The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

Ive got a Zeiss 35 1.4 as I loaned my Tamron 28-75 to a videographer friend to use at a wedding. He has loaned me his 35 as it will be a backup for my wedding on Tuesday.

Gonna check it out here and see how they stack up !
 
I was cleaning it there with the rocket blower and noticed debris blow out when I cleaned the front element. Is there meant to be a gap between the front element and the bit that its connected to ?20180708_185249.jpg
 
F/1.4 said:
I was cleaning it there with the rocket blower and noticed debris blow out when I cleaned the front element. Is there meant to be a gap between the front element and the bit that its connected to ?View attachment 130035
Click to expand...

Not that I have noticed.
This lens has one of the best weathersealing. If anything is not as per that then there is something wrong with it.

But may be there is a small gap - https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/12/sony-fe-35mm-f1-4-za-lens-teardown/
 
I've probably got 300+ Sigma 35 Art photos in my portfolio and I can't say I've ever noticed fussy or intrusive bokeh. If I don't notice it I can be 100% confident my clients don't either.

Would love to see some examples.
 
Any using the native Sigma ART lenses yet?

What are your thoughts generally, as well as with regards to AF performance, sharpness etc..
 
JohnBradbury said:
Any using the native Sigma ART lenses yet?

What are your thoughts generally, as well as with regards to AF performance, sharpness etc..
Click to expand...

I use the native arts, for stills they work absolutely brilliant. Like a perfect version of the dslr ones minus the crap af fine tune necessity
 
I notice a weird thing with adaptor via mc-11 yesterday and today. I’m not really sure what happened but there’s seems to be like a pause/delay from pressing the shutter to the shot being taking, then it would be totally fine again and it seems intermittent and if I put a native lens on and it goes away. Not sure what’s going on.
 
o
ukaskew said:
I've probably got 300+ Sigma 35 Art photos in my portfolio and I can't say I've ever noticed fussy or intrusive bokeh. If I don't notice it I can be 100% confident my clients don't either.

Would love to see some examples.
Click to expand...

Notice any weird streaks/smearing in the corners of your photos? I've seen quite a few examples of it - bit weird.

Bokeh wise, Sammy has a touch more CA, but rounder bokeh (as you move out from the centre, the Art's bokeh turns cat eyed, which i'm not a fan of).
 
Just ordered the A7iii with F4 24-105 (London Camera Exchange).
My 5Dii is starting to feel like a dinosaur and experience with the RX100V has been very positive.
I'm in two minds about getting one of these adapters to use the lovely Canon F4 70-200 and Sigma F1.4 50mm
I'm thinking the Sony 24-105 will do everything I need.
 
4wd said:
Just ordered the A7iii with F4 24-105 (London Camera Exchange).
My 5Dii is starting to feel like a dinosaur and experience with the RX100V has been very positive.
I'm in two minds about getting one of these adapters to use the lovely Canon F4 70-200 and Sigma F1.4 50mm
I'm thinking the Sony 24-105 will do everything I need.
Click to expand...
If it's sigma ART you can get a native version also now. Unless you need the f1.4 I'd suggest the FE55 which is every bit as sharp as ART but weighs a lot less. There is also a Sony 70-200mm f4 which is decent.
 
JohnBradbury said:
Any using the native Sigma ART lenses yet?

What are your thoughts generally, as well as with regards to AF performance, sharpness etc..
Click to expand...

Can't imagine a better 35mm 1.4 at that price. Af and sharpness esp are amazing. Id love a 1.8 version for weight reasons, but even still it's not unusably heavy on 12hour shoots.

I'm not a wall-shooting, pixel-peeping, bokeh-analyzer though.
 
decigallen said:
Can't imagine a better 35mm 1.4 at that price. Af and sharpness esp are amazing. Id love a 1.8 version for weight reasons, but even still it's not unusably heavy on 12hour shoots.

I'm not a wall-shooting, pixel-peeping, bokeh-analyzer though.
Click to expand...

Even if you were you wouldn't find much wrong. Awesome lens and a complete bargain compared to the Zeiss.

650 v 1350 quid.
 
twist said:
Even if you were you wouldn't find much wrong. Awesome lens and a complete bargain compared to the Zeiss.

650 v 1350 quid.
Click to expand...

I tested both lastnight and I prefer the Sigma. Its definitely a sharper lens. Size wise theyre also almost the exact same.
 
F/1.4 said:
I tested both lastnight and I prefer the Sigma. Its definitely a sharper lens. Size wise theyre also almost the exact same.
Click to expand...
It's definitely sharper wide open but Zeiss is sharper past f2.

Regardless how does the AF of both compare?
 
twist said:
Meh, buy an f1.4 lens to shoot at f2.8.... nope. Not to mention the CA and decentering. Edit Doesn't look sharper over f2 at dxo.
Click to expand...

DXO say they both have same CA.

Zeiss does look evenly sharper from f1.8 at DXO.

not to mention zeiss also has higher peak sharpness according to DXO.

If the QC was better zeiss is definitely a better overall lens. Renders lot nicely too which is more important than critical sharpness at f1.4.

View media item 13267
think I just convinced myself to buy another zeiss :banghead::banghead:
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
DXO say they both have same CA.

Zeiss does look evenly sharper from f1.8 at DXO.

not to mention zeiss also has higher peak sharpness according to DXO.

If the QC was better zeiss is definitely a better overall lens. Renders lot nicely too which is more important than critical sharpness at f1.4.

View media item 13267
Click to expand...

Lets do a real comparison with equal MP cameras shall we....

Screen Shot 2018-07-09 at 13.04.16.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-09 at 13.04.48.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-09 at 13.05.47.png
 
twist said:
Lets do a real comparison with equal MP cameras shall we....
Click to expand...

I suggest you look at my comparison again. My comparison is more 'real' than yours.
It was zeiss on A7RII vs. sigma on A99II both of which basically have the exact same 42mp sensor.

Why don't you post screen shots of above two which is more apples vs. apples than your comparison :P
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Yep!
View media item 13267
p.s. what this actually proves is that DXO is inconsistent and BS but believe what you want :p
Click to expand...

The Sigma is definitely sharper, so is the Samyang. The SZ is known for bad CA wide open, I saw it in my testing.

SZ is good for AF and OOF. Guess it depends on what's most important.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
The Sigma is definitely sharper, so is the Samyang. The SZ is known for bad CA wide open, I saw it in my testing.

SZ is good for AF and OOF.
Click to expand...

They both are sharper that SZ wide open. At about f2 I don't really notice much difference with the three. So I think debating that with dxo as reference (which is rather inconsistent itself) is moot.

Well some of us like our bokehs :D
I can't afford any of them till I sell my A7RII anyway :(
 
nandbytes said:
They both are sharper that SZ wide open. At about f2 I don't really notice much difference with the three. So I think debating that with dxo as reference (which is rather inconsistent itself) is moot.

Well some of us like our bokehs :D
Click to expand...

So do I, but also like sharpness wide open and lack of purple halos. :p

Both are good lenses in their own way.
 
Dxo is as valid as most online reviews/opinions. None are always accurate. Obviously it's important to be as well informed as possible and try the lens first.

You seem to know your way around dxo :confused:
 
Last edited:
I prefer the unbiased opinions of YouTubers and bloggers, also images that have been PPd to death @ 720p :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
ISO 6400 ! and yes, its the Zeiss 35/1.4 :p


BtFGMEO.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top