Reminder Secure

Sigma 135 f1.8 on the way?

Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
21 April 2013 08:24
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Location
United Kingdom
Buckinghamshire
Stoke Mandeville

Interesting, and certainly cause for Canon & Nikon to be VERY concerned IMO, especially if it does indeed have a stabiliser.
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.


RGBphoto is off-lineSilver Member
21 April 2013 08:42
magpie1
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Tyne and Wear
Newcastle

Interesting, the 35mm 1.4 'Art' lens is, by all accounts, a super lens so hopefully others in the series are to be anticipated with optimism. The only 'gripe' and its purely personal, is that I find 135mm a slightly ??? Focal length. Just not significantly longer than 100, wherein many good lenses happen, often with macro facility, and 150 (f2 ?) would suit me better, but as I say my purely personal view and somebody who owns a Canon 135mm SF lens, but that's because of the SF.


Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
21 April 2013 08:47
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Location
United Kingdom
Buckinghamshire
Stoke Mandeville

Quote from magpie1
Interesting, the 35mm 1.4 'Art' lens is by all accounts a super lens so hopefully others in the series are to be anticipated with optimism. The only 'gripe' and its purely personal, is that I find 135mm a slightly ??? Focal length. Just not significantly longer than 100, wherein many good lenses happen, often with macro facility, and 150 (f2 ?) would suit me better, but as I say my purely personal view and somebody who owns a Canon 135mm SF lens, but that's because of the SF.



Most of my best images are shot at around the 135mm mark on my 70-200 f2.8 (makes sense I guess as it's around half-way and arguably at the lens' sweet spot on the zoom), so for me a 135mm prime makes perfect sense (not that my 70-200 is bad in any way)

I own Sigma's 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 (both bought within the last year) and they're superb lenses and I'm glad I got these over the Canon equivalents (both f1.2 lenses, Canon's 50mm f1.4 doesn't count because it's pretty crap).  The Sigma 35mm is also on my shopping list but this one will need to be pretty amazing (and cheap) to convince me not to go for the Canon which has an astonishing reputation as being one of their top lenses.
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.


Hugh is off-lineGold Member
21 April 2013 08:59
Hugh
Photographer
Hugh
Location
United Kingdom
Dyfed
Aberystwyth

The Canon 35/1.4L and 135/2.0L are both amazing lenses - I originally bought Canon so I could use the 135/2.0.

I could shoot for the rest of my life with just those two lenses - I had only 35/2.0 and 135/2.0 FD lenses for quite a few years.

The 85/1.8 Canon is pretty good, but I agree the Canon 50/1.4 is pretty average.
I've been tempted by the Sigma 50/1.4. Seen some stunning results, but a few too many complaints about focus accuracy.

The Sigma 35/1.4 is supposed to be better optically than the Canon 35/1.4 if you get a good one - but not as accurate focusing.

To put it all in perspective, in my experience, the Canon 35/1,4L at f5.6 will easily make a very sharp, detailed 20" x 30" print which rivals 5x4" film - and I've owned and used 5" x4".
It's not Fine Art just because it's in Black and White.


RGBphoto is off-lineSilver Member
21 April 2013 09:01
magpie1
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Tyne and Wear
Newcastle

Exactly why they make plenty focal lengths! What suits 1 person doesn't suit another. I can't get away with a 50 for instance, assuming FF. I'm maybe weird but I go 28, 85, 150 in prime choice and shoot either 70 or 200 on my 70-200!


Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
21 April 2013 09:02
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Location
United Kingdom
Buckinghamshire
Stoke Mandeville

Quote from Hugh
I've been tempted by the Sigma 50/1.4. Seen some stunning results, but a few too many complaints about focus accuracy. 



Mine's bang-on with 3x full-frame bodies (two of which don't have the luxury of micro focus adjustment)
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.


Hugh is off-lineGold Member
21 April 2013 09:06
Hugh
Photographer
Hugh
Location
United Kingdom
Dyfed
Aberystwyth

Quote from RedChecker
Mine's bang-on with 3x full-frame bodies (two of which don't have the luxury of micro focus adjustment)



I might yet end up with one.
Use the Pentax 67/105mm for that perspective at present.
It's not Fine Art just because it's in Black and White.


Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
21 April 2013 09:07
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Location
United Kingdom
Buckinghamshire
Stoke Mandeville

Quote from Hugh
The Canon 35/1.4L and 135/2.0L are both amazing lenses - I originally bought Canon so I could use the 135/2.0.



I would agree with you, both were on my shopping list but now only the 135 is as far as Canon goes (as the Sigma 35 seems a better proposition for me), however both of those lenses are probably due for replacement and I'm sure Canon will do their usual doubling of the price of the lenses if they do. 

Perhaps having serious competition like these Sigma lenses may at the very least make Canon think twice about further obscene price rises when they bring out new replacement lenses in the future.
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.


Hugh is off-lineGold Member
21 April 2013 09:14
Hugh
Photographer
Hugh
Location
United Kingdom
Dyfed
Aberystwyth

The only real reason for Canon to replace either is if there is some insanely high MP camera coming - like 45MP.

Realistically, the money Canon would make by killing off Medium format digital is insignificant compared to what they can make from Video - which is where their research money seems to be going.
It's not Fine Art just because it's in Black and White.


Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
21 April 2013 09:25
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Location
United Kingdom
Buckinghamshire
Stoke Mandeville

Quote from Hugh
The only real reason for Canon to replace either is if there is some insanely high MP camera coming - like 45MP.



I thought the 35L could be a little soft around the edges?  (I've heard mumbles on other sites that suggest this)

They've made some advancements with the 24L regarding those sub-wavelength coatings (that eliminate flare) so it seemed only natural that they'd be updating the 35mm to follow suit.  A minor upgrade granted but I'd guess they'd iron out the soft spots and any chromatic aberation as well (isn't it also Canon's oldest EF lens design?)
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.



25 Users currently online   Blue=Models Orange=Photographers Red=Agencies Purple=MUA/Stylists Grey=Studios Green=Moderators
DareMeDD harryking kategrimsby RoxyMendez ryansd
andrewf antoinewynn chicimages D_H_P dannyrich david1500 djb1 dorrian GGDP_Photography gperl ignite Ladiesman mlp parafotos penfold10 psn Rhadamanthus skymouse Thunder_Photos
harbourstudio