[JJ_SO]

f/1.2 is half stop faster, I thought. f/1, 1.4, 2, 2.8 is the row I have I mind. But of course, difference is tiny and marginal, and can easily be eaten up by different transmission values. SLR land really offers faster glass than f/1.2 at least in my mind: Canon 50/1.0 (so they CAN do faster lenses, lots of them...)


http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions...for-a-dslr

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/08/...l2kRsTGurU


And here is one f/0.95 for FF: http://www.meyer-optik-goerlitz.de/nocturnus-f095-50mm/ currently in production.


Don't want to split hair, but the choices are a bit more. And of course, all of them very exotic and only good for saying "it"s more fast glass around" 8)


Now, I agree, the 35L II is really a nice thing of glass and surely capapble to resolve far more than "only" 50 MP. In centre. The sheer numbers "35/1.4” to me remain asking "nice, but what IS better on it than on others of the same specs?"


And I don't only have Sigma 35/1.4 since two years or longer? But also replaced the Nikkor 24/1.4 against the Sigma art version which still gives more crisp and crunch. Depending of the distance and aperture, I also like the bokeh better. But that's predictable to read from my side.