Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Art vs. Otus?  (Read 13128 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2014, 03:22:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, reading this thread, I can only assume two things: you are all much wealthier than I; you always use a tripod. If not, you're delusional.

I would own neither Porche nor VW; the Porche because it would drain my account pretty rapidly and any VW other than, perhaps, the Scirocco, because the rest of them share the glamour of a walnut.

When I was in business I always bought new, mainly because as, with cars, I felt buying used meant you simply took on board somebody else's problems. As it was all written off against tax anyhow, it made no sense to buy the cheapest and take on the risks. Now, long retired, I'm more careful with my pennies and have bought my last three lenses second-hand; three Nikkors: 2/35mm, 2.8/105mm Micro and 8/500mm reflex. All of them are non-af and feel as solid as a rock. I have absolutely no quibble with either physical state or delivery. They give what I expected from them and what else matters? I never look at any lens charts  because I don't honestly understand what they are all about, and even if I did, they would have zero influence in how I make pictures. Any regrets? Yes, I'd had all of these focal lengths for years, but sold them off in an absolute change to 6x7. I wish I hadn't done that, ever. I was delusional, too.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Theodoros
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #21 on: January 09, 2014, 10:46:31 AM »
ReplyReply

I was very impressed with the Sigma 35mmf1.4 optically however the AF was disappointing to a point where at one stage I considered selling it. I hope they do a better job with the new 50mm.

The bokeh and rendering in my opinion isnt as nice is my Zeiss 35mm f1.4. This maybe due to the fact the Sigma is so well corrected.

I think the new Otus is a marvel, so sharp yet renders so beautifully. No other lens that I am aware of comes close at doing both.
If one judges from architectural specification and bulk, it looks like the new ART 50 from Sigma, is going to be a more expensive lens than the ART 35mm… In addition, primes are usually better performing than WAs… As far as I know, the only other "standard" prime that has 77mm filter thread for f1.4 of aperture is the Otus, the Otus is also the only longer "standard" than the ART… The length and the number of groups and elements also suggests that the ART is a retrofocal design, which again (if it is) only the Otus is. Hence on paper, it can be concluded that: 1.Sigma aims higher than the usual makers lenses and 2.It will be a more expensive lens than the 35 and unusually expensive for Sigma… I think if its performance is close to Otus and given that the Sigma is AF, even with a price around 1000 it will be a major success… Of course all this is pure speculation for the moment, but… what is imagination for?
Logged
MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 897



WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 09, 2014, 11:03:49 AM »
ReplyReply

"what is imagination for?"

for me taking interesting photographs that reflect your view of the world rather than speculating on photographic gear prices  Roll Eyes

(sorry i couldn't resist  Grin  )
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7424


WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 09, 2014, 01:35:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Sigma has much larger production capacity than Zeiss and they have some cutting edge technology. They can produce plastic parts with 1 my precision, what they say.

It is probable that Sigma can produce lenses at lower cost than Zeiss, because they can produce larger numbers. The downsize is that manufacturing tolerances at Sigma are probably less tight than at Zeiss, but who knows.

Best regards
Erik


quote author=T.Dascalos link=topic=85847.msg696751#msg696751 date=1389285991]
If one judges from architectural specification and bulk, it looks like the new ART 50 from Sigma, is going to be a more expensive lens than the ART 35mm… In addition, primes are usually better performing than WAs… As far as I know, the only other "standard" prime that has 77mm filter thread for f1.4 of aperture is the Otus, the Otus is also the only longer "standard" than the ART… The length and the number of groups and elements also suggests that the ART is a retrofocal design, which again (if it is) only the Otus is. Hence on paper, it can be concluded that: 1.Sigma aims higher than the usual makers lenses and 2.It will be a more expensive lens than the 35 and unusually expensive for Sigma… I think if its performance is close to Otus and given that the Sigma is AF, even with a price around 1000 it will be a major success… Of course all this is pure speculation for the moment, but… what is imagination for?
[/quote]
Logged

Theodoros
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #24 on: January 09, 2014, 03:25:10 PM »
ReplyReply

"what is imagination for?"

for me taking interesting photographs that reflect your view of the world rather than speculating on photographic gear prices  Roll Eyes

(sorry i couldn't resist  Grin  )
There is no "instead" on imagination… That (what you describe) is called "visualisation".
Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 591


« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2014, 05:22:59 PM »
ReplyReply

A few years ago, who would've thought we'd be saying that a SIGMA lens might be second best, next to a top-of-the-line newly designed "BEST LENS IN THE WORLD" Zeiss?

How things have changed... and bravo Sigma.  Now let's get going on that full-frame high-megapixel Foveon DSLR, eh? 
Logged
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 874


« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2014, 07:30:04 PM »
ReplyReply

There's nothing wrong with second-hand or legacy lenses, I use them myself. I don't have many full frame lenses yet. I am using my own ancient manual M42 mount lenses and my father's no-longer-used manual Nikkor primes, including some with "the letters" (Q for 4 elements, P for 5 elements, etc) for normal and short telephoto. The lens that you have on your camera is the best lens, whatever its optical characteristics, because you are taking that picture and not saying, "can't do it, MTF is not good enough to bother shooting".
Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 591


« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2014, 07:45:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I think you're mixing up third-party lenses with legacy lenses.  I still have Contax Zeiss lenses that I've used for years that I will never sell.  With regards to third-party lenses, if you're implying that Sigma has always produced great lenses, then I strongly disagree with you.

The new lenses,  however are in a different league.  The 18-35 1.8 is going to be legendary in the amateur/prosumer/cinematography/motion picture/super35mm world, then there's the 35 1.4 and the lenses on the DP Merrill cameras that are world-class.  They are moving up. 
Logged
Paulo Bizarro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1585


WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 10, 2014, 03:07:08 AM »
ReplyReply

This is a very interesting lens, and potentially will be a top quality 50mm lens for FF DSLRs. The Zeiss Otus is another quality level up, maybe, but one has to pay a lot of dough to get that extra bit of performance. But it is sure good that there are options for all requirements.

I am a more pragmatic type of guy, so for my travel photography I like smaller 50mm lenses. Canon's 50 1.4 suits me fine; I know that there are better 50mm lenses out there, but so what? I don't want to lug around a heavy 50mm lens when I travel.

What I would like very much is for Canon to update their 50s 1.4 and 1.8 with the new designs and IS, like they did for the 24, 28, and 35mm lenses. Just improve the wide open image quality a little bit, and add IS.

Finally, once you run the 50 1,4 images through the lens correction profile say in LR, the lens is truly a bargain:)
Logged
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 874


« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2014, 02:16:54 PM »
ReplyReply

I didn't mean to imply that my legacy manual focus manual aperture lenses, which by necessity are third party lenses fit to the 6D by adapters, were going to equal the Zeiss. I am still enjoying shooting with them for the time being. Nikkor 50mm f/1.2, Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 are probably the cream of my closet selection, along with a very pleasant Mamiya-Sekor 60mm f/2.8 1:1 macro and several other M42 and Nikkor AI/AIS vintage lenses. The aberrations of the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 at f/1.2 are positively heroic in size, but it is fun to play with the aberrations wide open, and the lens is excellent at f/2.8 to f/8. It is very possible that the Canon Nifty Fifty or Shorty Forty could beat the MTFs of the old Nikkor, but those incredibly inexpensive lenses aren't really designed for manual focus.
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2014, 07:30:52 PM »
ReplyReply

The discussions keeps revolving around resolution and other optical matters. I think equal concern should be paid to build quality and mechanics.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7424


WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 11, 2014, 12:56:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

It is very hard to know about build quality and mechanics without actually picking apart a lens. I got the impression that the new Sigma A-series lenses are well built.

I have little doubt that the Otus are well built, and I guess that Zeiss has tighter limits on sample variations compared to pretty much everyone else.

This article by Roger Ciala is readworthy: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/assumptions-expectations-and-plastic-mounts

One observation is that they sometimes replace plastic parts, and that is no big deal, when metal parts are broken a lot more damage is done and the whole assembly is need of readjustment.

Best regards
Erik


The discussions keeps revolving around resolution and other optical matters. I think equal concern should be paid to build quality and mechanics.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2014, 01:00:14 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

Niels_Patrick
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 22, 2014, 11:17:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Little bit offtopic but at least I want to be the very first seeing an Otus 85 1,4 at photokina 2014. Maybe  Grin sweet dreams
Logged

_______________________
www.geisselbrecht.biz
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 874


« Reply #33 on: January 22, 2014, 01:00:01 PM »
ReplyReply

For fun, I looked up the optical designs, and the 35mm Sigma looks more complex and has one more "non-standard" element (4 exotic glass, 1 aspherical) than the 50mm Sigma (3 exotic glass, 1 aspherical). The Otus 55 mm is chock full of special elements (6 exotic glass, 1 aspherical). Retrofocus design on Sigma 50 and Otus 55 accounts for extra elements, length, weight vs. usual Planar-type 50-ish lenses.
Logged
Josef Isayo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 122


« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2014, 02:35:15 PM »
ReplyReply

My Sigma ART 35mm F/1.4 is an exceptional lens though it's easily beaten at F/2.8 by the cheap Canon 40mm pancake.
Logged

Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 655


WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2014, 02:41:20 PM »
ReplyReply

My Sigma ART 35mm F/1.4 is an exceptional lens though it's easily beaten at F/2.8 by the cheap Canon 40mm pancake.

In what ways? And I'm not trying to be argumentative (I have one of those 40s myself, and find it very sharp); just interested in your observations here.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7424


WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2014, 03:00:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Just a general observation, it is possible to build a good f/2.8 lens with fewer elements. Those elements are also smaller, so there is more degree of freedom in positioning. So there is a lot of design compromise involved in making a large aperture lens. If antireflex coating is equal, a lens with more air/glass surfaces will have more flare compared with a simple design of equal quality.

Best regards
Erik

In what ways? And I'm not trying to be argumentative (I have one of those 40s myself, and find it very sharp); just interested in your observations here.
Logged

MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 336


« Reply #37 on: January 23, 2014, 07:00:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd love to se a line of super sharp f/2 or even f/2.8 primes. The market seems obsessed with super fast lenses though.

Hi,

Just a general observation, it is possible to build a good f/2.8 lens with fewer elements. Those elements are also smaller, so there is more degree of freedom in positioning. So there is a lot of design compromise involved in making a large aperture lens. If antireflex coating is equal, a lens with more air/glass surfaces will have more flare compared with a simple design of equal quality.

Best regards
Erik

Logged
Some Guy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 346


« Reply #38 on: January 23, 2014, 07:47:53 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing Sigma did that the other manufacturers didn't is that $60 docking station that allows you to fine tune the AF to your camera body.  That should be an option with Canon, and more so with Nikon since Nikon only allows for one fine tuning point on their zooms where Canon has two.

Nice to see Sigma sort of understands the AF issues and sometimes the need to upgrade the firmware, rather than mail it in, wait, and pray they did it right.  Factory techs often rush and get sloppy, or don't care.

SG
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7996



WWW
« Reply #39 on: January 23, 2014, 03:30:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd love to se a line of super sharp f/2 or even f/2.8 primes. The market seems obsessed with super fast lenses though.

Isn't that exactly the thing Nikon provides with their f1.8 series?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad