OP
- Messages
- 5,635
- Name
- Shaheed
- Edit My Images
- No
I assume it'll come down in price later!
Any news on the release of the Sigma 85 f1.4 art?
- Thread starter Sir SR
- Start date
I assume it'll come down in price later!
D
Deleted member 66768
Guest
That's an ABSOLUTELY mental price. I'd go for the Nikkor everyday at the same money.
The art lenses (unless you baby them) look tatty after a month of use. Have hideous af issues in my experience too
The likes of the 35 represent great value compared to the Nikkor equivalent, but this 85 looks like a total rip off lol
The art lenses (unless you baby them) look tatty after a month of use. Have hideous af issues in my experience too
The likes of the 35 represent great value compared to the Nikkor equivalent, but this 85 looks like a total rip off lol
OP
- Messages
- 5,635
- Name
- Shaheed
- Edit My Images
- No
I have 2 art lenses - AF is great and look far from tatty.
I agree that the launch price is high. However, if it comes below 1k then it gets a bit more interesting compared to the Nikon.
- Messages
- 890
- Name
- Dilip
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think the Sigma's get tatty - not sure what you do with your lenses ??? I've had two 35A lenses for Nikon. The first was very hit and miss and was from a reliable source but at the time both my D750's were very suspect (couldn't use an 85 1.4G from Panamoz or a 70-200VR which worked flawlessly on a D3 / D3s).
After the bodies had a few visits to Nikon (Richmond) I was able to use most of my friends known good lenses at which point I got another 35A (which I still have) and it looks like new even though I've probably photographed over 100 assignments (weddings / events). I'd say it has fared as well as the Nikon 85 1.4G which I got just after.
Before the Nikon, I had the Canon 5D3 and bought one 35A from WEX which I used til I sold the body - no complaints / issues.
After the bodies had a few visits to Nikon (Richmond) I was able to use most of my friends known good lenses at which point I got another 35A (which I still have) and it looks like new even though I've probably photographed over 100 assignments (weddings / events). I'd say it has fared as well as the Nikon 85 1.4G which I got just after.
Before the Nikon, I had the Canon 5D3 and bought one 35A from WEX which I used til I sold the body - no complaints / issues.
- Messages
- 5,092
- Name
- James
- Edit My Images
- No
mm, my Sigma Art lens is looking a lot better than my Canon L lenses. It is younger, but it also appears to be much better built than the Canons.
I'm not a Nikon person, but having a lens launch at the same price as a lens that's 6 years older, doesn't seem too mental to me. Means in a few weeks you'll be able to get a much newer design of lens for less money.
Of course nobody knows yet how the performance of the two will compare in the real world.
F/1.4 said:
I'm not a Nikon person, but having a lens launch at the same price as a lens that's 6 years older, doesn't seem too mental to me. Means in a few weeks you'll be able to get a much newer design of lens for less money.
Of course nobody knows yet how the performance of the two will compare in the real world.
- Messages
- 6,414
- Name
- Tommy
- Edit My Images
- No
In terms of the art lenses looking tatty after not long use based on the ones I have had I would agree with that. There is a big difference using equipment every day and using it occasionally on your day of work etc. The art lenses finish doesn't stand up to much use if you are using them as a professional every day tool, Tamrons stuff is the same to be fair. That's one of the advantages of using the Nikon or Canon equivalent.
Not that it really matters too me as I only care about the images and am not worried what a lens looks like after a couple of months use. I really baby my equipment and my 35a looks a bit tatty compared to say my Nikon 24-70 which looks as new both get the same amount of use but the siggy has a few rub marks in the barrel etc. The 24-70 is about 5-6 years old the Siggy prob around 2-3. The 24-70 was bought used I am prob the third owner the Siggy was bought new.
Not that it really matters too me as I only care about the images and am not worried what a lens looks like after a couple of months use. I really baby my equipment and my 35a looks a bit tatty compared to say my Nikon 24-70 which looks as new both get the same amount of use but the siggy has a few rub marks in the barrel etc. The 24-70 is about 5-6 years old the Siggy prob around 2-3. The 24-70 was bought used I am prob the third owner the Siggy was bought new.
Last edited:
Raymond Lin
I am Groot
- Messages
- 10,030
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
My 50 Art still looks great...
- Messages
- 6,414
- Name
- Tommy
- Edit My Images
- No
No not the case on a Facebook group I am a member of there is a very similar discussion going on right now it started when the 85a was announced there are several hundred comments from Sigma art users saying how they love the lenses but how unhappy they are with the a.f performance. On there the general consensus is that even after tuning with the dock etc. they are only reliable around 70% of the time. On that group there are more unhappy Canon than Nikon users although on that particular group I would say more people probably shoot Canon.
When you don't use the equipment every day or rely on it then these issues are not as big a deal there lenses render beautifully but just simply can't be relied on for paid work. Although to be fair I think they mainly market them towards the prosumer market hence the lack of proper weather sealing etc.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,783
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 3,509
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not a prime, but I had a 24-35mm f2 ART lens delivered yesterday along with a Nikon 24-120mm f4.(the Sigma design and operation seemed excellent).........The Sigma was un-useable wide open but got razor sharp by f4, I had similar issues with a 24-105mm ART lens I bought a couple of months ago. No matter what I tried with the dock or camera MFA I couldn't get it right wide open. Will be on it's way back on Monday morning. The Nikon 24-120mm seems smack on from wide open and all focus lengths and seems better than the old one I had a couple of years ago on the D750.
I've owned a Sigma 105mm Macro and that was excellent along with the 150-600mm Contemporary lens I have now. Sigma seem a little bit hit and miss for me.
Nikon 20mm and 35mm 1.8G lenses on there way now, would have loved the Sigma to have worked for the convenience.
I've owned a Sigma 105mm Macro and that was excellent along with the 150-600mm Contemporary lens I have now. Sigma seem a little bit hit and miss for me.
Nikon 20mm and 35mm 1.8G lenses on there way now, would have loved the Sigma to have worked for the convenience.
D
Deleted member 66768
Guest
Spot on. The material on the barrel marks with the tiniest of knocks, bumps etc
Doesn't bother me either too but it's nice to have a lens that doesn't mark as much haha
Lol at how people get defensive over a lens wtf like
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 66768
Guest
The current 35 I have is razor sharp and seems to get near perfect focus every time.
I wouldn't even try another 50
I won't go near the 85 either at that price
I wouldn't even try another 50
I won't go near the 85 either at that price
- Messages
- 6,414
- Name
- Tommy
- Edit My Images
- No
I know lol but understandable I guess have done the same myself in the past, people like to defend there investment as you know it's easy to get caught up in the gear more than the images if your a person like me who likes gadgets. I must be getting old as couldn't care less about gear now or maybe it's because I have tried most things.
I tried 3 of those 24-35's simply awful a.f. as with the 50's I had couldn't be fixed with the dock.
- Messages
- 16,745
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Huh?? I have the 35 1.4 Art 3 years now. It's been out in storms, rain/hail/snow, it's had it's share of rough and tumble, it's certainly not been "babied" and still looks like new. I've never had any AF issues with it.
I would not pay what they're asking for the 85, but it will come down, no doubt. And it will very probably be better than the Nikon overall, Just as the 35 is a tad better than the Nikon 35 1.4.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Nope
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Ordered ages ago but finally my 85 is out for delivery today, along with both 24-35 and a 50mm for swmbo. I've had the original 85mm Sigma since 2008, love the lens its just all over the place in terms of AF reliability past F2.
I already have the 35 and 50 A, both of which needed a fair bit of AF tuning with Focal, but once done are super sharp with great AF, maybe I'm just lucky but I'm suprised to read of the problems others are having on here with the Art lenses.
It wasn't something planned in advance but I've ended up shooting with nothing but Sigma lenses now on my Nikon bodies, just hope the 85 is as good as the 35, 50 and 120-300,
I already have the 35 and 50 A, both of which needed a fair bit of AF tuning with Focal, but once done are super sharp with great AF, maybe I'm just lucky but I'm suprised to read of the problems others are having on here with the Art lenses.
It wasn't something planned in advance but I've ended up shooting with nothing but Sigma lenses now on my Nikon bodies, just hope the 85 is as good as the 35, 50 and 120-300,
Last edited:
- Messages
- 6,428
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the 85mm. The 24-35 too for that matter.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
It's here, finally. Only had chance for a quick play, beautifully made lens that is VERY sharp but required a lot of AF fine tuning, +18, +19, something in that region. The most I've had before is +15 on the 50mm Art, I'll run it through Focal when I hare a spare 30 mins and also see what it needs on my other camera bodies. I've got the Sigma dock but only used it for firmware updates, might take a look on there regarding the adjustment if it is similar across my other cameras.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,598
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Which camera is this on? My D750 did not get on well with the old Sigma 85mm f1.4. It ideally needed more than +20 for the centre points, but this threw out the outer AF points
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Which camera is this on? My D750 did not get on well with the old Sigma 85mm f1.4. It ideally needed more than +20 for the centre points, but this threw out the outer AF points
Was on a d750 as well, I have another to try it on and a d810, might just be that Camera body.
The outer AF points seem fine, though I'd only normally use the cross type when shooting at 1.4 anyway, but that's just me.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Which camera is this on? My D750 did not get on well with the old Sigma 85mm f1.4. It ideally needed more than +20 for the centre points, but this threw out the outer AF points
Very in-scientific quick test, but I'm normally pretty close to what Focal recommends AF Fine tune wise, its not the lens its the camera body.
D810 #1 & 2, both very sharp with no adjustment
D750 #1 +19
D750 #2 +10
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,598
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Odd that it's camera specific. That being said I had a nightmare with my D750 after it going in for recalls. After several failed attempts to correct my AF they finally gave me a replacement and AF is much approved. For example my 70-200mm needs no fine tune now whereas it needed around +12-15 on the old one. I've not tried my new D750 with an fast Sigmas though.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I just think the D810's are made with tighter tolerances. I've not had much luck with the 750's either, had three fail in total, one with the shutter, two with problems with Af and buttons not working. One of those I have now has got the dreaded sticky shutter problem when left turned off for more than a couple of hours. I'm not saying that the D810's wouldn't benefit from AF fine tune with the new lens, just that the images are sharp and usable without adjustment, where as the d750s were both quite soft.
Back on topic, I've been playing with the 85 in the garden, very nice indeed, AF is much more consistent at 1.4 than the old version, colours seem a little cooler, bokeh looks decent too.
If I can get one of the kids to stand still for two mins when they get home from school I'll post up a couple of pics later.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Three quick shots, not the best examples as the light was fading.
All are at around ISO 1000 on a D750, f/1.4, handheld. SOOC, no adjustments at all in post, no sharpening, no noise reduction, using converted from RAW using the wife's laptop so just using the adobe standard profile.
My old Sigma 85 always struggled with AF in strong backlight, new version handles it much better.
100% crop
100% crop
All are at around ISO 1000 on a D750, f/1.4, handheld. SOOC, no adjustments at all in post, no sharpening, no noise reduction, using converted from RAW using the wife's laptop so just using the adobe standard profile.
My old Sigma 85 always struggled with AF in strong backlight, new version handles it much better.
100% crop
100% crop
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
The dock will tune that right up.
Size comparisons are what we want.
Go on then, the triplets, 85, 50 and 35.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,598
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 23,598
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the clue is in the sample pics taken with it that psenior posted
(sorry couldn't resist ) It does look huge yeah from the pics psenior posted after your post
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Kinda reminds me of this...
I've got a lot less hair than that