20 hours ago
 |
matreshka
Lives in
Moscow, Russian Federation
Joined on
Aug 3, 2005
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
I am a happy owner of Sigma 35 1.4 and I really enjoy the sharpness and low CA of this lens when it is wide open (I can compare only to Canon's 50 1.4 and 35 2).
I do not have Canon 35 1.4 but what I saw from multiple comparing tests that Sigma's bokeh was at least as good as Canon's. Yep, it is some sort of "nervous" but it is a wide angle lens (as it peers) and it cannot be copared to smooth blurring of telephoto lens.
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.
Following "cherry-pick" theory, I should be a very important person in the world of photo gear as my copy of Sigma 35 1.4 is astonishing sharp virtually without CA wide open :))
Sigma 35 1.4's MTF is awesome - wide open much better than canon 1.4, and very close to the new canon 35 2 IS which in fact one stop slower than sigma. I agree - the new Sigma's design is very nice. Let's wait for the field results.
matreshka: Great article, Carsten! I did not find DoF technique discussion (hyper focal distance and etc), in my mind it is also essential in landscape photography.
Got it, thanks. I usually follow the same approach - some 1/3 into the frame and narrow diaphragm.
Great article, Carsten! I did not find DoF technique discussion (hyper focal distance and etc), in my mind it is also essential in landscape photography.
very nice shot!
As far as I remember - our lady of the rock - is fully surrounded by mountains but I cannot see them here. How did you manage to avoid them here?
Regards,