It was my first 35mm fix and after 50mm 1.8 on crop, it was amazing on FF. Excellent in any weather. I always get it at weddings or reporting from city events. This is not Elka, the bokeh is softer, ff-of course fail. I think it’s worth taking, and in a couple of months 35mm will become your main glass!))) Has some pros An excellent fix for beginners and progressive photographers, A convenient focal length allows you to shoot both portraits and reports, giving nice sharp shots, sometimes (!)…

Top lens for your money, in the region of 45 thousand on ebay you can buy in a new condition, and for 51 thousand a completely new one. Ridiculous price for such glass! (As of May 2022) Has pros: Sharp in the open, with cool bokeh, fast aperture, this lens makes you fall in love with photography and think about moving from an amateur level to a professional one. It is very versatile, suitable for both full-length portraits and half-length portraits, if you take larger plans, distortion will be…

Native lenses, of course, are faster in AF when it comes to photos. If you need high-quality 35 for shooting video - this Sigma is your choice. Got pros: + High-quality picture without aberrations. + Quite a large field of sharpness even with an open aperture. + Ergonomic design, not as bulky compared to standard lenses. + No aberrations or vignette at high apertures (16 etc.) + Resolution allows you to shoot 4K RAW on BMPC without losing detail. + Metal. Compared to other Sigma lenses…

I have been using it for almost a year, everything is cool . a very peppy lens, I learned to shoot gorgeous portraits on it, and an excellent reportage Got pros: Sharp starting from 1.4, excellent and other characteristics, after purchase it became a regular lens for almost all occasions. looks great on both crop and FF. 2.8 really working aperture, gives the best result on it. I strongly recommend to absolutely everyone, the ideal price / quality / convenience ratio. With its cons. Lack of…

I have a special relationship with the 35mm focal length. In fact, this is the only lens I use for all purposes and purposes. For a long time I dealt with the Canon 35 1.4L, in which I was absolutely not satisfied with the picture at the open aperture, more precisely, the normal working aperture began with F2, you could never think about F1.4 at all, because the soap was soapy. In addition, after a year of operation, the rubber of the focusing ring came off. When sigma appeared, I quietly…

I bought it along with the docking station, adjusted it to my 6D, I'm very satisfied. At distances over 2m there are autofocus misses, 10-20%. But! if you attach a flash with infrared autofocus illumination to the camera, then the number of misses tends to 0 (where the illumination reaches). So, most likely, the device itself misses and not the glass, although on other glasses I have a much smaller percentage of misses.

Realizing that I wanted to shoot in apartments and houses, I decided I needed something wider than a boring fifty kopeck piece. There were 2 options: either take the New Canon 24-70mm 2.8, or 35mm. There is very little light in our sunny St. Petersburg 😁, so I realized that 1.4 would still be more relevant. Then there was the choice of Canon or Sigma art. There were so many positive reviews about the latter that I didn’t even bother with the choice. I took a sigma, wound up on a Canon 5d Mark

The first thing that pleased the lens was that it did not have to be adjusted on the 7D camera. However, the 5D Mark III did not agree with the first camera, but this did not become a problem due to the possibility of in-camera alignment. Some users slipped remarks that it was on the 5D Mark III that the lens did not behave in the best way on the side focus points. I didn't notice this on my camera. I recommend using not one of the side points, but a group of them. Or at unhurried shooting…

I bought it 3 months ago, I managed to travel around several countries, using the lens as a standard lens for 5d, I am completely satisfied with the purchase. The new Sigma art line is really impressive, the lens is similar in appearance and quality to a Zeiss, this model does not have any problems with back or front focus, like the old Sigmas. I had experience using canon 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4, compared to these lenses, it focuses more accurately in the dark and subjectively the picture comes out…

I use this lens and, in principle, I am satisfied. It is made qualitatively, the materials are reliable, it feels pleasant in the hands. For me, its main advantage is aperture, because. I often shoot in natural light without a flash. The focal length of 35mm, in my opinion, is well suited for artistic or portrait photography (taking into account the crop factor). When expanded, the aperture forms a round hole, so that with a blurry background (bokeh), light sources do not turn into hexagonal…

Faced with the problem of focusing, then it’s not clear where the rules go, even if the depth of field is half a meter, the confirmation beeps and the focus goes to no one knows where, the corrections made on the target turned out to be -12. I tried it in manual mode, everything is ok, it means everything calmed down a little with the lens. You focus on objects, if it’s on a person, it’s half a marriage. it turns out she needs a more contrasting point, shifted the focus to the eye and…

I shoot with canon 550d. It is good to shoot 1.3 people from a distance of 1.3 meters. It is good to shoot objects from a distance of 0.3 . 1 meter. When they took it, they tested it on a canon 6d and it worked perfectly. Then I switched to canon 550d. The front focus has become noticeable. Did not reflash. I sharpen manually through live-view with magnification. Then you can definitely choose the focus on the pupil and the pictures are excellent. In autofocus mode, it's easy to miss with such

At first I was completely disappointed when I had a Canon 6D, this lens smeared godlessly! I didn’t buy it then, but when I bought the Canon R I decided to give it a second chance because the price is captivating compared to the native one and the Canon R has a different autofocus . It turned out not in vain, the problems with autofocus disappeared, everything is right on target, of course compared to Canon, it is slow, but this can be forgiven for the price)

Adequate, sharp, fast. Color rendering is close to natural. As I bought it, I still don’t take it off the carcass. Became a staff member. Bought online, didn't check anything. Everything came together, I was lucky. I have for Canon. Which is what I wish you. Never regretted. It is not cheap, but there are glass and more expensive. Camera adjustments were not required. Bland was included. Everything is solid, just like I wanted. Satisfied.

not satisfied with the picture, cold color, ragged blurring of the back, but in general the lens is not bad, regarding the quality of the materials, the lens has been for more than 4 years, the only lens I use almost constantly because of the very convenient focal length and sharpness at f / 1.4 and it works like new, the plastic is also very high quality - not a single scratch for so many years, it also did not loosen up and did not hold together and did not hang out at all ! In general, you…

I would like to leave my review based on two years of using the lens. I photograph a lot and 35 is my favorite FR. The lens itself is surprisingly sharp from 1.4 and looks very good in appearance. Before that, there were sigma lenses and they were no match at all. I experienced complete delight for about half a year, but then the classic Sigma shoals began to emerge one after another. After half a year, I found that with frequent use it loses its appearance, not that critical, but much faster…

I don’t like reviews. I love reading them!) But I can’t resist! Bravo Sigma! I set myself up to buy 35L . there were not enough focal lengths, and I still wanted to collect the "golden three" .) I honestly thought that after 135L and 85L nothing would surprise me . Here, having shoveled a bunch of reviews and reviews of real people, I decided to change L optics. And I did not lose. The glass is amazing. The plasticity of the picture, oily bokeh, coupled with sharpness in the open - like…

Everything I write here is my personal opinion and experience. in sharpness and HA it is much better than a similar Elka. very sharp in the open. "nuts" in bokeh start with aperture 2.8, in elka with 2.0 autofocus is tenacious, fast. Assembled very well. How whole. The fastening of the hood is reliable, dense. (by the way, at 135 2.0 the hood loosened in two years) after 2-3(?) years of use, still very satisfied. not going to sell. I shot it in the rain and in a snowstorm, there were…

There was a choice of 50 1.2 mm or 35 1.4 from Canon. I took a Canon 35 1.4 to shoot from a friend - excellent glass, nothing to say. I accidentally saw a review on the Sigma 35 1.4 network from the new line, read reviews for a long time and looked at examples, and still decided to buy my first non-Canon lens. The thing, for its money, is made very high quality, Canon is inferior in this regard, according to the sensations for sure. Ergonomics are thought out to the smallest detail, the image…

As I said, there is a critical problem with backlighting, there is one more little catch in this glass, when you photograph, for example, a person in full growth on a fully open one, forget about sharpness, but if you close the aperture to 2-2.8, the picture will be completely sharp, on in my opinion, this cannot even be attributed to the minuses, the aperture ratio remains very good, the same thing with architecture, you can see every brick! Vignetting is present by itself, but very pleasant…