Images with the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG DN Art

[Ivar B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, Darthaddie said:

I have friends who used this on a Sony and love it. Just wondering could it be an issue with the L Mount versions. 99% or 100% of the reviews are from Sony mount users. Maybe my SL2 and the Sigma are a forced marriage. Lol. 

Yes, this cannot be ruled out. I have the Panasonic S1R - so let us see.

I have seen quite a few tests saying that the Leica SL lenses perform better on a Leica SL/SL2 than on Panasonic S1/R.

[Darthaddie]

14 minutes ago, Ivar B said:

Yes, this cannot be ruled out. I have the Panasonic S1R - so let us see.

I have seen quite a few tests saying that the Leica SL lenses perform better on a Leica SL/SL2 than on Panasonic S1/R.

For what it’s worth, the sigma works the same weird ways on my Panny S5. 

[FrankX]

vor 43 Minuten schrieb Ivar B:

Yes, this cannot be ruled out. I have the Panasonic S1R - so let us see.

I have seen quite a few tests saying that the Leica SL lenses perform better on a Leica SL/SL2 than on Panasonic S1/R.

You should pay for Reid Reviews to get an answer to your question. It’s really worth the money.
He has done some very detailed comparisons between different Leica and Panasonic cameras with different lenses (Panasonic, Sigma, Leica).

[P1505]

Has he tested this lens?

For the moment I’ll hold off and wait.

[FrankX]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb P1505:

Has he tested this lens?

For the moment I’ll hold off and wait.

No, only the Sigma 50 1.4 and the Sigma 45 2.8 so far.

By the way, I shot several outdoor portrait sessions (2500 photos) using the new Sigma 85 1.4 without any problems, but I always used the hood. Maybe a difference?!

[Darthaddie]

7 minutes ago, FrankX said:

No, only the Sigma 50 1.4 and the Sigma 45 2.8 so far.

By the way, I shot several outdoor portrait sessions (2500 photos) using the new Sigma 85 1.4 without any problems, but I always used the hood. Maybe a difference?!

Mine are with the hood, Always. I can't seem to figure out the issue. Going to test some more tomorrow 

[P1505]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sod it. Bought.

[Boojay]

11 hours ago, P1505 said:

Sod it. Bought.

Haha, your comment made me laugh, I seem to have done a lot of the same lately, Covid fever😄.

 

[Alan Friedman]

On 1/26/2021 at 11:08 AM, Darthaddie said:

I have now shot over 8000 images with the Sigma over 15+ weddings. I am pretty sure there is something going on which I cannot pinpoint. Here are 2 (untouched) images from the same shoot. It was an overcast day but no fog. The family photo looks really low in contrast and foggy where as the couples photo is much better. The Sigma simply loses contrast in a lot of situations and its hard to explain. I have no such issues with my Canon 50 RF 1.2 / Voigtlander 40 1.2. I even rented a Leica 90 summicron. I understand the cost/quality difference but I did not have any such issues over 3 wedding shoots with any of the lenses. 

Also noticed that in high contrast situations where the subject is dark/sun behind the Sigma will not focus at all. Other lenses will focus easily. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

I can understand your concern - the images do seem low in contrast and with a blue overall cast. 

Sometimes when I spend a long time processing an astronomical image I find that my eyes become adapted to a lower contrast and I can wind up accepting a version that the next morning seems not at all optimized. Often I will run an >auto levels<in Photoshop to see what I might have missed. Sometimes the results are terrible but sometimes they do show adjustments that I had overlooked from too many hours on the job. I ran >auto levels< on your posted image just to see the result. The contrast is now too strong (as it often is, pushing the histogram to its limit) but I think it does show that there is potential in the images for improved contrast and color. Perhaps more experimentation with the camera settings for the lens would bring better results?

Edited January 28, 2021 by Alan Friedman

[Darthaddie]

12 minutes ago, Alan Friedman said:

I can understand your concern - the images do seem low in contrast and with a blue overall cast. 

Sometimes when I spend a long time processing an astronomical image I find that my eyes become adapted to a lower contrast and I can wind up accepting a version that the next morning seems not at all optimized. Often I will run an >auto levels<in Photoshop to see what I might have missed. Sometimes the results are terrible but sometimes they do show adjustments that I had overlooked from too many hours on the job. I ran >auto levels< on your posted image just to see the result. The contrast is now too strong (as it often is, pushing the histogram to its limit) but I think it does show that there is potential in the images for improved contrast and color. Perhaps more experimentation with the camera settings for the lens would bring better results?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Thanks for putting efforts into this. I do edit the images and get the desired output. Certainly can't deliver RAW images to my clients 🙂 

But the issue is not that it cannot be corrected, the issue is the randomness of things. I had another copy rented today and same thing with that. I am thinking that its an issue with the Leica L mount versions. The lens has gotten me amazing images no doubt, I just don't like it when it does random low contrast images for no conceivable reason. But the most replicable issue is shooting against the sun. This lens fails badly at that. Loses all contrast... even if the sun is behind the subject. 

The lens is still on my recommended list as there are no other affordable 85 options for the L mount. 

[P1505]

You’re on a Panasonic right? Mine will be in an SL 601. Over time we’ll figure it out.

My replacement won’t be here until Monday.

[MarkP]

On 9/10/2020 at 1:32 PM, Alan Friedman said:

Received the lens today and ran a few hundred shots in my production shop. It's a pleasure to use. I'm a rookie at autofocus but I thought the response was great - fast (noticeably quicker than the 45 2.8) and smooth with good accuracy on moving subjects.

I was just thinking that this lens with the 2.8/45 would be a nice light (and relatively cheap) two-lens combo on the SL-2.

[Reggie]

3 hours ago, MarkP said:

I was just thinking that this lens with the 2.8/45 would be a nice light (and relatively cheap) two-lens combo on the SL-2.

I have both and you're absolutely right.

I'm going to add the new 24mm f3.5 DG DN as well.

[Alan Friedman]

A quick look at two portrait lenses that compete for shoulder time in my travel bag. The Leica Summilux-R 80 f1.4 is a storied lens that I did not use very often on my R film cameras and have wanted to revisit with live view on L mount. The Sigma 85 1.4 dg dn is a lens I've enjoyed and carry routinely. The Sigma is manually focused. These images are shot on my Leica SL (601) and are unprocessed save converting to jpeg from the DNG files. Thanks to my wife for indulging me to be a human in the field of view. 

summi-R 80 at f1.4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

sigma 85 dg dn at f1.4

full size crop/ summi-R 80 at f1.4

full size crop/ sigma 85 dg dn at f1.4

Edited April 6, 2021 by Alan Friedman

[Alan Friedman]

I found myself feeling unsure about the accuracy of my focus with the summi-R despite using magnification in the finder. In these two shots, some highlights were recovered in Camera Raw - otherwise no processing save converting to jpeg from DNG.

summi-R 80 at f1.4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

sigma 85 dg dn at f1.4

full size crop/ summi-R 80 at f1.4

full size crop/ sigma 85 dg dn at f1.4

Edited April 6, 2021 by Alan Friedman

[Ivar B]

I wonder if these have been mislabeled or something? In the full size photos, the Leica lens appears to be sharper, while in the croppings this is reversed?

[Alan Friedman]

27 minutes ago, Ivar B said:

I wonder if these have been mislabeled or something? In the full size photos, the Leica lens appears to be sharper, while in the croppings this is reversed?

I think I have them right... the label is above the image. The Summi-R 80 images are slightly wider in field due to the focal length. The modern Sigma is crisper at the plane of focus but has a shallower depth of field due to focal length. You can see the focus fall off more quickly in the collar of Donna's jacket. Her lower eyelashes were my point of reference for focus. The Sigma has excellent feel when manually focused. The Summi-R is mechanically excellent but somewhat of a challenger to focus using live-view magnification due to an overall softness in the image. 

Edited April 6, 2021 by Alan Friedman

[Ivar B]

28 minutes ago, Alan Friedman said:

I think I have them right... the label is above the image. The Summi-R 80 images are slightly wider in field due to the focal length. The modern Sigma is crisper at the plane of focus but has a shallower depth of field due to focal length. You can see the focus fall off more quickly in the collar of Donna's jacket. Her lower eyelashes were my point of reference for focus. The Sigma has excellent feel when manually focused. The Summi-R is mechanically excellent but somewhat of a challenger to focus using live-view magnification due to an overall softness in the image. 

My mistake it seems. The Sigma appears sharper, yes. The 80mm Summilux is an old design, and I believe it needs to be stopped down a little to perform at its best. There have been some posts in the forum where users complain over mediocre sharpness and contrast with the Sigma lens, but your lens seems to perform superbly. I have the same lens, but have not been able to test it much yet. 

[Alan Friedman]

2 hours ago, Ivar B said:

My mistake it seems. The Sigma appears sharper, yes. The 80mm Summilux is an old design, and I believe it needs to be stopped down a little to perform at its best. There have been some posts in the forum where users complain over mediocre sharpness and contrast with the Sigma lens, but your lens seems to perform superbly. I have the same lens, but have not been able to test it much yet. 

The Sigma 85 does have great (modern) sharpness in the central region. I didn't evaluate sharpness at the edges of the frame for this exercise. I did shoot with a couple of other lenses from my collection that are candidates at this focal length. I actually started started this test wanting to evaluate and compare another vintage lens from my collection - The Zeiss Sonnar 85 f2 made for the Contarex line of film SLR cameras. My copy of this lens has a stiff focuser action and I would likely not carry it much. But I found its rendering to be quite nice. I've included it below (at f2) along with a shot through my Leica Elmarit-M 90 at f2.8 and renderings from the Sigma and Summilux-R stopped down to f2.8. Nothing gets quite as sharp as the Sigma but I thought each had its own merits in rendering a portrait. The Sigma seems to lose virtually all vignetting at f2.8, yielding a more evenly illuminated field of view. Some work in Lightroom or Camera Raw would help the Sigma retain the separation of subject that is its character at f1.4.

On ergonomics, the Sigma's weight is nicely handled through its close coupling to the SL body. The Elmarit-M is also comfortably balanced with the modest extension of the M-L adapter. The Zeiss Sonnar requires a funky Fotodiox adapter + M-L coupling. The Fotodiox Contarex-M adapter has an aperture ring that is necessary as the aperture adjustment of the Contarex lenses was handled in the camera body. It is not very easy to use and probably not a lens I would carry instead of the Sigma. The Summilux-R handles nicely, but it is quite heavy and with the added weight and length with the R-L adapter... well, you'd have to be in love with the character it renders. 

Zeiss Contarex Sonnar 85 f2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Leica Elmarit-M 90 f2.8

Leica Summilux-R 80 at f2.8

Sigma 85 dg dn at f2.8

Edited April 6, 2021 by Alan Friedman

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Alan Friedman]

A few additional thoughts with the crops - the Leica Elmarit-M 2.8 is very sharp centrally wide open and a pleasure to use with the SL and also with the Sigma FP. It paints beautifully with warm tones... I prefer how it rendered this scene over the other lenses, with the Sigma 85 at f1.4 a close second. Sharpness in focus is similar though of course the backgrounds are very different. Also, I love how well the Sigma 85 is designed and crafted for manual focus operation... not at all an afterthought. 

Zeiss Contarex Sonnar 85 f2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Leica Elmarit-M 90 f2.8

Leica Summilux-R 80 at f2.8

Sigma 85 dg dn at f2.8

Edited April 6, 2021 by Alan Friedman