Pros
- Excellent optical quality, sharpness, pattern, well made - Japanese assembly - heavy!
Cons
- Unclear situation with unstable autofocus of some instances. Heavy :)
Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens for 📷 Nikon - Black - 3.7 x 3.03 x 3.03 (Model 340306) Review
38
·
Average
Rating
3.9
👓 Lenses
Media
(4)
Photos by authors
(3)
Description of Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens for 📷 Nikon - Black - 3.7 x 3.03 x 3.03 (Model 340306)
Unleash Your Creativity with the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens for Nikon
When it comes to capturing stunning images, professional photographers and photography enthusiasts understand the significance of having a high-quality lens. Introducing the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens for Nikon, a powerful lens that offers exceptional performance and versatility. Designed for both DX and FX Nikon cameras, this lens is a must-have for anyone looking to take their photography to the next level.
Unparalleled Optics and Performance
Equipped with a 35mm focal length and a maximum aperture of F1.4, this lens delivers exceptional clarity, sharpness, and bokeh effect, allowing you to capture breathtaking images with stunning detail. Whether you're shooting landscapes, portraits, or low-light scenes, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens ensures outstanding results every time.
Seamless Compatibility
One of the standout features of the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens is its compatibility with all current Nikon cameras, including both DX and FX models. This means that regardless of the camera you own or plan to upgrade to, this lens will seamlessly integrate with your setup. Say goodbye to the hassle of switching lenses or compromising on quality.
Superior Autofocus and Manual Control
Thanks to its ring-type ultrasonic-type AF motor, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens offers lightning-fast and precise autofocus, ensuring your subjects are always in sharp focus. Additionally, the lens provides full-time manual focusing, giving you complete control over your shots. Whether you prefer automatic or manual focus, this lens caters to your unique shooting style.
Discover the Perfect Lens for Your Photography Needs
While the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens is an exceptional choice, it's essential to explore other lenses in the market to find the perfect match for your specific photography requirements. Popular alternatives to consider include wide-angle lenses for capturing breathtaking landscapes, telephoto lenses for wildlife and sports photography, and macro lenses for stunning close-up shots. Each lens has its own unique characteristics and benefits, so be sure to explore and experiment to find the lens that best suits your style and creative vision.
Who Will Benefit from the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens?
The Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens is an invaluable tool for both professional photographers and enthusiasts alike. Its versatile focal length makes it suitable for various genres, including portraits, street photography, and even documentary work. Whether you're a wedding photographer capturing intimate moments or an aspiring artist experimenting with different styles, this lens empowers you to unleash your creativity and achieve stunning results. With its exceptional optics, seamless compatibility, and superior autofocus capabilities, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens is a true game-changer in the world of lenses.
Here are some of the areas where the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art DG HSM Lens can be used:
35mm focal length, 52.5mm equivalent focal length on APS-C cameras, 56mm equivalent focal length on Canon APS-C cameras. F1.4 maximum aperture; F16 minimum, This model is compatible with all current Nikon cameras (both DX and FX). Ring-type ultrasonic-type AF motor with full-time manual focusing. 67mm filters,0.30m/11.81" minimum focus. Maximum Magnifications-1:5.2. Angle of View-63.4o. Available in Canon EF, Nikon F (FX), Pentax KAF3, Sony Alpha, Sigma SA mounts. Please refer the User Manual which is in the Product Box before use.
Hide
Pros
- Pathos. Sigma Art?! Taaa you sho, you sho God of photography or where?! Aperture 1.4 Bokeh is cool of course))
Cons
- Smears, hard, almost always. Heap with back/front focus that often goes untreated There is no stub, but for such a price one could have at least the simplest one.
Pros
- - sharp, All these advantages are crossed out by one disadvantage!
Cons
- illogical, non-systematic at focusing distances from 2
Pros
- Everyone is aware of everything there is to know about the benefits of using this lens. Cutting. Because it is inexpensive (in comparison to autofocus branded full-frame rivals with an aperture of f1.4), it has quickly acquired appeal among expert amateurs who want a prime lens with a high aperture and a detailed picture. The popularity of this lens in synthetic tests was greatly aided by DXOmark. In addition, the front pages of the B&H website and many other locations were bought out for advertising banners. It turned out that sharpness was a highly sought-after item, and it was not difficult at all to make a sale of it. And I was one of those customers who bought it. Yet as time went on, I became aware of things that I would not have discovered in such a straightforward manner. I am going to come right out and say it: the lens was put up for sale as soon as possible once a sufficient number of "pitfalls" that were "crucial" for me had gathered. A total of four years was spent as the owner of that property.
Cons
- - The keenness. Yes. Do not wonder. I've included this quality under the 'dignity' and 'disadvantage' categories. Optics are an extremely delicate field of study. This is the part of physics where there are laws. When it comes to obeying these laws, compromises are unavoidable. In the beginning, I was satisfied with a picture that had a high level of detail and the capacity to inspect even the smallest of the image's details, but as it turned out later, it is not at all difficult to make merely a sharp lens with the computer power available today. This requires a forced measure such as an increase in the number of optical elements in the lens, because each optical element in the lens presents an unavoidable hurdle to the light that is allowed to go through the lens and into the viewfinder. The process known as "lens construction" can be challenging since it requires calculating the optical system in such a way that the sharpness can be maintained at an acceptable level while also ensuring that the images capture a lot of detail. As a matter of course, the volume in a photograph is achieved by utilizing techniques such as tonal gradation, aerial perspective, and the proper lighting of the subject that is being photographed; but, as it was discovered, there is also a technique known as. - Microcontrast. To be more specific, the total absence of it. The problem of making the lens resolve a multi-megapixel matrix and conveying the "volume" of the environment that is being photographed is a challenging one. When it comes to the lack of this flaw, Sigma lenses are the gold standard. This is one of the primary factors that contributes to the high cost of lenses from Zeiss, Voigtlander, and Lake. The calculation of the optical scheme must be done in such a way that the number of elements in IDEAL should not be greater than nine. The optical phenomenon known as microcontrast can be seen most clearly in black and white images. an especially illuminating photograph taken with a Voigtlander that can be found at http://www.mtyskfoto. Se/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/voigtlander-3. Jpg. - The autofocus feature does not operate effectively in conjunction with radio synchronizers since it causes a significant amount of frame jamming.
Pros
- The glasses have a very low HA for their level of sharpness; they have excellent bokeh and softening of blur zones; the docking station eliminates the need to rely on the service center for tuning; the build quality and materials used are of a very high standard; and in general, very few people, even those with very expensive lenses, can boast about owning such a distinctive pair of eyewear. - 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 to the fullest here (few people can compete with the Japanese in this regard - they know how to calculate the production economy)!; - the most affordable price point in this segment -
Cons
- The following are sadly also present: A focusing screen with Doden wedges and microraster (microprisms) is recommended 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); - there is no protection against dust and moisture, well, the Japanese don't take money for it
Pros
- ratio of aperture, degree of sharpness, and cost in comparison to equivalents
Cons
- sometimes makes a creaking sound when focusing (possibly due to moisture), and sometimes the color rendition is a little unsettling (a little green, or something like that). to some extent a bit . It would appear that this is the case.) Nonetheless, in my opinion, the combined effect of both of these flaws is not more than a 5% reduction in its attractiveness.
Pros
- Sharp wide open The sharpness is very good with 3.3 even in low light; the sharpness is perfect with good bokeh. I shot at 2.0 when aiming at distant objects in the subway; the bokeh is good; the sharpness is perfect.
Cons
- On level 2.0, a magenta HA was found.
Pros
- + Quality of construction. It goes without saying that Sigma is not the same as it was ten years ago. In point of fact, Carl Zeiss and I share something in common with regard to this. + Autofocus (speed). A marginal improvement in speed over the standard Nikon 35 f/1.4G lens. + Extreme acuity. If you manage to hit accurately, you can be sure that even at f / 1.4 you will get pixel-by-pixel sharpness. + Balance. The proportions of a full-frame camera, both in terms of size and weight, are just right. + Cost. When compared to the native Nikon 35mm f/1.4G, there is a price difference that is about three times as high. + Market for used goods. Simple to purchase and simple to locate a buyer for.
Cons
- - Autofocus (accuracy). carries on with his own life. They "shot" in the store, they "shot" at home, and everything seems to be in working order. All right, so let's say you got really lucky and picked the one copy out of several that was the only one that was perfectly in focus. The following day, while you are photographing a wedding or graduation, you get eighty percent of the wedding! Once you've covered the aperture from f/ 2-2.8, you can finish shooting with half as much sorrow. And this is a problem that is totally technological in nature and has nothing to do with the photographer: you can get 4/10 hits on the central point from static portraiture, but if you start chasing the point throughout the full focused screen, then you can't bank on more than 1/10! The "subject" is unique in that if it accurately focuses from 2 meters to the object, it does not mean anything at all. This is the peculiarity of the "subject." One foot in front of the other, two steps behind, an obstacle, and a long shot. milk! Dock station!? You really believe that! Ok! You spend money on a docking station and make certain adjustments, but the issue is not entirely resolved. AND? Are you going to endure more pain? - An inability of Nikon carcasses to work with optical components made by Sigma I explain: I have two D810 bodies with the penultimate firmware and two D300 bodies (latest). While the D810 has full compatibility with the D300s, it does not support autofocus in live view. I make the decision to update the firmware by eating the carcass. AF performance degrades drastically across the board! How do you feel about making such a significant investment in optics when the date on which your system will stop providing support for it is unknown? By reverting the firmware, it was feasible to restore AF's previous level of productivity. - Bokeh. In contrast to the Nikon 35 f/1.4G, utter revulsion is elicited by this camera. There is only a zone of focus, which will be quite sharp if you were successful in achieving accurate focus, and soap, which will appear as circles with sharp edges. It is impossible to even consider the possibility of a seamless transition from one zone to another. Drawing that is too technical. This is a highly personal strike against the plus. Even if this is not the case, the picture that I drew myself is the one that appeals to me the most. - Refers to the secondary market. Do you remember what I mentioned up there about how simple it is to find a buyer? Yet, many people are aware of the difficulties associated with AF. Are you certain that you will have the same success in selling it as you have with your own optics?
Pros
- + build quality and materials + appearance, design + silent + drawing and color rendition + accurate, fast focus + minimal distortion - + Inexpensive compared to native.
Cons
- - no water protection in the mount (+ produces accuracy) - heavy, for men's hands (+ instead of dumbbells)
Pros
- Aperture. Build quality. The presence of a hood and a cover (it is extremely rare to find the latter in the kit). Good speed and focusing accuracy (details in the comment). Sharpness from an open aperture.
Cons
- I didn’t find it, and I hope that when using it, they won’t be found either.
Pros
- + Build quality. Sigma is not the same as it was 10 years ago, of course. Indeed, there is something in common in this regard with Carl Zeiss. + Autofocus (speed). Slightly faster than the native Nikon 35 f / 1.4G. + Sharpness. If you manage to hit accurately, you can be sure that even at f / 1.4 you will get pixel-by-pixel sharpness. + Balance. The size and weight are perfectly combined with a full-frame camera. + Cost. Almost 3 times the difference in cost compared to the native Nikon 35mm f / 1.4G. + Secondary market. Easy to buy, easy to find a buyer.
Cons
- - Autofocus (accuracy). Lives his own life. Okay, let's say you were lucky to choose the only one from several copies that was exactly focused: they "shot" in the store, "shot" at home, everything seems to be ok. The next day, when shooting a wedding or graduation, you get 80% of the marriage! Having covered the aperture to f / 2-2.8, you finish shooting with grief in half. And this is a purely technical problem that does not depend on the photographer: you can get 4/10 hits on the central point from static portraits, and if you start chasing the point across the entire focused screen, then don’t count on more than 1/10! The peculiarity of the "subject" is: if it accurately focuses from 2 meters to the object, it does not mean anything at all. One step forward, two steps back, an object, a long shot. milk! Dock station!? Are you seriously!? Ok! You buy a docking station, make changes, the problem cannot be completely solved. AND? Will you suffer further? - Incompatibility of Sigma optics with Nikon carcasses. I explain: I have 2 carcasses D810 (penultimate firmware) and D300s (latest). Compatibility with D300s is complete, AF in Live view does not work on D810. I decide to ate the carcass to the latest firmware. AF work falls off in all modes completely! How do you like such an investment in optics, which is not known when it will no longer be supported by your system? It was possible to return the work of AF by rolling back the firmware. - Bokeh. The disgust is complete in comparison with the Nikon 35 f / 1.4G. There is only a zone of focus (very sharp if you managed to focus accurately) and soap, consisting of circles with hard edges. There can be no talk of any smooth transition from one zone to another. Too technical drawing. This is a very subjective minus. Perhaps this is not so, but I like the picture from my own more. - Secondary market. Remember I wrote above that it is easy to find a buyer? But after all, many people know about problems with AF. Are you sure that you will be able to sell it as easily as your own optics?
Pros
- Yes, it is qualitatively made, yes everything is adjusted, there are no backlashes between the camera and the lens, even a speck of dust will not slip there in one word, you hold it in your hands, you feel the thing, but there are also disadvantages
Cons
- The most important thing is the stability of getting into focus, as it was already written here, it can fly over or undershoot in conditions that are simple for focusing, and this is the main drawback compared to that from Nikon, it is also inferior to the geometry of the picture (it distorts more than Nikkor, although it has distortions, You can see the difference in the photo, albeit a slight one. Now about the vaunted sharpness of the Sigma 35 mm. - yes, there is sharpness if you get into focus, but it is not as razor-like as the Nikkor 35 mm. not so ideal, I would say - that is, a little smoothing - for me personally, this is critical
Pros
- 1. Working open hole f/1.4 2. The high resolution of the lens reveals the capabilities of modern cameras with a large matrix (such as Nikon d800). 3. Autofocus is fast, silent, accurate enough 4. Not bulky, suitable as a staff member on the Nikon d800 5. Distortion in the center of the frame is invisible 6. Pleasant background blur on open holes.
Cons
- 1. The lens is still wide-angle: the farther from the center, the more the geometry suffers. For close-up group shots or portrait shots, you need to carefully choose the angle, otherwise the unpleasant features of the wide-angle lens immediately catch your eye. 2. Both lids are uncomfortable, bad to hold, mediocre quality 3. Nikon cameras do not know this lens and do not correct distortion automatically (on Canon systems the situation is different) 4. There is vignetting on open holes, but on older Nikon models (d800 +) it is automatically corrected by the camera settings 5. It is not known what resource is embedded in this lens, how many years the motor will work for it and whether this lens will be supported by firmware for the next generations of Nikon cameras.
