iiiNelson
Well-known member
What are you talking about!?! That's character brotha!!! :ROTFL::thumbup:Onion rings in the OOF highlights.
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
What are you talking about!?! That's character brotha!!! :ROTFL::thumbup:Onion rings in the OOF highlights.
I've owned the Sigma Art (twice) and if I was going to shoot it or the new Zeiss on the A7 bodies it would be no contest. The new Zeiss has the resolving power of the Sigma with better bokeh, focuses better and is lighter.Me too just read that review from LensRentals. Doesn't look that great for the price and size. Though, it probably is useful for videographers.
I'll keep my Sigma 35mm Art.
If I compare side by side the test results published by Camera lens tests, user reviews, camera accessory reviews - SLRgear.com! it seems to me that the resolving power of the Sigma Art on Canon 1DSmkII is clearly superior to the the one of the Distagon on Sony A7R. Bokeh and other factors may clearly be more important:“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” (HCB)I've owned the Sigma Art (twice) and if I was going to shoot it or the new Zeiss on the A7 bodies it would be no contest. The new Zeiss has the resolving power of the Sigma with better bokeh, focuses better and is lighter.
I think it depends on what you're looking for. Even on the LensRental test it was clear to me that the Distagon was A LOT better than the 35FE Sonnar at thumbnail sizes on an iPad Retina.If I compare side by side the test results published by Camera lens tests, user reviews, camera accessory reviews - SLRgear.com! it seems to me that the resolving power of the Sigma Art on Canon 1DSmkII is clearly superior to the the one of the Distagon on Sony A7R. Bokeh and other factors may clearly be more important:“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” (HCB)
Better than I could have said it. Yesterday I used the AF tracking on the a7II to take some shots of my boys on the trampoline. It worked very well. Using the native AF mechanism is really important to me and it should continue to improve in future bodies. I'm looking forward to even more sensor coverage of PDAF pixels but at least today I can move the AF point to the edges and have contrast detection when needed.I think it depends on what you're looking for. Even on the LensRental test it was clear to me that the Distagon was A LOT better than the 35FE Sonnar at thumbnail sizes on an iPad Retina.
As for the comparison to the Sigma Art - maybe it is the better choice for MOST as it is a more neutral lens and nearly half the cost. Let's face it the Zeiss look is one that you either take it or leave it. I happen to love it and am really starting to lean towards selling my Sigma Art for this lens. A big reason is that I can AF across the entire frame with native FE lenses compared to adapting A-mount. That's a huge deal to me.
Someone who has experience with both lenses isn't saying that the other lens is bad but it's just another opinion to the contrary of some others.
Hey Sam,Let's just say the new Zeiss is slightly better, lighter, focus faster but is it significant enough to get rid of what I already have for maybe $650?
Don't know, but the Sigma (1st batch bought in May/2013) focuses pretty fast and accurate without any micro-focus adjustment on both a7 & a7ii
The new Zeiss FE would be a good investment but one like myself unless decided to dump all A-mount lenses.
a7ii, Sigma f2.5 https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7299/16399325840_a63823b85c_o.jpg
a7, Sigma f1.6 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3949/15575525961_90d5489b91_o.jpg
a7, Sigma f2.2 https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7563/15855117639_ae00bc9ffd_o.jpg
a7, Sigma f2.8 https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7402/16392187369_7dee3b490d_o.jpg
I would venture to say that my copy of my Sigma Art autofocuses pretty well in lowlight between f/1.4-2.5 in the center third of the frame but my issue is focusing on the outer thirds. Being able to zoom in helps with manual focusing but it is a lot slower to catch the moment than say my M mount lenses that are much smoother.Better than I could have said it. Yesterday I used the AF tracking on the a7II to take some shots of my boys on the trampoline. It worked very well. Using the native AF mechanism is really important to me and it should continue to improve in future bodies. I'm looking forward to even more sensor coverage of PDAF pixels but at least today I can move the AF point to the edges and have contrast detection when needed.
My experience with AF and the Sigma has been nothing but frustration - particularly in low light (which is where I need it to be good) on the LA-EA4. It also wasn't great on the A900 and I recall reviewers echoing that sentiment.
Of course the Sigma is an exceptional lens - one of the best AF 35/1.4 lenses you can buy and arguable the best value by a longshot.
As far as the SLR Gear review goes.... hmmpf. For how I shoot a fast 35mm, usually between 1.4 and 2, this thing is tops. Going back and looking at my Sigma shots I'll edit my statement to say that the Zeiss "looks" sharper to me in the center - I don't do test charts so saying that it matches the resolving power of the Sigma may have been a bit of hyperbole :angel:
Yup I've been a Prime member for the last 5 years BUT unfortunately they put a shipping center in my state and charge tax now soooo I've been ordering through B&H more often for big price items. They also do free shipping on some items as well.Tre order from Amazon you get a 30 day return on it. If you don't like it than its a very easy to return place.