Marin Photography NYC wrote:
That Sigma 35mm 1.4 is fantastic!

Sure is!

Chuckarelei wrote:

Sigma outperforms OEM like Canon and Nikon? First time I heard it.

Zeiss, may be? But I really doubt Sigma has.

Where have you been?  You are still in the past.

de0rbit wrote:
I didn't think so after I watched this:

http://www.thatnikonguy.com/gear-talk/i … y-all-that

Try these...

http://photographylife.com/reviews/sigma-35mm-f1-4/3

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/792-si … fx?start=1

then compare it with the other 35mm f1.4 lenses..

Chuckarelei wrote:
Sigma outperforms OEM like Canon and Nikon? First time I heard it.

Zeiss, may be? But I really doubt Sigma has.

Check out the above links..  I think some of you non believer are sleeping...

de0rbit wrote:

I didn't think so after I watched this:

http://www.thatnikonguy.com/gear-talk/i … y-all-that

TheStarvingArtist wrote:
How can you even compare a sigma to a Zeiss?

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01 … m-shootout

Tony-S wrote:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01 … m-shootout

Shootout between 50mm at minimum focusing distance without any sample photos???

Charlie-CNP wrote:
On the other hand though, give me a full set of Zeiss primes any day!  There are so many control factors in Zeiss lenses that simply out perform any other lens on the market. If you can't afford them, at least rent one every now and then. They are perfection. good luck

They are hardly perfection. Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZE macro planar.


SMC Takumar 85-210 f/4.5 M42

Tony-S wrote:

They are hardly perfection. Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZE macro planar.


SMC Takumar 85-210 f/4.5 M42

???

R.EYE.R wrote:

???

See the CA?

Charlie-CNP wrote:
Personally, I have never been a fan of Sigma lenses. I have not worked with the newer ones mentioned,...

Stop right there... then get some of the new ones.

j3_photo wrote:

See the CA?

Show me one without in OOF especially in contrasty areas. And wide open as well please..

R.EYE.R wrote:

Show me one without in OOF especially in contrasty areas. And wide open as well please..

This one posted is not in OOF areas...and the claim they are 'perfection' is why Tony posted that- to contradict.

j3_photo wrote:

This one posted is not in OOF areas...and the claim they are 'perfection' is why Tony posted that- to contradict.

Oh, I get it! Sorry, I thought you were aerious there for a moment..

j3_photo wrote:
This one posted is not in OOF areas...and the claim they are 'perfection' is why Tony posted that- to contradict.

R.EYE.R wrote:
Oh, I get it! Sorry, I thought you were aerious there for a moment..

Quit trolling.

Photos by Lorrin wrote:
Zeiss's only problem for me beside price is that they do not auto focus.

There's a series of Zeiss lenses that also say "Sony" on the side that DO autofocus, even though they're made with the same glass as all of the other contemporary Zeiss lenses out there.

Ruben Sanchez wrote:
As for Zeiss lenses, they are in a different league of their own, having used Canon, Sigma, Tokina Pro, and Zeiss lenses on my cameras.  But who knows, it could happen some day, but who would buy a Sigma lens for their own Hassleblad or Rollieflex?

Given that Sigma doesn't make any lenses that cover 6x4.5, probably no one.

For a Red or Black Magic, however...

Charlie-CNP wrote:
Personally, I have never been a fan of Sigma lenses. I have not worked with the newer ones mentioned, but most of them that I have encountered have always had some form of barrel distortion issues where you have to go through several copies in order to get a good one. On the other hand though, give me a full set of Zeiss primes any day!  There are so many control factors in Zeiss lenses that simply out perform any other lens on the market. If you can't afford them, at least rent one every now and then. They are perfection. good luck

The new Sigmas focuses in a completely different manner than the old sigmas. Meaning, they actually do focus. I shot my 35 art in a light rain, whinch is a tough environment, and got 90% in focus shots. In less demanding conditions its been dead on.

I had, and RMA'd, the last Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM. It was a pile of carp. These new lenses are different.

Photos by Lorrin wrote:
Zeiss's only problem for me beside price is that they do not auto focus.

All my Zeiss lenses autofocus.

Photos by Lorrin wrote:
Zeiss's only problem for me beside price is that they do not auto focus.

There a huge difference between manually focusing with a lens that designed for manual focus and manually focusing with a lens that was designed for auto focus. Of course since most DSLRs are set-up for primarily AF shooting switching out the standard focusing screen for a Split-image or a Super Precision Matte is a good idea.

Mcary wrote:
There a huge difference between manually focusing with a lens that designed for manual focus and manually focusing with a lens that was designed for auto focus. Of course since most DSLRs are set-up for primarily AF shooting switching out the standard focusing screen for a Split-image or a Super Precision Matte is a good idea.

This is really unnecessary with Zeiss' current lenses that have focus confirmation. For older or adapted lenses without such chips the SE/MP is very nice though. I have that screen for my EOS 3.