comments are in line with every preview gallery I have seen. "These are not so great" What a piece of garbage" etc.
The real lesson maybe that at some relatively low level almost all cameras look "average" in the real world. It is up to the photographer to make them look exceptional. And an exceptional photographer can make most any camera look exceptional.
They show the images because people believe/hope/wish they will see something that will make them choose the camera. Also the public is demanding it. IMO the feel and handling is enormously important as the subjective experience of an instrument we admire adds to our enjoyment of the photographic experience. That is why I don't use a phone on my walkabout photo shoots.
These comments are in line with every preview gallery I have seen. "These are not so great" What a piece of garbage" etc.
gl2k: Perky price.Nikon DX 35mm f1.8 and FX 50mm f1.8 are about €170
True, but this lens joins Oly's premium line-up and not the mid grade of those lenses cited.
The Photo Ninja: I don't want a USB port attachment for my lenses. Make them work right out of the box or I'm sending you back!
I would not lay the blame solely on the lens. The AF module is in the body after all. This gives you a tool to fine tune the lens to the specific vagaries of the body AND the lens.
Nice camera but hardly an "invention".