Sigma Lens question

[analog-digital]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everybody

I only have one lens for my SL, the Sigma 14-24mm f / 2.8 DG DN Art L.

Now I should have less wide angle. Either that

• Sigma 24-70mm / f 2.8 DG DN Art L-Mount

or

• Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art

Can someone tell me their experiences with the two lenses?

[Advertisement]

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

[Anakronox]

I know it’s not in the list you provided, but I just picked up the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.2.  It is bigger than the 1.4, but also is weather sealed and after testing both, I preferred the better optics of the 1.2.  Excellent lens, though heavy.  

[anrotil68]

I also tried the sigma 35 1,2, excellent slow but very heavy and bulky. I wanted to try the SIGMA 35 1,4 but I don't know the yield and I also wanted to compare the yield with the LEICA 35 F2 APO .. which costs much, much more!

[Stef63]

Sorry, here also a very happy Sigma 35 1.2 user. It’s “enormous” compared to my M 35 Summilux FLE (one of the top M lenses) and 35 Summicron Typ IV... but the results are magnificent and certainly hold up against the Leica 35 M lenses on the SL2

[analog-digital]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Anakronox:

It is bigger than the 1.4, but also is weather sealed.........

weather sealed??? I can't find in the lens data that it is weather sealed!

The 1.2/35mm is far to heavy.

[Anakronox]

It absolutely is.  Has a gasket on the lens mount whereas the 1.4 does not.  

[analog-digital]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 4 Minuten schrieb Anakronox:

It absolutely is.  Has a gasket on the lens mount whereas the 1.4 does not.  

It is not/nothing written on their home Page......🙄

[Anakronox]

Okay, did you miss the part where I mentioned I own it?  It is sealed at the mount, despite the website failing to mention it.  Believe it or don’t.  
 

Or also don’t believe reviews, like Phillip Reeve: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sigma-35mm-1-2-art-dg-dn/

[analog-digital]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb Anakronox:

Okay, did you miss the part where I mentioned I own it?  It is sealed at the mount, despite the website failing to mention it.  Believe it or don’t.  
 

Or also don’t believe reviews, like Phillip Reeve: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sigma-35mm-1-2-art-dg-dn/

What other reviews say or not do not matter. What counts is what is on the manufacturer's homepage. Or in this case, it just isn't written.
 

[Boojay]

Tech Specs

• Newly developed high-performance lens series for full-frame mirrorless cameras
• SIGMA’s First F1.2 maximum aperture, large-diameter prime lens
• High operability that supports various shooting situations in both still and video
• Substantial functions enable user confidence, even in tough environments
• Lens Mount: Lens Mount: Leica L
• Lens Format: Lens Format: Full-Frame
• Fixed Mirrorless FL: Focal Length: 35mm
• Maximum Aperture: Maximum Aperture: f/1.2
• Special Features: Aspherical, Bokeh Effect, Dustproof/Splashproof, Weather Resistant
• Lens Type: Wide Angle Lens
• Lens Series: Sigma ART Series

[analog-digital]

vor 1 Minute schrieb Boojay:

Tech Specs

• Newly developed high-performance lens series for full-frame mirrorless cameras
• SIGMA’s First F1.2 maximum aperture, large-diameter prime lens
• High operability that supports various shooting situations in both still and video
• Substantial functions enable user confidence, even in tough environments
• Lens Mount: Lens Mount: Leica L
• Lens Format: Lens Format: Full-Frame
• Fixed Mirrorless FL: Focal Length: 35mm
• Maximum Aperture: Maximum Aperture: f/1.2
• Special Features: Aspherical, Bokeh Effect, Dustproof/Splashproof, Weather Resistant
• Lens Type: Wide Angle Lens
• Lens Series: Sigma ART Series

From which side (URL) is this?

[Alistairm]

It is from Sigma’s website. https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a019_35_12/features/

 

Substantial functions enable user confidence, even in tough environments

The lens features the dust- and splash-proof structure additionally with the water- and oil-repellent coating on the frontmost surface of the lens, which also supports shooting in various environments.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Alistairm

[Stef63]

Shouldn’t we stop the discussion about the non issue of weather sealing started by a poster who does not own the 35 1.2 and finds it to heavy. No problem with that but... 

What I see here is a OP that asks a question about a companion lens for his wide angle zoom Sigma that asks the forum their opinion on a standard Sigma zoom or a 35 mm 1.4 Sigma lens. Then some forum members point the OP towards their positive experience with a faster 1.2 Sigma albeit more heavy 35.  I think the OP never asked for a weather proof lens nor a lightweight lens.  So let’s focus on his question, provide relevant information from a owners experience.

 

 

Edited September 29, 2020 by Stef63

[analog-digital]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb Alistairm:

It is from Sigma’s website. https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a019_35_12/features/

 

Substantial functions enable user confidence, even in tough environments

The lens features the dust- and splash-proof structure additionally with the water- and oil-repellent coating on the frontmost surface of the lens, which also supports shooting in various environments.

Thanks, now I can read (German site) it. It was not that clear visible.

Edited September 30, 2020 by analog-digital

[analog-digital]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb Stef63:

Shouldn’t we stop the discussion about the non issue of weather sealing started by a poster who does not own the 35 1.2 and finds it to heavy. No problem with that but... 

What I see here is a OP that asks a question about a companion lens for his wide angle zoom Sigma that asks the forum their opinion on a standard Sigma zoom or a 35 mm 1.4 Sigma lens. Then some forum members point the OP towards their positive experience with a faster 1.2 Sigma albeit more heavy 35.  I think the OP never asked for a weather proof lens nor a lightweight lens.  So let’s focus on his question, provide relevant information from a owners experience.

 

 

BTW I was not asking for weather sealing or not on the f1.2! Just for your records. I was asking for the experiences with the two lenses. Thats all about.

Edited September 30, 2020 by analog-digital

[thatkatmat]

I don't have the Sigma 24-70, but I do have the Sigma 35/1.4 DG....I also own the 35SL. For context, I also own all 3 SL zooms and the 35/2, 50/1.4 and 75/2 SL lenses. I shoot primarily with the SL2 when I'm not going light duty with my Q. 

"My" Sigma 35 is OUTSTANDING. It's a little smaller and weighs less than the 35SL, mine focus' perfect, like any of my SL lenses, although you can tell the difference. Like most all Sigma lenses I've ever shot, the focus throws, then a hard stop, harder than than the Leica SL's (like, you can feel it a little) but it nails focus and I've not had any issues focusing where I think I could have got the shot with my 35SL.

Another cool thing is that it's an f/1.4, There's a noticeable difference in Depth Of Field. The bokeh and OOF transitions are really nice. I've heard the term "sterile" in regards to Sigma lenses. I know what people mean when they say it and....I used to think that about my 85 Art compared to my 85L. I don't think this Sigma 35 DG has sterile bokeh. I think it has beautiful smooth bokeh, especially for a 35mm lens. Also, when you shoot the Sigma with an SL or SL2, you get the signature Leica color engine.

I also previously owned the Summilux M35 FLE (newest version) and currently own the Zeiss 35 f/1.4 ZM because I sold the 35 Summilux after shooting with the Zeiss...To me, the Lux is Sterile compared to the Zeiss. (the Zeiss is my favorite overall 35 lens for walkaround, it's so 3D and sharp and the bokeh is really great, but I digress)

You can see that I love Leica products, but I'm not afraid of finding a better alternative. I wish the 35 Summicron SL was a Summilux, it might be huge like my 50/1.4 SL, but it would be f1.4. Yes, it's AMAZINGLY sharp, yes it's near perfect at everything and focus is so smooth and sure, but no matter what Karbe says about it looking like, or acting like an f1.4 lens...it isn't.

The only real downside with the Sigma is that it has no weather sealing....No biggie, if it gets wet and breaks, buy another one, your still up $4000 on the Leica 35SL Oh....and Also, it's not a Leica, so if you have a thing about not putting another brand on your Leica, the Sigma is not for you.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Edited September 30, 2020 by thatkatmat

[analog-digital]

vor 7 Minuten schrieb thatkatmat:

I don't have the Sigma 24-70, but I do have the Sigma 35/1.4 DG....I also own the 35SL. For context, I also own all 3 SL zooms and the 35/2, 50/1.4 and 75/2 SL lenses. I shoot primarily with the SL2 when I'm not going light duty with my Q. 

"My" Sigma 35 is OUTSTANDING. It's a little smaller and weighs less than the 35SL, mine focus' perfect, like any of my SL lenses, although you can tell the difference. Like most all Sigma lenses I've ever shot, the focus throws, then a hard stop, harder than than the Leica SL's (like, you can feel it a little) but it nails focus and I've not had any issues focusing where I think I could have got the shot with my 35SL.

Another cool thing is that it's an f/1.4, There's a noticeable difference in Depth Of Field. The bokeh and OOF transitions are really nice. I've heard the term "sterile" in regards to Sigma lenses. I know what people mean when they say it and....I used to think that about my 85 Art compared to my 85L. I don't think this Sigma 35 DG has sterile bokeh. I think it has beautiful smooth bokeh, especially for a 35mm lens. Also, when you shoot the Sigma with an SL or SL2, you get the signature Leica color engine.

I also previously owned the Summilux M35 FLE (newest version) and currently own the Zeiss 35 f/1.4 ZM because I sold the 35 Summilux after shooting with the Zeiss...To me, the Lux is Sterile compared to the Zeiss. (the Zeiss is my favorite overall 35 lens for walkaround, it's so 3D and sharp and the bokeh is really great, but I digress)

You can see that I love Leica products, but I'm not afraid of finding a better alternative. I wish the 35 Summicron SL was a Summilux, it might be huge like my 50/1.4 SL, but it would be f1.4. Yes, it's AMAZINGLY sharp, yes it's near perfect at everything and focus is so smooth and sure, but no matter what Karbe says about it looking like, or acting like an f1.4 lens...it isn't.

The only real downside with the Sigma is that it has no weather sealing....No biggie, if it gets wet and breaks, buy another one, your still up $4000 on the Leica 35SL Oh....and Also, it's not a Leica, so if you have a thing about not putting another brand on your Leica, the Sigma is not for you.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Thanks for your report. One of the few (unfortunately) here that is meaningful.

[caissa]

On 9/30/2020 at 10:17 PM, thatkatmat said:

I don't have the Sigma 24-70, but I do have the Sigma 35/1.4 DG....I also own the 35SL. For context, I also own all 3 SL zooms and the 35/2, 50/1.4 and 75/2 SL lenses. I shoot primarily with the SL2 when I'm not going light duty with my Q. 

"My" Sigma 35 is OUTSTANDING. It's a little smaller and weighs less than the 35SL, mine focus' perfect, like any of my SL lenses, although you can tell the difference. Like most all Sigma lenses I've ever shot, the focus throws, then a hard stop, harder than than the Leica SL's (like, you can feel it a little) but it nails focus and I've not had any issues focusing where I think I could have got the shot with my 35SL.

Another cool thing is that it's an f/1.4, There's a noticeable difference in Depth Of Field. The bokeh and OOF transitions are really nice. I've heard the term "sterile" in regards to Sigma lenses. I know what people mean when they say it and....I used to think that about my 85 Art compared to my 85L. I don't think this Sigma 35 DG has sterile bokeh. I think it has beautiful smooth bokeh, especially for a 35mm lens. Also, when you shoot the Sigma with an SL or SL2, you get the signature Leica color engine.

I also previously owned the Summilux M35 FLE (newest version) and currently own the Zeiss 35 f/1.4 ZM because I sold the 35 Summilux after shooting with the Zeiss...To me, the Lux is Sterile compared to the Zeiss. (the Zeiss is my favorite overall 35 lens for walkaround, it's so 3D and sharp and the bokeh is really great, but I digress)

You can see that I love Leica products, but I'm not afraid of finding a better alternative. I wish the 35 Summicron SL was a Summilux, it might be huge like my 50/1.4 SL, but it would be f1.4. Yes, it's AMAZINGLY sharp, yes it's near perfect at everything and focus is so smooth and sure, but no matter what Karbe says about it looking like, or acting like an f1.4 lens...it isn't.

The only real downside with the Sigma is that it has no weather sealing....No biggie, if it gets wet and breaks, buy another one, your still up $4000 on the Leica 35SL Oh....and Also, it's not a Leica, so if you have a thing about not putting another brand on your Leica, the Sigma is not for you.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

I use another Sigma that I find outstanding, the Art 24-35 with f2. It gives me three primes in one go at prime quality. (Currently in EF mount, but hopefully soon in L-mount.). (Ouch, it is so sharp. 😁🤔)

Edited October 4, 2020 by caissa