Sigma Art 1.2/35 or Apo-Summicron-SL 2.0/35 ASPH

[Ivar B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sean Reid has just published a very interesting review of these lenses used on Leica SL and SL2, and Panasonic S1R.

I am not going to undermine Seans livelihood by discussing the results here (it is well worth the money subscribing to his service), but it must be possible to state that the Leica lens is clearly the better lens in most respects, but the Sigma lens delivers outstanding results (in blind tests you could not see which is which), save perhaps chromatic aberration. 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Ivar B said:

in blind tests you could not see which is which

A funny choice of words 😄

[natthayu]

Last year I bought a Sigma 35/1.2 but ended up selling it. The lens itself is bulky and heavy. The real issue was that the lens showed severe chromatic aberrations wide open, except for the center part. Also if my memory didn’t go wrong, the lens wasn’t sharp and clean on the outer 1/3 part of the image until f/2 or so.

The Sigma is an overall outstanding lens for sure. I love the look at f/1.2 a lot, but I like the rendition of the Apo even more. So now I have the Apo in my bag.

Performance wise, it’s a bit like choosing between Noctilux and Apo M50/2. 

[mmradman]

Case of comparing apples and oranges. If Sigma made 35mm as f2 or Leica made 35mm as f1.2 comparison would perhaps be more realistic. As it is the choice is between super fast budget brick of a lens or moderate speed premium priced big lens.

 

 

[vincent_1919]

I'd say both because they cannot replace each other. But if you don't care about chromatic aberration, go for the Sigma. 

In real world, no one will be dissatisfied with the image produced by Sigma 35mm f/1.2 at F2, and how people appreciate the difference of rendering is highly subjective. 

[Ivar B]

11 hours ago, natthayu said:

Last year I bought a Sigma 35/1.2 but ended up selling it. The lens itself is bulky and heavy. The real issue was that the lens showed severe chromatic aberrations wide open, except for the center part. Also if my memory didn’t go wrong, the lens wasn’t sharp and clean on the outer 1/3 part of the image until f/2 or so.

The Sigma is an overall outstanding lens for sure. I love the look at f/1.2 a lot, but I like the rendition of the Apo even more. So now I have the Apo in my bag.

Performance wise, it’s a bit like choosing between Noctilux and Apo M50/2. 

I have not tested it, but I should think that chromatic aberration to a large extent could be sorted out by firmware. Sean Reid eliminated the codes in his tests so he could focus on lens perfomance in isolation.

Interestingly, the Apo 2/35 did not trigger any firmware optimization at all. It seems to be perfect as it is. Reid pointed out in an earlier test of the Summilux-SL 1.4/50 that the firmware optimization for this lens was substantial. 

[natthayu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Ivar B said:

I have not tested it, but I should think that chromatic aberration to a large extent could be sorted out by firmware. Sean Reid eliminated the codes in his tests so he could focus on lens perfomance in isolation.

Interestingly, the Apo 2/35 did not trigger any firmware optimization at all. It seems to be perfect as it is. Reid pointed out in an earlier test of the Summilux-SL 1.4/50 that the firmware optimization for this lens was substantial. 

Unfortunately I'm currently not subscribed to Reid's review. : (

It's true that chromatic aberrations can be eliminated with little effort in LR. Weight and size was also a major reason why I sold it.

All three Apo-Summicron-SLs I have (35, 50 & 90) don't have baked-in correction profiles. They are really near perfect lenses IMO. C1 does offer profiles for Apo-Summicron-SL lenses. When applied, they only correct minute distortions and vignetting. I don't think these lenses need digital corrections except for really really critical usages.

I have not tried the Summilux-SL 50, so I could not give any comments. : )

[Chaemono]

Am 5.5.2020 um 13:55 schrieb natthayu:

All three Apo-Summicron-SLs I have (35, 50 & 90) don't have baked-in correction profiles. They are really near perfect lenses IMO. C1 does offer profiles for Apo-Summicron-SL lenses. When applied, they only correct minute distortions and vignetting. I don't think these lenses need digital corrections except for really really critical usages.

Interesting. LR doesn’t offer profiles for Summicron-SL lenses. So, for really critical usages, one should work with C1 instead of LR then. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

On 5/4/2020 at 11:52 PM, natthayu said:

Last year I bought a Sigma 35/1.2 but ended up selling it. 

 

Do you still have some of the files shot with the SL and the Sigma 35/1.2.  (A file shot with an SL2 would be even nicer.)

I don't care about the image, but would just like to observe the strength of the distortion corrections and any LCA differences that the DNG contains.

If you have a file to share just pm me.  Thanks.

 

[SJH]

I’m relatively new to the SL2 as I’ve come from the M10P, Q, MP world and more recently I bought a Q2. I was looking to buy the SL35 but in the end I decided that I’d buy a Q2 and the Sigma 35 1.2 for my SL. My logic was that for not much more cash, compared to the SL35, I was getting a another Leica with a 1.7 lens (and 35mm F2 when cropped to 35), plus an outstanding 1.2 lens for my SL2. If I want light and portable for 28mm and 35mm I take the Q2 and then I have a very well balanced 1.2 lens for the SL2. 

Ultimately I took a similar view to Patrick in his article here http://findingrange.com/2019/11/11/sigma-35mm-f1-2-dg-dn-art-lens-review-for-l-mount/

Whislt not specifically relevant to the original post I also have my M 35mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.4 lenses which I also enjoy using on the SL2 when the mood takes me. I maybe in a minority of course but I’ve therefore not bothered with any SL lenses as for me they’re in the ‘middle ground’ and when I want all bases covered I’ve got the 24-90 which I bought with the SL2 originally. 

[Fedro]

14 hours ago, SJH said:

I’m relatively new to the SL2 as I’ve come from the M10P, Q, MP world and more recently I bought a Q2. I was looking to buy the SL35 but in the end I decided that I’d buy a Q2 and the Sigma 35 1.2 for my SL. My logic was that for not much more cash, compared to the SL35, I was getting a another Leica with a 1.7 lens (and 35mm F2 when cropped to 35), plus an outstanding 1.2 lens for my SL2. If I want light and portable for 28mm and 35mm I take the Q2 and then I have a very well balanced 1.2 lens for the SL2. 

Ultimately I took a similar view to Patrick in his article here http://findingrange.com/2019/11/11/sigma-35mm-f1-2-dg-dn-art-lens-review-for-l-mount/

Whislt not specifically relevant to the original post I also have my M 35mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.4 lenses which I also enjoy using on the SL2 when the mood takes me. I maybe in a minority of course but I’ve therefore not bothered with any SL lenses as for me they’re in the ‘middle ground’ and when I want all bases covered I’ve got the 24-90 which I bought with the SL2 originally. 

interesting approach. What do you mean by "middle ground"?

[SJH]

On 5/8/2020 at 10:58 PM, Fedro said:

interesting approach. What do you mean by "middle ground"?

Thanks Fedro and by 'middle ground' I was meaning that I wanted an AF lens for my SL2 with at least f1.4 so for me (and as per Patrick's review above) the Sigma 35mm f1.2 is a really fantastic lens. I looked at the 35SL f2.0 when I got my SL2 but it just struck me that for the same money I could have the Q2 with a f1.7 Leica lens at 28mm (no 28 SL f2.0 yet) and then if I wanted to I could crop to 35mm f2.0 in camera. So for walking around with the SL2 sensor, for the same money as the SL35, I can use the Q2 for 28mm and 35mm and it weighs less than the SL2 with the 35SL f2.0. I also bought the Sigma 45mm 2.8 which, whilst not an SL APO lens, in probably 90/95% of the way there for only £500, I also rather like this focal length.

At the 75mm SL APO focal length my 24-90 for me is really excellent so at the moment probably my next lens might be the 90mm SL APO F2.

[Fedro]

1 minute ago, SJH said:

Thanks Fedro and by 'middle ground' I was meaning that I wanted an AF lens for my SL2 with at least f1.4 so for me (and as per Patrick's review above) the Sigma 35mm f1.2 is a really fantastic lens. I looked at the 35SL f2.0 when I got my SL2 but it just struck me that for the same money I could have the Q2 with a f1.7 Leica lens at 28mm (no 28 SL f2.0 yet) and then if I wanted to I could crop to 35mm f2.0 in camera. So for walking around with the SL2 sensor, for the same money as the SL35, I can use the Q2 for 28mm and 35mm and it weighs less than the SL2 with the 35SL f2.0. I also bought the Sigma 45mm 2.8 which, whilst not an SL APO lens, in probably 90/95% of the way there for only £500, I also rather like this focal length.

At the 75mm SL APO focal length my 24-90 for me is really excellent so at the moment probably my next lens might be the 90mm SL APO F2.

thank you and makes sense, I did similar reasoning a while ago and ended up getting the Q2 and the 90 for the same reasons that you mention, I have since sold the Q2 as I would prefer to have the SL 28 when it comes out, we shall see. Happy shooting 

[SJH]

We'll I'm also toying with that idea of the SL28 but with C-19 I could see that be a while off now!!

[Fedro]

3 hours ago, SJH said:

We'll I'm also toying with that idea of the SL28 but with C-19 I could see that be a while off now!!

with C19 you won't have the temptation for a while, I suspect things are pretty much delayed anyways ..  

[Mick H]

I use the 35 f/1.2 Art on my SL and S1H.  Shooting wide open yields silky bokeh with sharp in focus details.  It compliments my Noct 1.0, however the Sigma will close focus and become a great food and flower lens.  The SL 24-90 is my go-to lens for general use.  The 35mm focal length is my preference for environmental portraits and shooting the Sigma wide open with off camera HSS flash is a treat.  The Sigma is easy to use in near darkness  - the EVF thrives on the f/1.2 light transmission.  I have not had the chance to use the 35 APO.  

 

[Jared]

On 5/6/2020 at 10:23 AM, Chaemono said:

Interesting. LR doesn’t offer profiles for Summicron-SL lenses. So, for really critical usages, one should work with C1 instead of LR then. 

No need. It’s easy enough to determine the required distortion and vignetting corrections for yourself if you care that much. The only challenge at all is that vignetting will vary slightly by both aperture and focus distance, so you might need to spend an hour or two one time to figure out a table of values. Obviously, this is less convenient than using Capture 1, but the corrections required are very small so you would not need to bother for the vast majority of your photography.

[tom0511]

For my taste the Sigma is quite big. The zooms for SL are big allready so I enjoy each time when I can use a smaller Summicron on the SL2. Pricewise....ok, it is really steep and it is not f1.2 for those who want such narrow DOF. For me f2.0 is fast enough 98%. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[wjdrijfhout]

On 5/6/2020 at 7:23 PM, Chaemono said:

So, for really critical usages, one should work with C1 instead of LR then.

That’s a good habit anyway...