Previous news story Next news story

Roger Cicala cock-a-hoop* over Sigma's 35mm F1.4 DG HSM

Nov 21, 2012 at 21:33:15 GMT

OTHER NEWS SIGMA

Pin It

Print view

Lensrentals' Roger Cicala hasn't always been a fan of Sigma's lenses but the company's latest 35mm F1.4 DG HSM seems to have got him pretty excited. He's written a very positive first impressions blog post, considering the build and test data from the first sample he's received. As usual, he's very careful to stress the limitations of what he's reporting - specifically that these are early impressions, based on a single lens that he's had little chance to actually take photos with. However, he's also someone with immense experience with lenses, and is in the unusual position of having had the opportunity to strip the lens down, so we found his insight interesting.

We're expecting a Sigma 35mm F1.4 in the very near future and will be publishing sample images and a review as soon as we can.

Click here to read Roger Cicala's Lensrentals blog post on the Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM

*'Cock-a-hoop' is a British saying that the Oxford English Dictionary defines as: 'extremely and obviously pleased, especially about an achievement.'

Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM

Add to: Login to add this item to your gear lists.

Comments

Total comments: 92

The Nikon 28mm 1.8G doesn't fare all that great in reviews in general. This sigma will be much sharper, better built and also it's 1.4 ... obviously.

0 upvotes

i hope sigma would release new 24-70 2.8 in future with their new global vision concept design & quality. and sigma has done something really brilliant.

0 upvotes

Looks pretty interesting for Canon users. For Nikon users, why not the 28mm f/1.8G instead?

1 upvote

7 millimetres

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

I would also recommend 28/1.8G, just get it and if you still think you need 35/1.4 get it, too at a lower price later (there will be no other 35/1.4 until we see 35/1.4L2 maybe next year).

28/1.8G is also recommended for Canon users, with a D800 of course.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

Looks mighty tasty... it will go well with my 85mm f/1.4 Sigma (another cracking lens)

1 upvote

I will buy it, had the chance to play and shoot with the lens today. Impressive results.

2 upvotes

Well, i love the styling of this lens. It would be good to know if this is an indication of where Sigma are headed in this regard - I'd like to see a new 85mm 1.4 (with IS/VR or whatever Sigma call it). I'd buy it.

1 upvote

Available to rent today!
some samples-
http://blog.sigmaphoto.com/2012/first-look-sigma-35mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-hands-on/

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Sigma is serious about improving its quality control and producing the worlds highest quality lenses. The lens on the DP2M is the sharpest lens I
I've ever used---it is amazing. The new 35mm f1.4 lens is the end result of Sigmas intense effort to produce lenses that truly showcase what the foveon sensor can resolve in addition to providing lenses worthy of the 24 and up megapixel cameras. Today and tommorow's super sensors need the best glass and Sigma is raising the bar for the rest of the industry. I want this lens.

2 upvotes

Well, it''s not really going to be as good as the nikkor, nor as good as the canon. i tested them both and they are really good. I also tested the 85 1.4 AFs nikon and it's stunning, a bit better than my sigma 85 1.4. The canons are also very good, with some CA wide open though. This sigma will be nicely sharp at 1.4, with minimal CA and spherical aberration, decent color rendition. The nikkor will render color better, will have better contrast wide open, will have less CA and you will probably never have to worry about calibration on it. At twice the price. The choice is really up to the user, and since I cannot afford or justify the nikkor, and my 35 f/2 is limiting me somewhat, this 35 sigma seems like a logical choice.

0 upvotes

you mean you tested the sigma 35 1.4 yourself against the canon and nikons?

0 upvotes

>The nikkor will render color better, will have better contrast wide open, will have less CA

What?

2 upvotes

It's posts like yours that make this forum such a weird place. People with strong emphatically delivered opinions based on no knowledge or experience. How on earth would you know that the lens would not be as good as a Canon or Nikon. If you can't get what you want from the 35mm f2 you're unlikely to get much more from the 1.4 sigma. Unless of course if you intend taking every shot at 1.4 (which generally isn't the point of wide lenses).

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting

12 upvotes

I agree with you @Sean65 except for your last point. If you buy a fast lens then you generally bought it to use it wide open surely. You don't buy the 50 F1.2 to use it at F2 most if the time - that would be a complete waste.

2 upvotes

technotic:

a 1.2 lense stopped down 2 is extremely sharp out to the corner.
A 1.2 has a lot more headroom than a 2.8...Bigger is always better.

1 upvote

Long overdue (by which I mean it's about time third parties filled in the yawning gap in the market for premium lenses at more competitive prices).

This is exactly the kind of lens I am looking for, be interested to see what else comes up in this range.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting

5 upvotes

I have had one Sigma, the 17-50mm f/2.8 OS Nikon version. It's very good overall, some CA though. The only problem is the AF finetuning that requried the limits of the D7k, while my 5 Nikkors required zero. Sigmas also tend to show wide sample variation, let's wait to see wht he finds when he tests other copies.

0 upvotes

Is this jolly old England? Cock-a-hoop? Cmon ...

2 upvotes

I'm guessing you are in America.

7 upvotes

Nothing wrong with some trans order culture folks... it's what makes the world fun and worth seeing

2 upvotes

Their is the basketball photo in the article..... and don't forget this site was originally English.

0 upvotes

Where does all the first party fanboyism come from? Is it a natural social trend or are there people out there pushing that reasoning? I know its existed before the internet.

0 upvotes

again...today's sigma isn't the same we used to know comes in a green nylon bag with much lower price tag : )

HOWEVER....please stick to an uniform design for the lens~ they all seem from different mothers and different fathers now lol

my next sigma is going to be 180 f2.8 macro actually

0 upvotes

I'm not in the market for this lens but I'm glad to hear the positive comments about Sigma, I have four Sigma lenses and haven't had any issues with any of them.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

can't wait for the 24mm 1.4 version....
already have the 35 canon :)

1 upvote

"Cock-a-hoop" means something of pleasure, I totally get it!

1 upvote

and you get 3 years warranty instead of 1 year.

thought i wish they would give as long warranty as tamron (5 years).

you have to wonder why nikon and canon don´t trust their lenses as much as tamron...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

Now I wonder if the kudos are a hint of what to expect with the 17-70mm?

0 upvotes

Ashmills, thanks for your addition. Im still learning. But if I was in the market for a 35 mm lens, I sure would consider this one to buy. I'm impressed by what I can read here and the price Sigma wants for this full frame lens.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

I'll be getting one soon then....

And here I was thinking I'd never buy another Sigma lens! The only one I don't worry about the focusing on is my fisheye...

I love my 28mm f1.8 too - but it has sticky aperture blades...

0 upvotes

Pffff, if this lens was for a mirroless system it would it in my pocket.

Note: this is a passive-aggressive humorous response to some of the comments that have been repeatedly made in most, if not all, mirrorless system lenses announcements on this site.

It is not meant to be taken as an offence, and I apologise beforehand if someone finds this inappropriate. If so, just ignore it.

2 upvotes

I find that inappropriate, insulting, and extremely and irrationally offensive!

4 upvotes

I don't think anyone could have said it with more hyperbole than you. Well done.

1 upvote

as usual, your comment is a reflection of lack of knowledge in photography.

0 upvotes

The double standards of the DPreview community are amazing.

It's perfectly fine for anyone to go to a mirrorless lens announcement and criticise it for its price and how it will perform on a camera with a smaller sensor when compared to an "equivalent" lens on a larger sensor, but if someone comments on the portability, or lack of, of a lens made for a larger-sensor camera, even in a joking manner, it is "inappropriate, insulting, and extremely and irrationally offensive!".

Well, lesson learned, I'll stay clear and far from these fanatics.

3 upvotes

You'd better do indeed. And they didn't even start with their "equivalent aperture" crazy BS theories...

1 upvote

Mr. Cicala, sharpness and weight are not the only criteria for the evaluation of a lens. What about bokeh rendition? As far as I can see this Sigma isn't even close to Nikkor or Canon equivalents.

But without doubt. This is one great lens from Sigma and very good offer.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Sharpness and weight may not be the only criteria for evaluating lenses, though they are definitely more objective than the more subjective nature of bokeh rendition. Generally good to test things that can be quantified first before making subjective evaluations.

11 upvotes

well you should stop photographing then if you don´t see it.... the bokeh is absolutely fine. and why not... it´s a 9 blade design.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

The number of blades does not affect the bokeh wide open, and is not a primary factor of its quality even when stopped down. It has more to do with the lens design and optimization. The lenses with the best bokeh are the ones which are not the sharpest. The sigma seems to go in exactly the opposite direction.

5 upvotes

It seems like that it's possible to make good lenses for a reasonable price. Are you listening Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Leica!!!!?. I hope someone will do the same with cameras too, especially with the FF ones.

2 upvotes

It has been possible to build good lenses for reasonable money for very, very long time now. Reason why "big 4" wont lower their prices is spelled stupidity of their customers. There are so many morons out there that blindly pay whatever Canon, Nikon, Zeiss wants. They don't ask why it cost 3 times more, morons just give their money away. Big four knows that hence their prices.
Leica people are beyond help, I personally think that most of them should be institutionalised.

1 upvote

well maybe money is no concern for us leica users... you are poor as it seems so that is maybe the problem.

may wife has a 3000 euro handbag.... so why should i skimp on my lenses or cameras?

that sure does not mean i pay more then i have too.... im looking for a bargain too,

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

It's no different from other men's toys.The more expensive, the more exclusive and that's what they want. Nothing wrong with that.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

3 upvotes

Let's get things in perspective though. Canon and Nikon used to produce good lenses for a reasonable price too and some of their lenses are still in that category. It's just recently they've gone in to craze of charging 3X more for lenses with upgrades eg;inclusion of IS or newer versions of the same spec lenses. For example with the announcement of the new 24mm and 28mm with IS are 3X more expensive than the older but as good models. What is totally unacceptable and arrogant is that they stopped producing the non IS versions. It looks like pure greed. Unless they have a valid explanation.

0 upvotes

I believe Zeiss has good deals, at least on ZM lenses... Nikon primes too.

1 upvote

Undergrounddigga, Just put your 17 mm f 1.8 on a full frame camera and compair the result. It still will be a 17 mm, with only f 3 or less, and a small image circle. Equivalent, only says you get the same composition, not the same picture. But I think you would not see the diference?

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Harrie you are partially wrong- assuming the mirror wasn't in the way the image will indeed be same framing as a 17mm on a full frame, with severe vignetting (not a given with all lenses) and a 1.8 not f3 aperture. You cant take the equivalent thing and turn it around.

The framing in a 4/3 camera will be equivalent to 34mm on full frame, and the aperture and there for exposure will be 1.8, but the apparent depth of field will be f3 or so as you say and the noise in that image (due to less area of light captured) will be that much more, assuming same pixel pitch.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

1 upvote

@ ashmills , did you think about what you wrote " severe vignetting "not a given with all lenses" the 17mm F1.8 is designed for a sensor almost a quarter the size of FF.

The aperture for exposure is all but irrelevant if comparing across formats or we would be using the Panasonic FZ200 with its f2.8 600mm equivalent, F2.8 is F2.8 right lol . And the DOF equivalent of F1.8 on FF is of course F3.6 .

0 upvotes

Yes I did consider what I wrote, and a 300mm 4/3 for instance would very likely cover the whole FF sensor- (again, ignoring the short flange depth)

Sorry but you cant say aperture is irrelvant! The aperture being a constant actually gives 4/3 an advantage in decent light, if you dont always want the shallowest DoF or least noise.

Obviously the issue is ignoring the actual focal length- the panasonic you mentiion has a 108mm lens at full reach, so yes the shot appears like a 600mm only because the chip crops to that size. But it does crop, and if the lens is decent and the chip works well you can have 600mm reach, 12mp of pixels, and 2.8 exposure. Which plenty of people might like quite a lot,

Not many of those people would appreciate the DoF of a Full Frame 600mm 2.8 - I know Id find that tricky...

1 upvote

This guy is one of the very few I take for serious. Why ? Because he doesn't test a carefully hand selected copy but takes a whole bunch of lenses and then looks what's going on. He also gets constant feedback by his customers and the companies service center over a large number of devices.

Thank you depreview for sharing his opinion at your website.

9 upvotes

Equally importantly, if people don't like the test results for a particular lens because it doesn't fit their agenda, they can't exclaim "bad copy" and dismiss them.

3 upvotes

@ gl2k totally agree , the fact that he mentions testing 100 Canon 35mm lenses says it all

1 upvote

numbers speak for themselves.
the average, best, worst, and distribution are all important.
of course the test of a single copy is better than no test.

0 upvotes

$899
and 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.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Right, the 17mm F/1.8 with a 9.4mm aperture covering a 225mm^2 sensor area compared to a 35mm F/1.4 with a 25mm aperture covering a 860mm^2 sensor area. By that logic, the Lumix LX7 is the bargain of the year, featuring a F/1.4-2.7 zoom *and* a camera for only 449$! Or maybe you're missing the fact that the smaller the sensor, the cheaper the lens, ceteris paribus.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting

7 upvotes

Nobody would complain if Olympus made a 34mm f1.8 FX lens for $499. But they haven't.

That lens is 34mm equivalent, but it's not f1.8 equivalent, it's f3.6 equivalent. And it seems to be quite good, but not great. That's why people complained.

FWIW, there must be at least 10 times the amount of glass inside that 35mm f1.4 Sigma, as compared to the Oly 17mm f1.8. So $899 actually seems to be a very good price in comparison.

Now I'm just waiting that Sigma starts making lenses like this one for my OMD :)

4 upvotes

One thing is, the f/3.6 equivalence is in terms of depth of field only, not the brightness. The f-stop is defined as the ratio of focal length to aperture, and it doesn't change when the sensor size changes. What DOES change is angle of view due to the sensor size (and lens-flange distance to be accurate), the depth of field, based on the focal length. The amount of light that is passed through by the lens is not a function of the sensor size, but the aperture size.

Under the same lighting conditions, a full frame camera set at A with a 35 f/1.8 lens at ISO 200 and f 1.8 will show the same, or very close, shutter speed as a m43 camera set at A, at ISO 200 and a 17 f/1.8 lens at f 1.8, using their internal metering systems. Light meters do not have any sensor size variables, just aperture, ISO and shutter speeds.

Maybe we all need another f/64 movement to get this misconception out of the system...

3 upvotes

undergrunddogga = no clue at all

0 upvotes

The point with equivalence is that you can use ISO values 4 times higher with FX, as compared to 4/3, and still get the same image quality.

Using same generation sensors, a m4/3 image with a 17mm lens, exposed at f4, 1/100sec, at ISO 400 will give you very similar results to an FX image with a 34mm lens, exposed at f8, 1/100sec, at ISO 1600.

Similar not only regarding DOF, but also regarding noise and other parameters.

2 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

@brunobarolo writes:

"The point with equivalence is that you can use ISO values 4 times higher with FX, as compared to 4/3, and still get the same image quality.

Similar not only regarding DOF, but also regarding noise and other parameters."

All you are saying here is smaller sensors are noisier than larger ones. We all know that is generally true but it has nothing to do with lenses and so saying a fast M4/3 lens is equivalent to a much slower lens on FF is not helpful.

Both will allow you to set the same shutter/aperture combo for a given ISO and that is all that matters in a practical sense. You like the FF output better due to less noise? OK but that is a function of the sensors not the lens.

4 upvotes

Looks good. Once upon a time I sold all my Sigma lenses because...well, you know why. Hope the results will be replicated on a larger scale and many of the "copies" will be at the same level. And now, tadaaaa: let's bet - Canon will introduce a new 35 mm ("the sharpest ever made"...) f/1.4 at... 2500 USD/EUR (optimistic scenario). Cheers! :)

6 upvotes

Well gosh, do lenses need to be any sharper? Sure they could be better at F/1.4 but come on, it's so shallow it feels sharp anyways (and one really shouldn't be shooting absoluetely everything at 1.4). There's more to a lens with different qualities than just sharpness too, and of course Canon will improve on all aspects if/when a #2 comes out, but same sepculation, it'll be expensive.

0 upvotes

I want one :D

1 upvote

The shots I've seen look it's got great resolution and quality of bokeh. However, I'm concerned about the LoCA. Can't wait to get my paws on one and find out what's what!

1 upvote

A treatment of LoCA (Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration) as well as LaCA (Lateral Chromatic Aberration) can be seen at http://photographylife.com/what-is-chromatic-aberration

0 upvotes

Huh? I know what both are. I'm just concerned about the performance of this new lens in both of those areas.

0 upvotes

Contrast, flare and vignetting amongst other aspects still to be considered, but I doubt they are "bad", and the price is certainly good.

0 upvotes

First non Nikon lens for me.

2 upvotes

Well it's either your second lens or you are easily parted from your money :)

3 upvotes

learn to read ryan....

2 upvotes

cock-a-hoop?

1 upvote

If only someone would provide an explanation.

4 upvotes

By Henry M. Hertz (56 min ago)
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/cock-a-hoop.html

Zactly,
what's it say about early adopter's remorse ?

0 upvotes

filthy good!

0 upvotes

These impressions make me look forward to the new 120-300 zoom. Maybe Sigma are really delivering now.

0 upvotes

Sigma's been delivering for awhile now. I have a 105 2.8 EX macro from maybe 10 years ago vintage and it's a superb lens with a rock solid all metal barrel. I think third party lenses get stigmatized unfairly.

This new 35 1.4 looks impressive for sure.

2 upvotes

Sigmatised?

8 upvotes

There are also some good samples just published today:

http://blog.sigmaphoto.com/2012/first-look-sigma-35mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-hands-on/

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

i would pre-order..... but the price is 999 euro here.

so i buy one when i fly over to canada next month.

1 upvote

And how much is 999€ going to be in Canada - next month?

1 upvote

it is close to what you pay in the USA... so around 710-750 euro.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

If it goes for about$700 in the US then the Samyang in my bag has its days numbered.

0 upvotes

it is closer to 900 dollar in the USA 0,77 euro = 1 dollar

0 upvotes

I wish you hadn't explained "cock-a-hoop", it would have made the comments section a lot more interesting.

7 upvotes

Nobody seems to read the full article before commenting on DPR (or any news and reviews site for that matter) anyway!

2 upvotes

after this "preview" and some pics from a japanese site - pre-ordered :D

1 upvote

Once again, Sigma ftw!

2 upvotes

I'm not one to say this usually, but...go Sigma. I've preordered.

4 upvotes

better then canons or nikons 35mm..... well done sigma.

10 upvotes

Total comments: 92


Lens reviews update: 70-200mm lenses added to our test data widget Apr 29, 2013	Just Posted: Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Preview Samples Dec 4, 2012	Sigma USA announces $899 price for 35mm F1.4 DG HSM prime lens Nov 7, 2012	Sigma launches three lenses, one in each of newly branded product categories Sep 17, 2012

	Olympus PEN E-P5 May 10, 2013
	Samsung NX2000 May 1, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Apr 24, 2013
	Ricoh GR Apr 17, 2013
	Samsung NX1100 Apr 11, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Apr 9, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix S8400W Mar 22, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix XP200 Mar 22, 2013

Recommended Photoshop Alternatives?	99
Adobe is WRONG!	91
Are we fooling ourselves?	79
From first effort at street.	69
Not completely satisfied with my X100S	58
Sold my RX100 - this is why	56
All this Adobe flaming	53
M43 and DOF with a fast lens	49
24mp sensor for m43? 3.2micron pixel pitch!	48
Primes vs Zooms	47
Anybody out there who does not use Photoshop ...	42
When I increase the aperture my screen goes ...	42
A99 Short Film "Survival of the Fittest" Hi-ISO	41
Nikon 1 lens road map...anyone?	37
Alternative to Adobe software	35
Nikor 24-120 F4	33
Tempted by the price of the SAMYANG 14mm f2.8 ...	31
Colors in B/W!!!...	30
Who own the copyright and why?	30
X100s exposure inconsistency	28

Your email address:
Your name: