[Klaus]

https://opticallimits.com/sony/sony-fe-f...ry-review/

Slow but nice.

[Rover]

Triple 2.8: aperture, vignetting wide open, pincushion distortion.

Anyway it's nice to see the reviews of these lenses even though I'm not really in the target group; Sigma has made a lot of them in very quick succession I think? (17/4; 20/2; 24/2; 24/3.5; 35/2; 45/2.8; 50/2; 65/2; and this 90/2.8... have I missed anything?)

Maybe if I manage to leave the journalistic trade behind, I'll get some of these and shoot on vacations.

[stoppingdown]

When comparing with the Samyang 75mm F1.8: «However, you can expect it to be more flimsy in terms of build quality» — yep, I can confirm that. I'm pretty happy to have it, but you trade the extra stop and low price with the build quality.

[Klaus]

Triple 2.8: aperture, vignetting wide open, pincushion distortion.

Anyway it's nice to see the reviews of these lenses even though I'm not really in the target group; Sigma has made a lot of them in very quick succession I think? (17/4; 20/2; 24/2; 24/3.5; 35/2; 45/2.8; 50/2; 65/2; and this 90/2.8... have I missed anything?)

Maybe if I manage to leave the journalistic trade behind, I'll get some of these and shoot on vacations.

The 17/4 review is coming soon.

The 65 is still my favorite.

---

Question - do you also see 3D pop in this image?

https://photozone.smugmug.com/Sigma-90mm...-pPntZ7f/A

[Rover]

LOL, I think it's one of those nebulous terms people use arbitrarily and subjectively to describe things (e.g. lenses...) they like as opposed to those they don't.

I think the image is nice; the background looks iffy in spots at 100% but this is inevitable because most any lens may be made to look bad when shooting images with lots of foliage and twigs in the OOF areas. But I usually don't give a rat's ass about these things anyway.

[Klaus]

I don't think that 3D pop is hokum - because it can be measured. It won't show up in our numbers here, though.
We "just" measure the peak resolution (and a bit of contrast), but this doesn't reflect how objects "stand out".

Watch this snippet from a Leica explanation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vyoAIOTIcs
Time index: 29:10 to 32:10

I'd guess you can sometimes - although not always - take a hint from our LoCA tests.
The "problem" with the LoCA test is that this contrast transition is polluted by the rather close focus distance.

[toni-a]

Klaus pid='58123' dateline='1715598077']
Question - do you also see 3D pop in this image?

https://photozone.smugmug.com/Sigma-90mm...-pPntZ7f/A[/quote]

3D pop is hard to define, however I am somewhat not really happy with post processing. while I do shoot to the right, while converting to RAW I then correct exposure, here it still looks overexposed.
White balance is rather on the cold side warmer colors, I would also correct the grass greens. and obviously decrease saturation, for composition I would suggest cropping behind the old car as the details are distracting 

[MLonlooker]

Not a lot to criticize there, although I would prefer that extra stop at 1.8 for portraits really ...
 btw text quotes 2.8 as the vignetting figure where the graph shows 2.44 ....
  thanks ....

[Rover]

I think the focus here (pun not intended) was on compactness... it's much smaller than any AF 85/1.8 I think? Though not lighter due to the metal husk.

[MLonlooker]

---

Question - do you also see 3D pop in this image?

https://photozone.smugmug.com/Sigma-90mm...-pPntZ7f/A

  Nice image! ...... 3D pop sort of yes, but with reservations though .... the 3D pop is countered somewhat by a sort of "micro bubbling pop" going on in the foliage highlights as well as edgy highlighted twigs in the mid distance ....  all on a micro scale ..... it doesn't seem to be nisen bokeh image splitting or just general soap bubbling .....  on a large scale print that would be pretty distracting ....... strange !
 I get the impression this image nice though it is, has exposed a  shortcoming of this lens at least at greater magnifications .... but then I do give a rat's arse about bokeh .....