Sigma 18-35 vs Nikkor 35/2 different exposures
I was fiddling with the new Sigma 18-35/1.8 for about an hour today. I tried it at my local stone shop. I am rather disappointed by the inconsistent AF fine tune requirements at different focal lengths and focusing distances as compared by the LV-AF method. Could there be sample variation or is it design issue? But this would make a different story...
I wanted to make comparison with my 35/2 to see how much would I probably gain shooting wide open in interiors as I am about to shoot one indoor concert-like event. I didn't notice it in the shop, if I did, I would have made more and more precise tests
The Nikkor is T2.1, Sigma is T1,9 according to DxO. So I was quite surprised to see the shot from Sigma to be at 1/3EV longer shutter time than the Nikkor - 1/80 F1.8 x 1/100 F2.0. I would expect it to be the other way round. The scene is not absolutely identical, but the exposure of the central area is more or less the same. I have checked the 1:1 Brightness values of the orange camera bag (blown) and the yellow paper below it and it is about 1% away from each other. Definitely not 2/3EV away from each other. Aperture mode, flat metering (not spot).
How would you explain that?
The images are resized for bandwidth reasons, full exif kept.
|Post (hide subjects)||Posted by||When|
|Feb 25, 2014|
|Feb 26, 2014|
|Feb 26, 2014|
- Fujifilm X-T223.6%
- Nikon D50025.4%
- Nikon AF-S 105mm F1.4E8.2%
- Olympus M.Zuiko 12-100mm F47.5%
- Panasonic Lumix DMC-G857.2%
- Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art6.7%
- Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 Art5.1%
- Sony a63006.4%
- Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III3.7%
- Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V6.3%
|Lighthouse, Bottom of the World by CelticOdyssey|
from An A to Z of Subjects- Week 12, L
|Dundrum by Rik Powdrill|