Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Art vs. Otus?  (Read 44183 times)

Herbc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 387
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #80 on: April 12, 2014, 09:15:20 am »

What with the Sony mirrorless offerings being so easy to use, I am VERY reluctant to buy any lens that does not have
f stops - tried to manage the adapter that supposedly allows f stop settings was not satisfactory.  That said, my D800E is still the one that gets the "serious" work.
Logged

MrSmith

  • Guest
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #81 on: April 12, 2014, 09:20:46 am »

I'll probably get the sigma in canon mount to use mainly on my A7r. My clients would not be able to tell the difference between images shot on that or the otus and I would rather the money sat in the MrSmith comfort fund than those of Zeiss shareholders.
Logged

Vladimirovich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1311
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #82 on: April 12, 2014, 10:39:57 am »

Aircraft, for example, are now built using composites - at least in part.
the real question is - does your camera/lens part using the same quality plastic as that part in "aircraft" or not... the assumption is that it is, but the devil is in the details... it is not a fact, plastics are different, even if you call 2 plastics by the same name (same class) they are not the same
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #83 on: April 12, 2014, 08:26:52 pm »

I'll probably get the sigma in canon mount to use mainly on my A7r. My clients would not be able to tell the difference between images shot on that or the otus and I would rather the money sat in the MrSmith comfort fund than those of Zeiss shareholders.

Will your "clients" notice any difference at all with any other "standard" lens? ...I doubt it! ...in fact I doubt if "they" care for the existence of a lens rather than its nature...
Logged

MrSmith

  • Guest
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #84 on: April 13, 2014, 03:49:28 am »

Possibly if they looked in the corners of images shot with the zoom I'm using that covers 50mm focal length, I don't own a flat field high quality 50mm so the sigma will fill that gap.
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #85 on: April 13, 2014, 04:17:44 am »

Just ordered this new Sigma from B&H with a Nikon mount.

I'll bet this provides a nice boost for your D800E.  Can't wait to see what you do with it on that camera.

So far, the only review I've seen uses the D3x. 

If the lens is that good, I might return to 50-land.

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #86 on: April 13, 2014, 06:02:11 am »

I'll bet this provides a nice boost for your D800E.  Can't wait to see what you do with it on that camera.

So far, the only review I've seen uses the D3x. 

If the lens is that good, I might return to 50-land.

In this review http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1677/cat/30 they claim that they were told by Sigma that they sacrificed a bit of resolution in favour for contrast... This may mean that on D800/E Otus may appear considerably sharper that the ART, while on a lower resolution camera (like a D3X or Eos 5iii or even 1DX or D4/DF) the Sigma may appear visibly sharper than the Otus (with more micro contrast)... Just a thought for people that use more than one camera to take into account when testing the lens them selfs... An important factor that many reviewers don't take into account when testing a lens and sometimes many of the customers don't pay enough attention either.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #87 on: April 16, 2014, 12:23:54 am »

vladimirovich, have you any idea how many different kinds of aluminum alloy there are, and how widely the properties of those alloys vary?  Only certain alloys of aluminum are suitable for aircraft structural components - if you use other aluminum alloys, the plane is likely to break up into pieces. "Plastic" is as variable.

I for one am happy to use a good lens or a good camera even if it has plastic components  the weight savings can be significant, and this can translate to less user fatigue. I shoot with a Canon 6D, and it performs to specifications. No, it isn't as sturdy as the 1D series. I am not taking the thing into war zones, though. It is Good Enough For Me. (At least, I preferred to buy a less expensive SLR and spend the difference on a really nice used lens for landscape, Zeiss 21mm f/2.8).

I am waiting for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art to show up in local shops. That will space out the expenditure a bit.
Logged

dreed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1715
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #88 on: April 16, 2014, 10:45:08 am »

...
Canon non exotic primes higher up on the list than they should be(especially the canon 50 f 1.4).
...

My one of these needed to be repaired and when I took it in for service even the receptionist could tell exactly what was wrong with it when I handed it to her and was able to pull a line item from their service catalogue for costing without a technician looking at it.

Canon offer a 1 year warranty for all of their lenses for "defective parts or a defective Product."
Sigma offer:
"Beginning July 1, 2013, all brand new Sigma Products purchased from authorized Sigma dealers are covered under the 1 year America warranty (North and South America) and U.S.A. extended warranties for a period of four (4) years against defects in manufacturing and workmanship only."

So Canon will stand by their product for one year, Sigma four years.
Logged

Misirlou

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 711
    • http://
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #89 on: April 16, 2014, 10:40:17 pm »

My one of these needed to be repaired and when I took it in for service even the receptionist could tell exactly what was wrong with it when I handed it to her and was able to pull a line item from their service catalogue for costing without a technician looking at it.

Same thing happened to me. That lens must fail in a very predictable way. In their defense, mine was 9 years old when it croaked, and the service center had it back to me in about two days.
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #90 on: April 17, 2014, 02:23:31 pm »

The DxO test for the Sigma Art 50 is up at DPR today. 

Try using the comparison tool to compare the Sigma with the Otus.  Though the MTF numbers don't tell the entire story, it does seem that the Sigma beats the Otus off center.  Mind you, this is measured only on the 5DIII, which the test acknowledges is probably the limiting factor for some measurements.  Nevertheless, it is interesting. 

MatthewCromer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 505
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #91 on: April 17, 2014, 02:46:06 pm »

Quote
Mind you, this is measured only on the 5DIII, which the test acknowledges is probably the limiting factor for some measurements.  Nevertheless, it is interesting.

Why would they test on the 5DIII?!
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #92 on: April 17, 2014, 03:19:31 pm »

Why would they test on the 5DIII?!

Why indeed!  Clearly the point of the Art/Otus is to be prepared for 36MP+ sensor resolutions.

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #93 on: April 17, 2014, 04:46:57 pm »

Why indeed!  Clearly the point of the Art/Otus is to be prepared for 36MP+ sensor resolutions.
Yet, all known lenses up to now have been tested on lesser resolution cameras... this gives an immediate real comparison of the improvement achieved and suggests that the difference can only be magnified if a higher resolution sensor is used... OTOH, many that are not using a 36mp sensor currently (or others that wouldn't care to get one), may would conclude that such a lens would be a worthless overkill if tested on a higher res. camera than what they use.
Logged

Misirlou

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 711
    • http://
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #94 on: April 17, 2014, 05:02:55 pm »

Why would they test on the 5DIII?!

Because the first copy they received was in Canon mount, and using an adapter on something like an A7R would introduce a testing variable. I'm sure they'll put one on a Nikon as soon as they get one in that mount.

I could be wrong, but that's my guess.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #95 on: April 17, 2014, 08:25:08 pm »

right you are, misirilou. Sigma brings out its lenses in order of mount popularity, so Canon is always first, Nikon second, then Sony A and Pentax K and Sigma A make up the third group. Sigma wants to move lots of the lenses in the early days and generate lots of buzz. Rest assured, someone will be slapping that EF-mount 50 1.4 Art on a Sony A7R soon enough and publishing the results.
Logged

Aztex

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #96 on: January 19, 2015, 10:28:50 am »

Hi,

Thought I'd bump this up as I have been researching the Sigma 35mm 1.4 A lens. I read this entire thread and found it a wonderful discussion. I'm new here and have experience at other photo sites. I'm impressed by the way you guys can disagree and not flip out and keep on track. I like it here!

That said I'm posting as a number of the posts suggested the resale value of the Sigma may take a hit and some suggested 33% when the box is open.

Well as of Jan 19th I saw only one with Nikon F mount on ebay with bidding at $710 with 2 days left…
KEH has one for a Pentax at $728
BHPhoto one for $829

Seems to be holding its value quite well.

Since the OTUS is out of my league I can't comment on that.

I pulled the trigger this morning! Can't wait!

Thanks,

Aztex
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #97 on: January 19, 2015, 10:37:45 am »

You ought to be pretty happy. I love my Sigma Art 35 f/1.4, and may be getting its big brother (50) soon.
Logged

Some Guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 729
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #98 on: January 19, 2015, 11:32:47 am »

I have the 35mm ART and compared it to my Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G and it came out a little softer than the Nikon using the latest Reikan FoCal software.

My ART seems to have a shift of the AF in the Red, Blue, and Green when I did the FoCal AF test on it.  The Red needs a -17, The Blue a -15, and the Green -10 in the body for AF tuning.

The Nikon sets around -14 with a two point spread in the RGB, vs. the Sigma 7 point spread above.

I dunno...

However, at least you can calibrate the lens AF tuning with their puck to a given body, just not the aberrations of the three colors though.

SG
Logged

Aztex

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: Art vs. Otus?
« Reply #99 on: January 19, 2015, 12:59:54 pm »

I have the 35mm ART and compared it to my Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G and it came out a little softer than the Nikon using the latest Reikan FoCal software.

My ART seems to have a shift of the AF in the Red, Blue, and Green when I did the FoCal AF test on it.  The Red needs a -17, The Blue a -15, and the Green -10 in the body for AF tuning.

The Nikon sets around -14 with a two point spread in the RGB, vs. the Sigma 7 point spread above.

I dunno...

However, at least you can calibrate the lens AF tuning with their puck to a given body, just not the aberrations of the three colors though.

SG


I try not to get too crazy about all this but certainly understand the analysis is important. I wonder how much it is camera dependent as I have read the opposite reports! Probably individual lenses having "issues"

I'm crossing fingers I get a good one on first try. Not sure if I should try a couple if poor results or invest in the USB puck…

This will be my first non-Nikkor lens for a Nikon ever! Never had CA issues in the film days but was mostly a B&W shooter. I use NX2 and it auto corrects flawlessly with Nikkor lenses. I doubt it does so with Sigma but we shall see what happens.

Thanks,

Aztex
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up