05-13-2014, 04:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2014, 04:02 PM by Rover.)
The link is missing on the front page. I was only able to deduce that something must have appeared because the Zeiss Touit 12mm and Fujinon 23mm reviews suddenly changed places.  (mad or what!)
Excellent Review Klaus, thanks! Impressive performance, but as you say it is only equivelant to a 29-56mm f/2.8 on 35mm... still it looks quite a bit better than my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8.
Just to let you know, you have the wrong 'Rating Scale' next to the resolution graph. It's showing the 5D II scale.
The conclusion "a fast, high resolving wide angle zoom on prime level" is something I can agree with. However, riding the "only 29-56/2.8” horse is just ignoring the facts that
It might become hard to find a FF zoom resolving like that one
at open aperture and
at that price.
The Nikon version then is 27-52.5/2.7 equivalent, and with that equivalencies overrating (there are still a lot of APS-C users with no plan to move to FX, so an expensive 24-70/2.8 is no alternative) it has to be said in that wide angle region down to 18mm there's nothing faster in primes.
If I want get shallow DoF, FX is the way to go - and the way to spend a lot more money.
If I want to take pictures of dim lit rooms, the lens doesn't work wonders - except at the moment I don't have a tripod with me, because then it becomes extremely useful.
To me, there's another aspect which might be of no weight to most people: I started to get used to the Sigma DPxMerills, I do find the qualities of the Foveon sensor outstanding. Although with massive downsides (lowlight performance, software, small batteries). But in case Sigma presents a new Foveon DSLR on Photokina this year, I can send in the lens and get a new mount.
Quote:The conclusion "a fast, high resolving wide angle zoom on prime level" is something I can agree with. However, riding the "only 29-56/2.8” horse is just ignoring the facts that
It might become hard to find a FF zoom resolving like that one
at open aperture and
at that price.
The Nikon version then is 27-52.5/2.7 equivalent, and with that equivalencies overrating (there are still a lot of APS-C users with no plan to move to FX, so an expensive 24-70/2.8 is no alternative) it has to be said in that wide angle region down to 18mm there's nothing faster in primes.
If I want get shallow DoF, FX is the way to go - and the way to spend a lot more money.
If I want to take pictures of dim lit rooms, the lens doesn't work wonders - except at the moment I don't have a tripod with me, because then it becomes extremely useful.
To me, there's another aspect which might be of no weight to most people: I started to get used to the Sigma DPxMerills, I do find the qualities of the Foveon sensor outstanding. Although with massive downsides (lowlight performance, software, small batteries). But in case Sigma presents a new Foveon DSLR on Photokina this year, I can send in the lens and get a new mount.
Hey, no reason to complain :-) - it got a HR rating after all!
As far as the "standard zoom" debate is concerned - 3x zoom ratios are the de-facto norm these days for f/2.8 lenses here. That's just how it is and if you got less it is just necessary to mention.
Did Sigma change their color rendition with "Art" series? older lenses had that warm look, newer offerings look more neutral... or is just me?
Klaus, I don't have an overview about 2x zooms in wide angle, so it was no attempt to make it a standard zoom, I just needed an f/2.8 example for FF. So I need to step back from my sympathy for Sigma's reinvention of themselves, which is a rare thing these days. For sure it is no weight saver, unless one tries to get a 35, 24 and a 18mm prime, with f/1.8 instead of that lens.
It's also fun to play with open aperture and 0.28m minimal focus distance.
Quote:Did Sigma change their color rendition with "Art" series? older lenses had that warm look, newer offerings look more neutral... or is just me?
Tempted to say the same, but my old Sigmas were for Pentax (mostly on Auto WB) and the new ones are for Nikon. So I can't compare. To me the tones are lighter, less massive. But that might be depending on more details shown by the new ones with 140% more MP.
Quote:Klaus, I don't have an overview about 2x zooms in wide angle, so it was no attempt to make it a standard zoom, I just needed an f/2.8 example for FF. So I need to step back from my sympathy for Sigma's reinvention of themselves, which is a rare thing these days. For sure it is no weight saver, unless one tries to get a 35, 24 and a 18mm prime, with f/1.8 instead of that lens.
It's also fun to play with open aperture and 0.28m minimal focus distance.
Yeah, something like the sample shot with the cannon (albeit the focus wasn't perfect) is a cool experience on APS-C.
And it doesn't get much better than this at the moment.
However, the lens shows also once more that if you'd like to have the same depth-of-field potential you will end up with roughly the same lens weight and costs.
Quote:Did Sigma change their color rendition with "Art" series? older lenses had that warm look, newer offerings look more neutral... or is just me?
It is just you
Seriously, unless you go for fixed WB settings you'll never know. Your camera's AWD will equalize the differences in color temperature (which is metered behind the lens so it takes its transmission characteristic into account).
|
