Pros
- The glass is just awesome. Detail, microcontrast, focus, color reproduction.
Cons
- A little heavy, but there is of course solid glass
Pros
- aperture ratio, sharpness, price compared to analogues
Cons
- sometimes creaks when focusing (probably from dampness) and sometimes the color rendition worries a little (little green, or something. somehow . a little . something seems like that .) But both of these shortcomings reduce its attractiveness by no more than 5% in my eyes;)
Pros
- Sharp wide open I shot at 2.0 when aiming at distant objects in the subway, the sharpness is very good with 3.3 even in low light, the sharpness is perfect good bokeh
Cons
- Found magenta HA on 2.0.
Pros
- - optical qualities (sharpness, lack of XA, microcontrast, low distortion) - quality of materials and workmanship - Adequate price for such a quality item - compatible with usb dock station for self-tuning autofocus for a specific camera and ating the lens firmware
Cons
- - there is no dust and moisture protection, even the simplest rubber ring on the bayonet - oddities in the autofocus - on FF, the vignette is probably quite significant
Pros
- 1. With proper adjustment, if you hit it exactly - sharp to the point of stupor from 1.4 to 36mp (D800), sharper than Canon 35L (used), sharper than Nikon 35 / 1.4G (tried), at the edges of the frame it also surpasses them with an open one. 2. It is also lighter by itself (T-stop = 1.5 by DxO, you can check for yourself) 3. The design is super, it looks like a Zeiss. 4. aberrations are hardly noticeable even in the open 5. The color is not worse than the original glasses 6. Distortion is imperceptible
Cons
- 1. There are AF misses, see comment., 2. there are bulbs in circles of blur (not annoying), 3. the focus ring is tight, the stroke is small 4. A little more vignetting compared to K and H (not critical, easy to correct)
Pros
- Everyone knows everything about the advantages of this lens. Cutting. Cheap (relative to autofocus branded full-frame counterparts with f1.4 aperture), thanks to which it quickly gained popularity among advanced amateurs who would like a prime lens with a high aperture and a detailed picture. DXOmark greatly contributed to the popularity of this lens in synthetic tests, in addition, the front pages of the B&H website and many other places were bought out for advertising banners. Sharpness turned out to be a sought-after commodity, and it was not difficult to sell it. And I was one of those buyers. But over time, I began to learn information that I would not have found just like that. I will say right away - the lens was sold immediately after the mass of such "pitfalls" that was "critical" for me had accumulated. The total time of ownership thereof was 4 years.
Cons
- - Sharpness. Yes. Do not wonder. I put this feature both in dignity and in disadvantage. Optics are very delicate things. This is physics in which there are laws. And obeying these laws - compromises are inevitable. At first, I was happy with a highly detailed picture and the ability to examine the smallest details in the pictures, but as it turned out later, it’s not at all difficult to make just a sharp lens with modern computing power. This entails such a forced measure as an increase in the number of optical elements in the lens, and each optical element in the lens is an inevitable obstacle to the light that enters the viewfinder through the lens. The difficulty in "lens building" is to calculate the optical scheme in such a way that both the sharpness remains at a good level and the photographs are voluminous. Of course, the volume in photography is obtained from such things as tonal, aerial perspective, the correct lighting of the photographed object, but as it turned out, there is also such a thing as . - Microcontrast. More precisely, its complete absence. This is quite a difficult task - to make the lens resolve a multi-megapixel matrix and convey the "volume" of the photographed environment. Sigma lenses are the standard for its complete absence. This is one of the main reasons why lenses from Zeiss, Voigtlander and Lake are so expensive. Calculation of the optical scheme in such a way that the number of elements IN IDEAL should be no more than nine. Microcontrast in optics is best seen in black and white photographs. a particularly revealing photograph from a Feuchtländer http://www. Mtyskfoto. Se/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/voigtlander-3. Jpg - autofocus does not work well in conjunction with radio synchronizers, it jams a lot of frames .
Pros
- Good quality workmanship, on foreign forums they compare with Zeiss, but still this is an exaggeration. About how to compare mirrorless Fujitsu X-* with Leica. Really sharp and detailed already at 1.4 if you managed to get into focus. The bokeh is pretty nice. Good balance with the D700 camera. Good quality case included.
Cons
- Autofocus on the Nikon D700 can be said to be non-working. For a stable and predictable result, shoot only in manual mode. And for this there is Samyang, which with the same characteristics is more than half the price.
Pros
- focus, picture quality
Cons
- if only the weight, and the front lens is happy to grab dust, put a filter
Pros
- sharp since 1.4, beautiful colors, fast autofocus
Cons
- did not find
Pros
- Luminosity, focusing speed, build quality, beautiful picture. There are optical distortions, but they are easier to correct than on the same Nikon 24-70. I shot a banquet on Sigma 35 and then on Nikkor 24-70 - the picture turned out better on Sigma.
Cons
- Chromatic aberrations, but I was ready for them, all fast fixes have them. The weight is rather big, the hands get tired.
Pros
- The quality of the lens, the quality of the resulting image, the speed and accuracy of autofocus.
Cons
- They just don't exist
Pros
- -light - beautiful drawing - sharp enough, but. See comments - light coloured - perfectly assembled
Cons
- Disadvantages, as you know, are a continuation of merits. Due to its artistry, it is not razor-sharp and chromates on the open with violet . Noted is not critical, to some extent this is art .)
Pros
- The lens is not bad, if not for Sigma
Cons
- 1. The lens is partially incompatible with Nikon D810. It depends on the firmware of the lens, but in order to change it, you need to buy another USB docking station, and this is still an expense (2200 + shipping). The incompatibility looks very simple: it does not work in Live View mode. Agree, it's a shame to buy a lens and immediately take it to a service center or pay extra for a dock. 2. The lens cap does not have a lanyard attachment. Get ready to ruin another 300. 3. If you want quality, you can’t do without a docking station or without lens adjustment in the service
Pros
- - optical qualities - quality of materials and workmanship - quiet autofocus - adequate price
Cons
- - no dust protection - oddities in the autofocus -rubberized focusing ring has a very small trim that tends to get clogged with dirt.
Pros
- - build quality and materials used; - excellent sharpness; - high saturation (color); - large luminosity; - with the docking station, dependence on the service center for adjustment disappears; - good bokeh and blurring of blur zones; - for such sharpness - very uniquely low HA - and in general, not everyone, even a very expensive lens, can boast of such a set of special glasses !; - of course, the most, perhaps, the ideal price / quality / functionality ratio in this segment - it is absolutely clear what money is given for and that every penny is worked out in full here (few people can compete with the Japanese here - they know how to calculate the production economy) !;
Cons
- Unfortunately, there are also: - autofocus during fast, reportage shooting does not always hit - work only for its intended purpose "Art" - artistic unhurried shooting (and it is advisable to put a focusing screen with Doden wedges and microraster (microprisms) for confident manual focusing!); - there is no protection against dust and moisture, well, the Japanese don’t take money for it (although I would rather overpay, but I would feel more confident in the field);
Pros
- Aperture, sharp immediately on the open, beautiful pattern.
Cons
- I read about possible problems, but they were all resolved with the doc. station.
Pros
- - Sharp on the open, - small HA, - very well made - comfortable and smooth manual focus, - AF on my copy is very accurate, and even in very poor lighting, - lives up to its name Art.
Cons
- Autofocus is not without sin, but not enough to lower the score. And so you can’t immediately say for sure whose sin it is to a greater extent, the lens or the camera.
Pros
- High aperture Excellent sharpness Glare resistance HA unobtrusive, easily corrected
Cons
- Occasionally naughty with focus, but here you have to figure out whose fault is more, my Nikon D600 or the lens
