![]() We hope to circumvent this issue by - in the future - performing these sorts of shootouts with a copy that represents the performance of the average of a population. This is also a reminder that any internet shootout (save for Roger's work) is generally prone to only being valid for the copies tested. Interestingly, Roger Cicala has actually found greater copy-to-copy variation with the Sigma 35mm Art in comparison to the Canon 35L II (see Conclusion of this article). The extreme variance in performance from copy-to-copy of the Sigma 35mm F1.4 is certainly concerning, and is a good reminder that discerning buyers should test their copy. The Canon 35L II continues to perform better with respect to chromatic aberration, though. At F2.8 we see the gap between the Sigma 35mm and the Canon 35mm close, while the 24-35 F2 trails slightly behind. The story is a little different at the extremes of the scene: although we see a great improvement in this copy of the Sigma 35mm, it still does fall behind the Canon wide-open with a hint more coma at the extremes. Immediately, we see that a better copy of the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art performs admirably against the new Canon 35L II, at least matching, if not slightly exceeding, center sharpness wide open and even at F2. Please keep in mind the general caveats surrounding adapters and adapted lenses, especially around compounded mount tolerances affecting off-axis performance (which we see little evidence of). ![]() We adapted both the EF-mount Canon 35/1.4L II and EF-mount Sigma 24-35mm F2 to the same Sony a7R II via a Metabones Smart Adapter IV for a fair comparison. While we were at it, we also threw in the Sigma 24-35mm F2 zoom, to see how it stacks up against two of the best 35 primes in the business. While we didn't have access to more EF-mount versions at the time, we did have a Nikon F-mount Sigma 35mm F1.4 in the office, which we adapted to a Sony a7R II with a Metabones adapter to re-shoot the comparison. Copy VariationĪfter shooting this comparison on the Canon EOS 5DS R, we were concerned with how poorly the EF-mount Sigma 35mm F1.4 performed off-center. Overall, the Canon EF 35mm F1.4 L II does perform a step above the competition. ![]() These inconsistencies are part of the wonderful world of copy variation, and these lenses are by no means hand-selected examples. There are areas where there is a similar amount of sharpness behind the Mark I's aberrations, and there are places where it is far behind the Mark II version. At F2 the Sigma starts to catch up in overall IQ towards the center, and the first version of the Canon starts to narrow the gap at F2.8, although in this specific area it never quite catches up. ![]() It also shows better performance wide-open in the extremes of the image. The new Canon shows little to no chromatic aberration on the tower of the Space Needle, an area where the other two struggle. When used wide-open, the differences between these three 35mm F1.4 lenses seem fairly significant. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |