Sigma 35mm f1.4

Symphotic

I've got one on order, but I want to try it in the store before I buy. My dealer had one last week, but I couldn't get off work to try it and he only agreed to hold it one day. So it's gone. No rush, but I do think 35 is a useful lens for FX, and I wasn't really impressed with the Nikkor 35...

jerl

Here's a comparison of the Sigma to the Nikon 35/1.4G from the same site as the Canon/Sigma comparison.

The Nikon seems to hold up fairly well. Given some of the test results and remarks that people have said, I'm surprised that Nikon performs as well as it does.

http://lcap.tistory.com/entry/Sigma-A-35-mm-f14-DG-HSM-vs-Nikon-AF-S-35-mm-f14G

Symphotic

Here's a comparison of the Sigma to the Nikon 35/1.4G from the same site as the Canon/Sigma comparison...
The Nikon seems to hold up fairly well. Given some of the test results and remarks that people have said, I'm surprised that Nikon performs as well as it does....

I'm not sure I'm seeing what you're seeing: the images don't start to compare in quality until about f/5.6. I don't think Nikon made as much effort in this lens as they did in many of the other lenses they make, which has created an opportunity for Sigma. For the money, I'll wait for the Sigma. My dealer will let me try them both on my camera.

Msmoto

This must be a phenomenal lens...Amazon has only one at double retail. I will order mine when the supply gets back up.

Sqaumish...do you have your lens yet?

shawnino

I've yet to find a review that doesn't say it's superior to or at least level with Nikkor/C****. I mean, not one. Contrast, distortion, bokeh, whatever. If I needed a fast 35, I'd be all over this like a cheap suit.

SquamishPhoto

No word yet and I actually cancelled my order. I need more materials for studio work, so I reallocated the funds. Its supposed to be arriving this month at a lot of places, or so I read.

JJ_SO

Last thursday I had my Sigma with me to take a nice sunrise. I noticed, the screen stayed black when I wanted to display a picture to check. LiveView was working, info-screen wasn't. AF didn't work. After a while of some switch ON and OFF, the D800 behaved like normal again. The same with the D7000. Both bodies made problems, but that's new and wasn't before.

But only with the Sigma. Now, I need to say I never switch off the cams when I change lenses. And that worked fine the past four years with all Nikkor lenses and the Pentax lenses before. I'm suspecting it has something to do with the processor in the Sigma lens (or whatever is going to be updated by USB adapter, when available).

A friend of mine told me, he needs to switch off his D90 all the time , otherwise just this is happening. I find that a bit odd - do pros really switch off the bodies for a lens change? I would expect the electronic should be able to cope with?

Ironheart

Every Nikon DSLR manual I've ever read says to turn off the camera before changing lenses. The way the electrical contacts are arranged in the mounting flange causes you to drag all of the pins across the contacts before locking into place. Kinda like Russian roulette with electrical signals...

JJ_SO

In the past two years I bought a dozen lenses and three bodies and had never a problem with them. I also can't reproduce the symptoms. None of the contacts could be shortened by just changing the lens, especially not if I don't change in slowmotion. If I get a good reason I try to change my change habits. What Nikon writes in manuals has to be foolproof and I agree, the safest way is to switch OFF - but I doubt that all users are doing it all time.

PB_PM

JJ_OS I think you're smart enough to realize that if you remove an electronic item from a live circuit you are likely to have a problem. The electrons don't care how fast you do it. Just because it doesn't happen every time doesn't mean it does not have the potential to fry a circuit board of your camera. It seems like an unnecessary risk from my point of view. I've done it by mistake a few times, but I don't make a practice of leaving my camera on while switching lenses.

Golf007sd

Another reason to turn the body off, it that it will keep unwanted object from getting on to the sensor. Some where I read that the sensor is "charged" thus it has the potential of attracting dust.

As to the topic, looking forward in getting some feed back from those that get it. Would be nice to have a 35mm in the bag for my pro body.

JJ_SO

PB_MP, you mean electronic devices like, say, USB sticks? hot-pluggable HDs? SD cards? rechargeable batteries out of the charger?

let's face it, we often do things we better don't do or are told by the manual not to do. And also, engineers learnt how to prevent bigger risks for gear. It may have been trued for the first generations of DSLRs but I don't think, Nikon puts that sentence into the manual for other reasons than to avoid discussions with customers. "We told you..." I don't think, you can fry a logic board of a camera these days by just not switching off before lens change. That might have been true in the old days, like the not-more-than-200ISO limit to avoid noise.

It's not logical, that nothing happened to me in the past 4 years like that, and I never switched off a body only for lens change. That has to be possible - you don't switch off a car just because you're changing driver seats with your friend although the manual will state you have to. I know some of the US manuals and I know some of the reasons they have to be so over-scary.

It is a risk - of course you can damage the contacts or shortening them by touching them with a piece of metal. But the lens has no own power supply and the camera does react to a lens change by switching the contacts off, I suppose. So my suggestion to everybody is "don't copy that, switch off for every lens change and let me be responsible for what I'm doing with my gear"

PB_PM

It might not have happened to you, but I know people who fried there cameras doing it. I've never been in a situation where I couldn't afford to take the extra 500s of second to turn the camera off, so I'll stick to tuning the camera off before switching.

Msmoto

@ JJ_SO
To quote you...let's face it, we often do things we better don't do or are told by the manual not to do. And also, engineers learnt how to prevent bigger risks for gear

I would suspect most of the folks on NRF follow the directions in the manual. On occasion, we do make errors, but for the most part, we are able to follow the directions and attempt to not screw up our equipment. On the old forum, this issue was discussed about turning the camera off before changing lenses, and if I remember correctly, the consensus was to turn the body off. Apparently, while the risk is low, on occasion damage or malfunctions will occur if the lens is changed powered up. But, the question I would have is "Why take a chance".

JJ_SO

If I fry my camera - it's my problem, isn't it? As I said, this might have been true for older bodies, I doubt it still is. But who am I, with only 20.000 Nikon pics and another 10.000 Pentax, but no fried logic board? Keep it safe and I do my frying game am still waiting for the first smoke cloud.

Nearly forgot to answer your question "Why take a chance?": Because it's another switch I'd have to think off - and there are already enough of them, maybe even too much.

CEBlueclouds

I don't have either a 24 1.4 or a 35 1.4...considering a purchase for a while now but now have the Sigma 35 1.4 on back order. this would be my second sigma lens; first being the 150-500 (an impulse purchase in 2008) which has decent quality but focuses slow...

Symphotic

I picked the lens up at my supplier today. My comments:

This is a very well made lens. I ran some tests with it our our test fixtures here (which are more for video, but it's all I've got) and the edge to edge sharpness is great, no visible coma in the far corners. I've got my manual focus f/1.4 35mm Nikon here, but I don't have time to test them both.

I like this focal length in 35 mm (FX) format as it allows me to frame more of the photo than what I need so I can see through the viewfinder what is going on around my subject.

Just for grins, I took it home at lunch to see what kind of baby pictures it can take at f/1.4. You boke fans should like this a lot: Here's the link, or look at PAD. http://www.flickr.com/photos/symphotic/8451884010/

With the $620 I saved over the Nikkor equivalent I am upgrading to a RRS tripod head, and I'll buy another round of drinks for my inkjet printer.

Msmoto

I am waiting for Amazon to get one....

autofocus

Just received mine and all I can say is WOW!. Had to take a few shots in the house to try it and the RAW files blew me away. Color, sharpness, and AF are great. Can't wait to get out tomorrow and really put it through it's paces.

shawnino

Autofocus: That's a great image!

Msmoto

Mmmm... I am actually waiting on Adorama to ship mine....ordered a few weeks ago....

JJ_SO

I'm still waiting to see the "somehow nervous bokeh" some testers saw :-?? but it took a while until I accepted to have to adjust the AF tuning with this lens and to change my AF settings I was used to as well. Now it's even greater.



One night after tuning the AF I took it out and decided, all pictures have to be @ f/1.4 to see if I got it right. I think so, I aimed at the knob of the pot on this oven which has 4 inches height without the chimney and was in a shopping window of an antique shop.

And next week I get the lens caps from Sigma to exchange all Nikon rear caps. Looking forward to it, making lens change easier for me.

NSXTypeR

Wow, Sigma just launched an updated 30mm 1.4- I'm somewhat tempted to get the 30mm just because I've always wanted something wider than 35mm on DX.

Especially with all these glowing reviews on the 35mm 1.4.

PB_PM

I'm still waiting to see the "somehow nervous bokeh" some testers saw :-??

I can see nervous bokeh in your sample shot there...

JJ_SO

I'm glad for you. We appear to have different ideas about "nervous bokeh"