Posts: 646
Threads: 18
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
1
Klaus, thanks for your update.
I don't know what the charts are showing, but by looking the landscape shots both lenses look about the same.
Posts: 430
Threads: 7
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
09-25-2013, 08:25 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-26-2013, 05:15 AM by Rainer.)
Comparing just the images you linked from the EF 35/2 IS and from the Sigma 35/1.4,
I have to say, I find the images taken with the Canon more inspired. That is probably
due to the scenery available in the moment you had the lens ... at least partly. For
myself, I often find, if a lens is a joy to use, the pictures taken with it turn out better,
somehow at least.
Just a subjective observation ... Rainer
PS: If that's the remnants of the "London Bridge" in picture 6, it seems
you spend some days around the "great ocean road" ... some really
nice spots to take photographs there.
Hello Klaus
What a place! Where is it?
Regarding the lens:
Is that me or the bokeh does not look particularly good?
Posts: 8,004
Threads: 1,851
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
If you are referring to these "melting" sandstone formations - this is in Bouddi National Park just north of Sydney.
The arc island is in Port Campbell National Park to the west of Melbourne.
I'd say that the bokeh of the Canon lens is very good compared to others in this class (like the Sigma). Still - it's a wide angle lens and as such not perfect.
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
It would be really nice to see a side-by-side comparison of the same subject with the same settings.
Posts: 8,004
Threads: 1,851
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
The standard test has standard scenarios where the difference is easily visible.
The Sigma test should be online on Saturday, the Canon on Sunday.
