[JJ_SO]

Can't help, I find this lens tip review totally off and very disappointing. â…” of their shots at closer aperture than f/2? Why would anyone buy such a heavy chunk of glass? I want to see how it works wide open, in dim light, at night, at close-up, how's bokeh, what about those flares? Over at DPreview I saw a series of portrait shots with 24-35/2. Any fans of green flares because of backlight here? Step forward, don't look any longer, that's your lens  :ph34r:

 

Playing around with a zoom and see the difference between 24 and 20 mm I still fail totally to see any point in getting that lens. I'm waiting for a "baang, that's it" post which points out the greatness and the sense of this 1kg cause of back-pain. I would like to like that lens, but that could turn out as a piece of serious work in mental self conviction.  :wacko:

 

Now, I'm still waiting g for some serious hands on or test, because to me - no offense meant - the lenstip stuff is useless.

[JJ_SO]

Now I've seen some samples wide open and backlit, made with a state of the art EOS 5Ds R. http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/ca...ssion.html I downloaded a couple of them and looked at it.


They catched me. That was what I was looking for. Shame to "testers" delivering ordinary images at average apertures which give no reason why one should buy 1kg glass with prime FL. When I'm going home tomorrow, I have to make a stopover at my dealer, I guess. For me, those pictures are the decisive push I needed (or not, depends).

[mst]

Now I've seen some samples wide open and backlit, made with a state of the art EOS 5Ds R. http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/ca...ssion.html I downloaded a couple of them and looked at it.

Some nice shots in there, thanks for the link.

Still, I wonder if there is a significant visible difference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 in these kind of shots. Or in other words: if a 20/1.8 would be fast enough to get 95% of the intended look.

-- Markus

[JJ_SO]

Valid question. I'd say, fast enough, lighter and smaller for sure. But the sharpness wide open does impress me, and the calibration to closer distances was something I wanted to have. Still there is sensitivity to ghost and flare, so it is mostly something for indoors, not so much sunsets.


What I find a bit annoying is the plastic lens hood as well as the cap. Anyway, after the weekend I can tell more and maybe show a bit of it's weaknesses and strengths.

[Rover]

I'm sure you can get rid of the hood through... mechanical modification. Though I suppose that might hurt the resale value a bit. 

Me, I'd love to get this lens but I think I'd stick to my 24/1.4 L for awhile. If only I had known when buying it that the new Sigmas were coming... -_-

[JJ_SO]

Well, the hood is not just a fun part, but I'm also sure I could get rid of it. Meanwhile I comfort myself with saying "alright, it DOES look cheaper than the 14-24's hood, but if the worst happen, it will take a lot more energy out of a fall.


And the frontelement is just behind the smaller part of the hood, so it is good to have some protection.