Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sigma 35mm f1.2 DN vignets like crazy?
#1
Probably partly due to the very narrow E-mount....
https://www.lenstip.com/566.8-Lens_revie...tting.html

So, it does not reach anywhere near f1.4 light levels even, so no use getting it to be able to shoot in lower light. And not very nice bokeh (a "pulled apart" quality to it, probably partly due to the huge vignetting), so... It kinda misses both of the f1.2 points?
#2
(09-25-2019, 06:52 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: Probably partly due to the very narrow E-mount....
https://www.lenstip.com/566.8-Lens_revie...tting.html

So, it does not reach anywhere near f1.4 light levels even, so no use getting it to be able to shoot in lower light. And not very nice bokeh (a "pulled apart" quality to it, probably partly due to the huge vignetting), so... It kinda misses both of the f1.2 points?

That is a misconception from you. f/1.2 or f/1.4 always shows vignetting, no matter how big the mount-Ø is. And most of it does also come from the microlens geometry of the sensor which can't counteract against normal optical rules, bit on the contrary is amplifying them. 

And as there is no other lens to shoot at low light, there's not much of a choice - no one will put the main subject into the corners and no one will take reproductions of paintings or whatever with such a lens(brick). It is meant for desperate need of the last bit of photons coming in, and it is also meant to play with superthin DoF - and knowing Sigma's approach, it is also meant to show off what they can do - but it can't be a match for Canon's 85/1.2 approach(es) on their R mount. And what Nikon can do in terms of big mount (mouth as well...where's the f/0.95?) still has to be seen Smile

There are other lenses with "flaws" which are producing unique pictures. I don't see the Sigma 35/1.2 as a close to perfect lens, but as one with a certain character - you like it or not.
I don't see much of a benefit from f/1.2 to f/1.4, here we can agree, but there were some shots on DPReview's samples I could not do with any of my f/1.4 lenses.
#3
Of course you will always see vigetting. Many aspects contribute to that. But here, I bet the small mount diameter constrains the optics a lot, contributing to the extreme vignetting. 2 stops loss in the corners or 4 stops, that is a rather big difference.
#4
(09-25-2019, 08:59 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: Of course you will always see vigetting. Many aspects contribute to that. But here, I bet the small mount diameter constrains the optics a lot, contributing to the extreme vignetting. 2 stops loss in the corners or 4 stops, that is a rather big difference.

No denying here.

On the other side, the Z-mount is really big - but when I use the 14-30/4 S and compare it to the same picture made with the 14-24/2.8 Art, the Art shows much less vignetting than the (already software corrected) genuine S lens. And not only wide open - at regular apertures like f/5.6...f/11. A bit weird, I have the feeling Nikon promised something else  Rolleyes

14-24/2.8  f/10:
[Image: i-s5XNHV5-X2.jpg]


14-30/4  f/10:
[Image: i-7JDXMT2-X2.jpg]
#5
All the f/1.4 wideangles Klaus had tested in the Canon mount have 3 stops of vignetting (or more) wide open - the 35/1.4 L II was no exception. If we stick to the Lenstip measurements the 24/1.4 L II even had over 4 stops (Klaus found 3.3), so I'm not sure there's anything out of ordinary here. Ultrafast lenses vignette a lot wide open. Wide angle ones even more so.
#6
Well, the 24mm f1.4 L mk II is UWA and severely retrofocus, which does result in a LOT of microlens light fall off. 35mm is not that wide angle, so kinda comparing apples to pears.

On the other hand, Canon's RF 50mm f1.2 L USM does vignet quite a bit too, it would be nice to see easily comparable results from one source.
#7
Well, you've answered your own question. Smile Even the 50L RF does, as you say, "vignette like crazy", despite being used on an allegedly better mount. I've checked a few reviews of Canon mount ultrafast (f/1.4 or brighter) lenses here on PZ and, as a rule, the vignetting only gets better by 85mm (1.8 stops on average for 85mm f/1.4 lenses wide open, same for the 1.2 L). At 35mm, the Sigma f/1.4 and the original Canon L are, interestingly, a little better behaved in this regard than the L II (2.65 and 2.4 stops WO, respectively).
#8
(09-27-2019, 07:37 AM)Rover Wrote: Well, you've answered your own question. Smile Even the 50L RF does, as you say, "vignette like crazy", despite being used on an allegedly better mount. I've checked a few reviews of Canon mount ultrafast (f/1.4 or brighter) lenses here on PZ and, as a rule, the vignetting only gets better by 85mm (1.8 stops on average for 85mm f/1.4 lenses wide open, same for the 1.2 L). At 35mm, the Sigma f/1.4 and the original Canon L are, interestingly, a little better behaved in this regard than the L II (2.65 and 2.4 stops WO, respectively).

Which question have I answered?

Anyway, lets actually look at some data. The Canon EF 35mm f1.4 L USM II is a DSLR lens which should be at a disadvantage due to the flange distance combined with the focal length.
Same source, lenstip (which does not have the same platform to platform issue OL has regarding vignetting, as far as I know) says this lens vignets 2.88 stops in the corners. That is 1 stop less than the sigma which is 1/2 a stop faster. Somehow that does not explain things well, losing more light than the aperture gains.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)