Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Review

Dustin Abbott

April 4th, 2018

The very first Sony FE lens that I reviewed was not a Sony; it was a Zeiss. When Zeiss approached me about reviewing the Zeiss Batis APO Sonnar 135mm f/2.8 lens, I actually had no way of doing so as I didn’t own any Sony bodies. B&H Photo bailed me out by loaning me an a7R2, which allowed me to also do a mini-review of that camera as well. While I wasn’t completely blown away by the a7R2, I was very interested in the idea of having autofocus lenses with that legendary Zeiss optical performance. I didn’t take the plunge to purchase the a7R2, but some of the positives of that experience (and the thought of autofocusing Zeiss lenses!) translated into serious interest when the Sony a7R3 was announced, and, after reviewing that camera to death, I made the decision to purchase one for myself. One thing I knew after that experience with the Batis 135mm; I was seriously interested in the Batis line if I ever added Sony to my own kit. That interest certainly didn’t go away. So, when I knew that I would be visiting the Shenandoah Mountain region in Virginia along with making a trip into Washington, D.C., I reached out to the great people at Zeiss North America, and they hooked me up with a couple of Batis loaners – the Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Distagon T* (featured here) along with the lenses big brother, the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 Distagon T*. I decided to look at the two wide angle Batis options at the same time so that I could compare and contrast them for myself…and for you. The Batis 25mm is an extremely interesting option for owners of both full frame and APS-C Sony E mount cameras, but is it the lens for you?

Prefer to watch your reviews? You can see my thorough video review here:

Batis 25mm f/2 Build, Design, and Handling

You can get the whole picture of the build and design in this video here:

The Batis series has a very familiar look. These two lenses are, respectively, the 21^st and 22^nd Zeiss lenses that I have reviewed. The current “Zeiss look” debuted on the ultra-premium Otus series, and is one of the most elegant looks in the business. One of my favorite aspects of this current design language is how the lens hood design is a part of the “flow” of the lens profile. Many lens hoods are functional, but look like afterthoughts from a design perspective.

Zeiss lenses have a reputation for being some of the best made lenses in the business, and that truth ratcheted up with the Milvus series for Canon and Nikon DSLRs due to having thorough weather sealing to compliment the all metal and glass construction. What the Milvus (or Otus) series lenses are not, however, is light. They are typically among the heaviest lenses in their respective classes, with a unique heft and feeling of density that is uniquely Zeiss in my mind.

The Batis series takes the Zeiss design ethos of having very well-built lenses complete with weather sealing but then marries that with the mirrorless need for much lighter lenses. As a result, the Batis lenses look familiar but feel different in the hand. I first reached for them expecting that familiar heft, but instead found a lens that feels surprisingly light. An excellent case in point is the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 and the Zeiss Milvus 18mm f/2.8. Both lenses are made for full frame sensors, and have fairly similar dimensions (Batis is 100mm in diameter and 80mm long, while the Milvus is 90mm in diameter and 93mm in length – which translates to 96% of the same volume). The weight? Well, the Batis lens weighs 330g, while the Milvus lens is 721g! The Batis series is remarkably light by comparison.

In the case of the 25mm f/2, Zeiss has managed to produce a lens that feels very well made (mostly lightweight metals), has dust and moisture resistance, but still manages to weigh in at a lightweight 335g (11.82oz). This makes it lightweight enough to also pair nicely on the Sony a6500 APS-C camera body that I also tested it on alongside the full frame Sony a7R3. There are a lot of happy users of the Batis 25mm on APS-C cameras. The lens is moderately sized as well, with an 81mm diameter (3.19”) and 78mm length (3.07”). It has more of a squat profile than anything, but the modest length of the lens means that there is little weight situated out from the camera, making it an easy lens to balance even on lighter camera bodies. One weight-saving measure that I’ve noted on the Batis series as compared to other Zeiss lenses is that the lens hood is made of plastic rather than metal. They’ve done a good job of blending the finish of the metal lens barrel and the plastic hood so that visually there is no difference. It is only when you handle the hood that you detect a difference in construction.

On the note of the finish: I personally am a big fan of the sleek, black, anodized satin finish on Zeiss lenses. Other lens makers have followed that visual cue (Tamron and most recently Tokina come to mind). The royal blue of the Zeiss badges look great inset on either side of the barrel. But some have complained that the finish is prone to picking up fingerprints (which can be true).

The barrel has no switches on it, so you will have to switch into Manual Focus mode in the camera body, or by shooting in DMF (Direct Manual Focus) mode that continues to allow autofocus but allows you to manually override focus at any point. One nice thing about this is the that camera will automatically zoom in the image on the LCD screen or viewfinder when manual input is detected, which makes it much easier to make quick manual adjustments on the fly.

The manual focus ring has a rubberized texture that is very similar to the Otus series. Some has objected to this, citing that the rubberized surface will break down and peel over time, but I have never seen any evidence of this actually happening. Sometimes people just like to complain. It is an easy surface to grip, and, unlike the rubberized focus rings of some other brand lenses that I have used, I have found that the Zeiss material isn’t particularly prone to collecting lint.

There are no distance markings on the barrel, which is typical for mirrorless autofocusing lenses due to manual focus being “focus by wire”. All focus input on the manual focus ring is routed through the autofocus motor of the lens, and it is actually the focus motor, not the ring, that moves the elements. Because there is no mechanical connection to the lens elements, there is no fixed position for the focus ring, and thus no traditional focus distance information. Most mirrorless lenses force you to rely on focus information in the camera body, but on the Batis series this particular bit of information can be tasked to the OLED screen further up the barrel. When the camera is turned on the OLED will flash the word “Zeiss”, and then what information that is further displayed there will depend on what mode you put it. Out of the box it will mostly stay dark unless you are in manual focus mode, when it will display actual focus distance as a numerical value (in meters [up to two decimal points] or feet), which is very handy and arguably more useful than a traditional focus window.

The usefulness doesn’t end there, however. If you put the camera in MF mode and then turn the manual focus ring to the left past minimum focus 360 degrees you will enter into the control for the OLED. You have three options there: ON, MF (Default Position), and OFF. In the ON position it will show the focus distance even in AF mode. If you put the camera in MF mode and twist the focus ring to the right for a while it will allow you to switch the readout to measuring in feet rather than meters. You might argue that this is of minimal value, but when you consider that many mirrorless lenses lose any kind of distance window, I think that this is one of the beneficial hallmarks of the Batis line.

Moving to the lens mount, you will find a metal lens mount with a rubberized gasket (for the weather sealing) in Zeiss blue (always a nice touch to me). It’s a small thing, but the raised circular area that denotes the lens mount point on the outside of the barrel is actually very useful. Many lenses just have something painted there, but if you are in dark or dimly lit conditions (like when shooting Astro), being able to find the mount point by tactile feel is kind of a big deal. Thank you, Zeiss, for thinking of the small things.

Up front the look of the lens is very familiar to Zeiss shooters, with metal filter threads (a very common 67mm here), and classy branding information.

One distinct advantage (particularly for my shooting style) of the Batis 25mm over the 18mm f/2.8 is the close focus ability of the 25mm. I tend to value lenses with the ability to focus closely and with a good magnification figure, as it enables more variety in the types of images that you can take with a particular lens. The Batis 25mm allows you to focus down to a very close 20cm (7.87”), where you will have a very useful 1:5.2 reproduction ratio (0.19x). This is nearly double that of the 18mm. The Batis 25mm employs floating elements to enable better performance near minimum focus distance.

The Batis 25mm is, like other Zeiss lenses, made in Japan. All in all, this is a beautiful little lens that will look very handsome mounted on your camera.

Batis 25mm Autofocus

I’ve already dealt briefly with the manual focus ring in terms of its feel, but before I deal with the autofocus, let me briefly detail the nature of the manual focus action (it just seems right when reviewing a Zeiss lens!). It’s pretty well documented by this point that I’m not a huge fan of focus by wire, but I have to admit that some of these premium lenses are starting to make it a much better experience. The weight of the manual focus ring on the Batis 25mm is about right, with the freedom to move fast when making major focus changes but enough weight to make small, precise movements when needed. The speed of movement responds to your input speed, so it will move quickly when making fast input and then slowly when you want more precision. There doesn’t seem to be an issue with lag between your input and focus changes. All in all this is a much more sophisticated implementation of “focus-by-wire” than what I saw with early Canon STM motors. The biggest thing missing is the tactile feel that only great manual focus lenses provide – the hard stops at minimum focus and infinity and the feeling of moving the elements directly.

Video shooters may favor the manual focus Zeiss Loxia series instead, as the purely mechanic focus ring will work better with either manual focus or focus follow systems than any focus-by-wire lens (even a good one like this!)

The Batis 25mm is a different breed than most Zeiss lenses; it is an autofocus lens (as are all Batis lenses). Thus far it is only on Sony mirrorless where we have seen true Zeiss (not Sony/Zeiss) autofocus lenses. There are two autofocus Zeiss series on Sony cameras, the Touit series (APS-C) and the full frame Batis series. There’s a lot of things that I like about the Touit lenses, but the behavior of the autofocus systems in the Batis lenses is definitely more sophisticated. The Touit lenses tend to be louder in operation, while the Batis lenses are essentially silent in operation. The only real noise that I typically hear in operation is the beep confirming focus lock.

Focus speed is generally very good. There was a [very] occasional focus “miss” on the first focus attempt, which would trigger a focus rack before the autofocus queued things up again, but most of the time focus was quick and confident. I also had good success with focus accuracy, with my only real challenges coming at or near minimum focus when the AF system wanted to grab the background rather than the subject.

All of the various Sony focus modes work well, as does technology like Eye AF. There are limits to Eye AF with a wide angle lens, as if you subject is too far away from the camera the focus area (eye) may be almost too small to detect. At reasonable distances (25 feet or less), Eye AF works fine.

One minor thing worth noting is that you can manually focus a little close than what the lens will autofocus, so don’t be afraid to maximize your magnification of close focus objects by using a little manual focus.

All in all the autofocus performance from the Batis 25mm is a positive experience. Having an autofocusing Zeiss is just as great as you think it is!

Batis 25mm Image Quality

The single greatest reason to buy Zeiss is because of their incredible experience with creating excellent optical instruments. The name has been synonymous with excellent image quality, and my expectations are frankly pretty high whenever I review a Zeiss lens. This lens employs the familiar Distagon optical arrangement and has 10 element in 8 groups. Can the smaller, lighter Batis 25mm f/2 maintain the high Zeiss standard?

The short answer is yes. I recommend that you watch this video to get the details along with a comparison to the 18mm f/2.8:

Both the 18mm f/2.8 and the 25mm f/2 have unique strengths. The Batis 18mm f/2.8 may be one of the sharpest wide angle lenses that I’ve seen in the middle of the frame, with near perfect sharpness and contrast even at f/2.8. Its performance is a little uneven, though, with a noticeable variance between the center 2/3rds of the frame and the outer portion of the frame…particularly at closer focus distances, where some field curvature comes into play. It also exhibits more distortion and vignette than the 25mm f/2. At infinity distances it has a slight edge in sharpness and contrast in the center 2/3rds of the frame, but the extreme corners favor the 25mm.

The Batis 25mm f/2 stands out for the evenness of the resolution across the frame. It never quite reaches the level of sharpness and contrast in the center of the frame of the 18mm (though it is excellent in its own right), but gives a more compelling edge to edge performance. It exhibits lower distortion and vignette as well. The 18mm f/2.8 has lower coma than the 25mm f/2 with both lenses wide open, but stop the 25mm down to f/2.8 and it gives the sharper result with lower coma.

Batis 25mm Resolution and Contrast

First of all, applying the Lightroom profile for the Batis 25mm in addition to the embedded RAW profile makes a noticeable if not extreme difference. There is only very mild distortion, and there will be very few situations where you will notice this difference. The Batis 18mm f/2.8 actually leaves somewhat of a mustache distortion behind after just the embedded lens correction, but the native distortion in the Batis 25mm f/2 is obviously pretty mild to begin with. There should be zero concerns after applying the standard profile. There is some vignette that remains after the embedded profile is applied, but the Lightroom profile seems to finish clearing that up without any kind of damage done to the image.

I did notice some chromatic aberrations in a few extreme situations, but in most situations they were well enough controlled as to be nearly unnoticeable. You can tell that axial chromatic aberrations are very low by looking at the infinity results, which, even at f/2, are pretty incredible across the frame. At a pixel level you can see the faintest amount of CA on the high contrast white trunks of the poplars, but it is virtually undetectable.

That amount of sharpness and contrast in a wide angle lens at f/2 is impressive. I felt that the f/2 results were perfectly usable across the frame at f/2, with excellent sharpness and contrast. The Batis 18mm shows a little better sharpness and contrast in the center of the frame, but out on the extreme edges the 25mm f/2 has the edge even at f/2. Stopped down to f/2.8 the results are nearly indistinguishable, though I would give the slightest edge to the 18mm everywhere save the extreme edge.

Stopping the lens down to f/4 from f/2 (2 stops) makes only a minimal amount of improvement in the center of the frame, as the results were already excellent. You gain a slight bit of resolution and contrast at either portrait distance or infinity:

Improvement along the edge is a little more noticeable, where you go from very good to excellent.

At a traditional landscape aperture like f/5.6 the results from corner to corner are nothing but excellent. This is a magnificent lens to pair with the excellent 42 MP sensor of the Sony a7R3 that I reviewed the lens on.

This is a lens that is sharp at any aperture, and delivers a superb optical performance in terms of resolution and contrast. The center of the frame is not record setting, but it is excellent, and the sum total of the performance across the frame is exceptional. It delivers amazing landscape results:

Masanutten: Where Winter and Spring Collide

Bokeh, Coma, Flare, and Color Rendition

One thing worth noting is that there is a difference between these two lenses in their color temperature. The 18mm consistently delivered slightly cooler results than the 25mm. Which is preferable is probably a matter of taste. For me personally my preference varied from one image setting to another. Both are close to accurate, though I think the 25mm may just be slightly more so. I’ve got the benefit of looking at the originals on my incredible calibrated BenQ SW271 monitor (a superb display for photographers), and draw my conclusions based on that.

Color rendition from either lens is pretty awesome, though. They have the unique Zeiss ability to deliver results out of camera that really need minimal processing, and what processing you might do is more based on wanting a certain “look” than to help create accurate results. Case in point is this landscape image, where I dialed in a lot more lavender to create more of a desired look – the image was beautiful out of the box, however (the second image is SOOC):

I came home from a trip to the Shenandoah Mountains in Virginia, and was simply delighted with a lot of the images I got right out of the camera. The color, contrast, and detail is near flawless. Here’s a small sampling:

Flare resistance is good but not perfect. You can experience some minor ghosting effects with the sun in the frame, but they are limited in scope. These represent the worst I saw in real world use:

So yes, not really anything worth complaining about.

Coma performance is also very good. Even at f/2 the amount of coma is minimal (some star points on the edge of the frame become slightly wedge shaped), but stopping the lens down to f/2.8 (where most of the competitors start) gives you a truly excellent performance. Here’s a comparison between f/2 and f/2.8:

The sharp, crisp star points along with the other excellent optical attributes of the lens will give you a great looking result:

While 25mm isn’t a major “bokeh” focal length, the close focus distance of the lens does give you the ability to throw backgrounds out of focus when you are close to your subject. The Batis 25 has 9 rounded aperture blades, and definitely has the ability to “make some bokeh” if used right:

As you can see, the quality of the bokeh rendering is pretty good, though in certain situations you will see some “onion bokeh”.

The nature of such a wide focal length means that you probably won’t see this often…nor will it occupy enough of the frame to be visible at anything other than a pixel level. I’ve also noted that the roundness of Zeiss apertures isn’t quite as smooth as a number of other lensmakers when stopped down to smaller apertures.

As you can see, I’m trying to find the potential weak spots of this lens optically and really not coming up with a whole lot. Distortion is well controlled, vignette is pronounced but not really after in the camera corrections take place, flare and chromatic aberrations are well controlled, and color rendition, sharpness, contrast, and bokeh are all positives. Bottom line is that this is a lens that delivers a great performance on its native full frame.

As always, I recommend that you visit the Image Galleries here to look at real images from the lens for yourself.

APS-C Results

I did not formally review the Batis 25mm f/2 on APS-C, but I did shoot with it a fair bit on a 24 MP a6500. The lens has an equivalent focal length of 37.5mm with Sony’s 1.5x crop factor, which delivers an angle of view just a little tighter than the traditional 35mm. This is coming close to “normal” territory, and it proves to be a great “walkaround/general purpose” focal length. It’s good for a lot of subjects, and I enjoyed the ability to diversify my images by getting alternately very close to subjects or shooting at traditional distances. Here’s some examples:

I found that the lens translated well to APS-C, with good contrast, sharpness, and color rendition whether near or far from my subject. The last two examples are shot at f/2:

There are a number of people who use this lens exclusively on APS-C, and I can see why they would enjoy it there. I personally would happily use it on both my a6500 and a7R3, as it is a great fit on both systems.

Conclusion

If you are looking for the best lenses to pair with your Sony full frame (or even APS-C) mirrorless camera, this is a lens that should definitely be on your radar. The Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Distagon T* is one of the better performing wide angle lenses available for any system, and its optical performance belies its light weight. Some will hesitate at the price tag, which is a fairly hefty $1299 in the US. There are certainly cheaper alternatives, but none of them exceed the combination of optical performance, build quality, and compact size that the Batis 25mm affords. Its weaknesses are few and not very pronounced, and its strengths are excellent. I’ve heard basically nothing but good from actual owners of this lens, and after spending the last month with it, I can see why. If the focal length meets your needs, and the price tag is within reach of your wallet, there are few other reasons to avoid this lens. The Batis 25mm is a winner!

Pros:

Beautiful build that is both robust and lightweight
Very even sharpness profile across the frame
Good contrast and low chromatic aberrations
Distortion is very mild
Autofocus is quick, quiet, and accurate
Beautiful color rendition
OLED helps with manual focus
Moisture and dust resistance
Good coma performance (particularly at f/2.8)

Cons:

Pricey
In rare situations you will see some onion bokeh

Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Distagon: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Ebay

Sony a7R III Camera: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK | Ebay

Peak Design Slide Lite: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK

Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription

Alien Skin Exposure X2 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

Keywords: Batis 25mm, Batis 25, Zeiss Batis 25mm, Batis225, Carl Zeiss, Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2, Batis 25mm f2, Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 review, Dustin Abbott, Zeiss Batis Distagon, Review, Video Test, Sample Images, Resolution, Distortion, Vignette, Autofocus, Speed, Accuracy, Flare Resistance, Contrast, 25mm, f2, f/2m Distagon, Real World

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Image Galleries

Dustin Abbott

March 24th, 2018

The very first Sony FE lens that I reviewed was not a Sony; it was a Zeiss. When Zeiss approached me about reviewing the Zeiss Batis APO Sonnar 135mm f/2.8 lens, I actually had no way of doing so as I didn’t own any Sony bodies. B&H Photo bailed me out by loaning me an a7R2, which allowed me to also do a mini-review of that camera as well. While I wasn’t completely blown away by the a7R2, I was very interested in the idea of having autofocus lenses with that legendary Zeiss optical performance. While I didn’t take the plunge to purchase the a7R2, some of the positives of that experience translated into serious interest when the Sony a7R3 was announced, and, after reviewing that camera to death, I made the decision to purchase one for myself. One thing I knew after that experience with the Batis 135mm; I was seriously interested in the Batis line if I ever added Sony to my own kit. That interest certainly didn’t go away. So, when I knew that I would be visiting the Shenandoah Mountain region in Virginia along with making a trip into Washington, D.C., I reached out to the great people at Zeiss North America, and they hooked me up with a couple of Batis loaners – the Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Distagon T* (featured here) along with the lenses big brother, the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 Distagon T*. I decided to look at the two wide angle Batis options at the same time so that I could compare and contrast them for myself…and for you. I’ll be sharing my findings soon, but, in the meantime, I’ve got a lot of great photos from them to share with you from the Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Distagon T*. Stay tuned for my final review!

Images of the Zeiss Batis 25mm F2

Images taken with the Zeiss Batis 25mm F2

APS-C Images taken with Sony a6500 and Batis 2/25

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

Keywords: Batis 25mm, Batis 25, Zeiss Batis 25mm, Batis225, Carl Zeiss, Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2, Batis 25mm f2, Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 review, Dustin Abbott, Zeiss Batis Distagon, Review, Video Test, Sample Images, Resolution, Distortion, Vignette, Autofocus, Speed, Accuracy, Flare Resistance, Contrast, 25mm, f2, f/2m Distagon, Real World

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART Review

Dustin Abbott

September 1st, 2017

There are few lenses more important to a manufacturer’s lineup than a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens, making Sigma’s 24-70 ART one of their most significant releases this year. 24-70mm is an extremely versatile focal length, covering wide angle (24mm), standard/normal (35/50mm), and short telephoto for portraiture (70mm). Professionals love them because of that versatility in framing added to the fact that often these lenses offer sharpness and image quality that is competitive with prime lenses. Amateurs who are looking for a big optical upgrade (and don’t mind the extra weight and cost) will often replace their kit lens with a 24-70mm f/2.8. They also make for compelling travel options because you can take 90% of your travel shots (maybe all of them, if you don’t need any telephoto shots) with the focal lengths covered in a 24-70mm f/2.8. For years I’ve traveled different places in the world often carrying a sling bag with a 24-70mm mounted on a full frame body with the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS as a telephoto companion, and shot dozens of weddings and events with a 24-70 + 70-200mm f/2.8 combination. Sigma’s existing EX 24-70mm f/2.8 was a carryover from its “pre-Global Vision” company reboot. Before the launch of the 35mm f/1.4 ART, Sigma was the “budget company” for those who couldn’t afford better glass, with a few lenses that were cult favorites but little cache in the photography world.

That all changed with their company reboot. The ART lenses were big, sleek, and optically powerful. They were (are) cheaper in most cases than first party lenses, but they compete more on merit than on price. Today there are few lenses than create more fervor on my YouTube channel or in this space than a new ART series lens release, and my coverage thus far of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM | ART has been no different. People are very interested in the 24-70 ART!

I’ve reviewed most all of Sigma’s recent releases over the past four years. I’m even in the process of reviewing some of the glass for Sony E-Mount right now, and use their MC-11 adapter to test lenses like this on a Sony body. There are some variations, of course, but for the most part the ART series lenses (particularly the primes) have prioritized resolution above all things and are often either the sharpest or near to it in the class. In my opinion, however, that has sometimes come at a penalty – while I love the sharpness of the lenses, I’m less impressed by the rendering, which tends towards being somewhat “clinical”. Some audiophiles love vinyl because it has a warm, organic sound which they feel is lost in the ultra clean digital formats. To the audiophile those formats are cool and detached, less inviting, and thus less desirable. That analogy perhaps overstates my feelings, but I can say that I have rarely loved the rendering (the global “look” of images) from a Sigma ART lens without some processing. The recent Sigma 135mm f/1.8 ART lens went a long way in improving that, but when I compared it to the Zeiss Milvus APO Sonnar 135mm f/2 that I own (which has that quality of rendering that I speak of), I often instinctively just liked the images from the Milvus better. Now, don’t get me wrong. If I didn’t own the Milvus, I would probably own the 135 ART, as it is a pretty special lens, but…

As we will see in this review, however, the 24-70 ART is a Sigma aberration. I’m not actually wowed by the sharpness, but I pretty much love the rendering from the lens. I’ve already released a detailed image quality breakdown video on my YouTube channel, and reactions vary. Some people clearly love the “resolution at all costs” approach, and are thus disappointed by this lens. Others perceive the image quality as I do; a lens that is practically sharp enough for most all purposes but adds character into the process. Beautiful color rendition, great contrast (not always an ART series strength), and very nice bokeh rendering. Sound interesting? Then read on…

Prefer to watch your reviews? You can see my video review by clicking the video here:

Build and Design

If you would like a closer look at the lens itself, check out this hands on video here:

The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM | ART has a lot of little words in its names. Let’s breakdown what they mean. DG is Sigma’s way of identifying what type of camera system the lens is for. DG indicates that it is designed for full frame cameras, and I have reviewed the lens primarily on a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV with some additional shots on an EOS 6D Mark II that I happened to be testing at the same time. It can be used on APS-C (crop sensor) cameras as well, where you will need to apply the crop factor of the camera system (1.6x on Canon; 1.5x on Nikon/Sony) to the focal length. The lens comes natively in Canon, Nikon, and Sigma mounts, but it is easily (and effectively) adapted to the Sony E-Mount via Sigma’s MC-11 adapter. I also used the lens some on a Sony a6500 APS-C body via the MC-11, where I found that it functioned nicely, with fairly quick, accurate focus and great image quality. I’ll comment a bit more on focus in that section. As a full frame lens, it is bigger and heavier than one designed for a small image circle. Sigma’s ART series lenses have routinely been some of the largest and heaviest lenses in their respective classes, and that is definitely true here. At 2.24 lb/1020g, the 24-70 ART easily outweighs all the competitors save the Nikkor 24-70 VR (1070g). Most of the competitors sit in the 800g range, so you will definitely feel the additional weight if you are coming from, say, the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 variants or the last generation Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC.

The lens gives the impression of being squat rather than long. Most of the lenses in the class save the Nikkors ascribe to a similar design philosophy. The 24-70 ART is about 3.5” (88mm) around and 4.24” (107.6mm) long. It terminates in large front element and threads for what has become the new standard filter size for 24-70mm lenses – 82mm.

I was really impressed by the build of this particular ART lens. I used the Tamron 24-70 VC for years, and it served me well on three different continents and a lot of different situations. It paid for itself many times over. But the 24-70 ART feels and operates at a different level. The zoom action is smoother and more precise, the focus motor and OS operates more quietly, and the “feel” of the lens is more professional grade. This is the nicest built 24-70mm f/2.8 lens that I’ve used. I have yet to use the new Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 lens, as it hasn’t been released yet in a Canon mount, so I can’t yet comment on it, though I do plan to do a direct comparison down the road. I’ll add linkage to my video covering that when I do to this review.

The 24-70 ART does include moisture resistance, with both a rear gasket and internal seals, which is a definite improvement over earlier ART lenses and which helps the lens’ credentials for travel and professional use (which often includes inclement weather and/or dust depending on the environment).

I was particularly impressed with the very nice zoom ring and accompanying zoom action, which felt very precise and solid. No hint of wobble or “sticky points” in the zoom action. The lens feels well engineered, and Sigma lenses continue to be made solely in Japan. The zoom ring is a little over inch in diameter, and is the further of the two rings from the lens mount.

I’m less crazy about the size and proximity of the manual focus ring. It is very narrow and sits very close to the zoom ring, enough so that it is possible to inadvertently turn it a bit while grasping the zoom ring. The action of the focus is pretty good, but the size of the focus ring may not inspire confidence. At the same time I do recognize that MF on such a lens as this may not be a high priority for many shooters.

There are two switches on the lens barrel, and that is where we get to the other two abbreviations in the 24-70 ART’s title. The first switch involves Sigma’s HSM motor.

Autofocus

HSM stands for “Hypersonic Motor”, and is Sigma’s autofocus technology in lenses like this. The switch on the lens barrel has three positions: AF|MO|MF. AF stands for autofocus; MF for manual focus. The MO mode is unique to Sigma lenses, as it allows for full time manual override (you can use the focus ring to override the autofocus result at any point). This is actually the standard setting for most lenses when in AF mode, but for some reason Sigma splits this into two different modes (which clearly causes some confusion if you read comments on message boards from owners). In this case that may be a positive. If you have an issue with inadvertently hitting the MF ring you may want to select the AF mode rather than MO. Most of the time when I use Sigma lenses I use the MO mode in case I want to tweak focus on the fly.

The application of the HSM in the 24-70 ART is well implemented. It focuses quickly and confidently, with good speed and very quiet focus. It is definitely a faster, smoother experience than the Tamron 24-70 G1 (first generation lens). I found that even major focus changes came quickly. I’ve used faster focusing lenses, but at the same time I feel this lens will focus quickly enough for just about all situations you might find yourself in. It is definitely good enough for event/wedding/photojournalism type work. Focus was also very quiet, with no impression of elements “sliding” during major focus changes. Sigma has worked at increasing torque in their recent lens releases, and that seems to have helped a lot with focus accuracy issues that I’ve frequently run into with older ART series releases. Having a maximum aperture of f/2.8 helps, as this is two full stops smaller than the f/1.4 apertures in many of Sigma’s ART lenses. That means that depth of field is a little deeper and there is a bit more margin for error. But fortunately I didn’t really see a lot of error. I had good and consistent focus results, though due to time I did not run specific “torture tests” during my review period. My “field” (real world) results were good.

Optical Stabilizer

The OS stands for Optical Stabilizer, which is what Sigma calls their image stabilization system. Tamron was the first to the party with a stabilized lens in this category, but it’s obviously a little harder to accomplish than what might be expected, as to this point only Nikon (and now Sigma) have accomplished this. Canon still doesn’t have a first party 24-70mm f/2.8 lens with IS. Kudos to Sigma for pulling off this feat. Sigma’s OS gets points for very quiet and smooth operation, but loses a few for not delivering a strongly stabilized viewfinder result. There is some opportunity to tweak this behavior via the Sigma USB Dock, but my experience is that the resulting change isn’t strongly pronounced. I didn’t notice a major difference in my viewfinder image with and without the OS engaged, but at the same time I was able to get some solid results at low shutter speeds (1/10^th, 1/15^th) in real world shooting.

I would gauge the effectiveness on the system (at least in the copy I reviewed) as slightly less effective as the Tamron 24-70 VC, and I suspect the G2 version will be tops in this regard. Nonetheless, the system is unobtrusive, quiet, and is unquestionably helpful in both stills and video work. I find a lot of value for OS in a lens like this, as you don’t always have opportunity to utilize a tripod while travelling.

All in all the 24-70 ART combines a very nice build quality with good mechanical operation. It feels pro-grade, and is the nicest of the 24-70mm lenses I’ve used to date.

24-70 ART Image Quality

This is typically the reason why people are interested in Sigma lenses in recent years, as Sigma (particularly with the ART series) has consistently managed to produce optical powerhouses that compete near the top of their respective classes. I have personally observed that the emphasis with Sigma ART lenses has tended towards a heavy bias on absolute resolution, which charts very well and has helped Sigma develop a reputation for making “super sharp” lenses. If you dig a little deeper, however, I’ve often been less inspired by some other image quality metrics like bokeh, color rendition, and contrast. This isn’t to say that these things are bad (not true at all), but rather to say that they typically aren’t as “class leading” as the resolution.

But, as I’ve mentioned at the beginning of this review, the 24-70 ART is a bit of an aberration…and will perhaps be a disappointment to some Sigma fans. It does not seem to offer “class-leading” resolution, but in many ways, gives a more complete optical performance than many previous Sigma lenses. Let’s start with the resolution, however, as that remains the single quality that most photographers gauge lenses by. If you would like a nuanced, interactive look at the image quality from the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS ART, I recommend you watch this video here:

24-70 ART Resolution

The following tests were shot with a Canon 5D Mark IV, on a tripod, mirror lockup with two second delay. I focus the first shot in the sequence, then turn off autofocus so that focus is consistent throughout the other aperture values.

Things start a little rocky on the 24mm end. At wide open apertures the center sharpness is fairly good [but not exceptional], but the periphery of the frame is fairly soft. Don’t expect to get sharp landscape photos from corner to corner wide open. Here are crops from across the frame – left to right (all other sequences will follow this pattern).

Stopping down to f/4 helps only a little, and corners never really get exceptionally sharp at any aperture. Best case scenario is somewhere between f/5.6 and f/8. Here’s a look at f/5.6:

There is some improvement at 35mm, with the corners looking less soft and hazy. Here’s wide open crops from that series.

I split the difference for this landscape scene to show you a more real world landscape type result. This is at 32mm, f/2.8:

Stopping down to f/5.6 helps the corners considerably, though this is still not an exceptional result.

If you want a Sigma ART lens for landscape work, you might want to consider the 24-35 f/2 ART lens instead, which is exquisitely sharp (though with an extremely limited zoom range).

Best case scenario arrives at 50mm, where the lens delivers its best results (and most competitive with other lenses). Sharpness extends to the edges of the frame better. Here are the f/2.8 crops:

Unfortunate for the 24-70 ART is the reality that people tend to use zooms most on the extremes of the focal length, so its best performance may not get seen as often.

70mm returns to roughly the same performance as the 35mm position, with good center sharpness and a noticeable drop-off at the edges.

Fortunately for this focal length, compositions are less likely to involve the extreme edges, so, for example, if you are shooting something like this “goat’s beard”, the fine detail is really quite good.

Sigma has produced five zoom lenses that have born the “ART” designation, but the optically exceptional ones (at least in sharpness) are the unconventional zoom lenses in both focal length and aperture. These include the APS-C specific 18-35mm f/1.8 and 50-100mm f/1.8 lenses along with the previously mentioned full frame 24-35mm f/2 lens. The more traditional focal lengths (and apertures) are the 24-105mm f/4 and this 24-70mm f/2.8. It would appear that Sigma’s strength is really in pushing optical boundaries in unconventional ways.

As for this lens, it is really only better than existing 24-70mm lenses at the 50mm position, and considerably weaker at the wide end than other competitors. Fortunately, there is more to the image quality than just raw resolution.

Other Optical Qualities

Something that quickly impressed me about the 24-70 ART was the quality of the color rendition, which is both rich and accurate, producing very nice looking images under a variety of lighting conditions. I used the lens as a travel lens while visiting the Chateau Montebello in Quebec, Canada with my wife for our anniversary. I was very pleased with the look of the images out of camera, with little need for processing to enhance them. I got very pleasing results when shooting architecture, food, or people scenes.

I was also very pleased with the overall rendering from the lens. While it isn’t supremely sharp, I found it sharp enough in most situations and with a nice graduation from focus to defocus. The bokeh rendering is very nice for a short telephoto zoom (particularly from 50-70mm), and I got a lot of nice looking images by composing close to my subject and getting a lot of defocus.

In the image with the water droplets on the morning lawn, you can see a slight bit of concentric circles in some of the bokeh circles (onion bokeh), but it is very faint and, to me, not enough to really detract from the image.

I’m also pleased with the contrast from the lens, which adds to the nice rendering/look of the images. It’s just about right; not too heavy, but neither is there any feeling of images being washed out. You can always dial in a lack of contrast for effect, as I’ve done with this birthday photo of my youngest:

Vignette is most heavily pronounced at 24mm, where the corners will darken somewhat. While the vignette is not particularly heavy, I did notice that it took a few stops for it to clear up entirely. I didn’t find the vignette all that noticeable for field use at other focal lengths. There is also some fairly heavy vignette at 70mm, but it seems to only affect the extreme corners. As a result it goes unnoticed in many images, and in one where I found it bothersome I noted that while I needed a fairly strong value in Lightroom to fully erase the vignette (+76), I didn’t need to move the midpoint slider at all.

I didn’t really notice any chromatic aberrations during my review period, so I feel confident in saying that this won’t be a problem in real world use for anyone. In one landscape image I noted the faintest amount of lateral green fringing alone a roofline, but I had to really look for it.

But, as this crop shows, there is essentially no “bokeh fringing” (LoCA):

Likewise distortion seems fairly well controlled. There is a mild bit of barrel distortion at the wide end of the focal length, but not enough to really impact images.

The one other misstep that I saw was that the lens has a tendency towards being flare prone if the sun is in the frame. There isn’t much of a problem with veiling (loss of contrast), but definitely a problem with ghosting (prismatic “blobs” of colored light). In particular I noted some fairly pronounced green ghosting effects that I felt had little artistic value. Be careful in composition of how you place the sun or other strong backlights in the frame.

All in all I’m actually quite happy with the image quality from the 24-70 ART. I do wish that Sigma had managed to squeeze more resolution out of this lens, as I fear that they will take a hit on sales with the lens based on the negative perception of the sharpness. I’ve heard feedback from a number of subscribers who are taking a “wait and see” approach and intend to see what Tamron’s 24-70 G2 lens brings. Beyond the resolution, however, I can safely say that I like the images that come out of this lens. There’s a nice blend of sharpness and bokeh, good color rendition, and few optical defects that might mar the image. But will that be enough to satisfy the “resolution gluttons” that Sigma has created?

I would encourage you to check out the Image Galleries here to draw more conclusions for yourself.

Sigma on Sony Thoughts

Since adding a Sony a6500 to my kit I purchased a Sigma MC-11 adapter and have been testing lenses also some on the Sony body. The Sigma ART lenses (in particular) play nicely on Sony bodies, with good autofocus results (including all modes being available) and proper EXIF data communication. I was happy to see that the lens actually transitioned to the high resolution 24 MP APS-C sensor on the a6500 quite well, and liked what I saw out of the combination. The balance is far from optimal, obviously, but if you handle the lens instead of the camera, it works.

My experience with this combination is limited to this lens and the 135mm f/1.8 ART, though I’ve used a variety of other lenses on the adapter from other manufacturers. Bottom line is that the MC-11 works best with Sigma lenses. It communicates proper EXIF data (the lens designation reports properly) and all focus modes (including eye detect and DMF [Direct Manual Focus]) work properly. Autofocus accuracy is good, and speed is roughly what I’ve come to expect from this kind of combination. It is fairly quick, though not quite as fast as Phase Detect autofocus on a DLSR. Those with a Sony mirrorless may find this a nice combination, and it’s a nice bonus for those of you who, like myself, utilize both systems. The balance is a little unwieldy, but it works okay if you handle the lens rather than the camera for balance. You can see a gallery of images taken with the combination here. Here’s a few highlights from that gallery:

One final note on this: on an outing one day I shot the Sigma 24-70 ART side by side with the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS II (a lens I’m also testing right now), and came away somewhat disappointed with the Canon by comparison. When shooting similar things side by side, I definitely preferred the image quality from the Sigma. It also seemed like the better made lens, with the Canon L lens feeling somewhat “plasticky” by comparison.

Conclusion

I’m not quite sure how this newest lens from Sigma will be received. Sigma has built their recent reputation on sharpness, and the 24-70 ART is not the sharpest lens in this focal length even when compared to the releases from Canon and Tamron from 5 years ago. But it also delivers nicer image quality than those lenses when you consider the complete picture of lens rendering. Will consumers be able to grasp that nuance? The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART comes to market at a list price of $1299 USD, which significant undercuts first party lenses from Canon, Nikon, and Sony, but comes at a $100 premium over the upcoming Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 lens, which boasts an excellent construction (metal) along with an industry leading 5 stop image stabilizer. Sigma’s OS in the 24-70 ART is certainly not delivering that degree of stability. The looming Tamron lens may be the biggest competitor for this lens.

That aside, however, I can confidently say that I enjoyed using the Sigma 24-70 ART; it felt great in the hands and delivered images that I liked. I think that owners of the lens will be very pleased with it, but I also think that Sigma has a perception gap to overcome due to the lens not being as sharp as people have come to expect Sigma ART lenses to be. But if sharpness is not the only thing you personally consider, then consider this lens, as I suspect you will find a lens that will become an indispensable part of your kit.

Pros:

Very nice build and mechanical operation
Quiet, quick autofocus
Beautiful color rendition and nice bokeh for a 24-70mm zoom
Distortion is minimal
Chromatic aberrations are low
Compatibility with Sigma USB dock and MC-11 adapter for Sony users
Undercuts first party lenses in price by a wide margin

Cons:

Resolution isn’t fantastic
Somewhat flare prone (ghosting)
Optical Stabilizer could be more effective

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

August 7th, 2017

One of Sigma’s most hotly anticipated lenses of the year is the new 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART lens. Few lenses are more popular among working professionals than 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom lenses because of their versatility and often very good image quality. Tamron was the first to the game four years ago with a stabilized lens in this focal length; a feat that Canon still hasn’t matched, though Nikon has. Now Tamron is set to release their second generation lens, but Sigma has stolen the march by bringing its new 24-70 ART to market first. The new Sigma 24-70 is a beautifully built lens, and these galleries will give you an opportunity to see if you appreciate the images that it can produce as well. Check back often for new images, and watch for my ongoing review coverage here and at my YouTube channel.

Images of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS ART

Images taken with the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS ART

Images on Sony a6500 via Sigma MC-11 Adapter

Gear Used:
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (5D4): B&H Photo | Amazon.com | Amazon Canada
Canon EOS 6D Mark II: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada
Sony a6500: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada
Adobe Lightroom CC Software for Mac and Windows (Boxed Version)
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X2 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

Travel Banner:

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 Contemporary Review

Dustin Abbott

June 30th, 2017

First impressions matter. My first two impressions when opening the box and pulling out Sigma’s newest lens – the 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary – were 1) the lens was smaller than I anticipated (not a lot bigger than a lens like Canon’s new 70-300 IS II and similar in profile) and 2) the build quality felt more premium than I anticipated. Both of these are good news for Sigma. On the negative side I also observed that this was the first Sigma lens that I’ve personally unboxed that did not have an included lens case. All in all, however, the positive first impressions for the 100-400 C easily outweighed the negative. I had fairly low expectations for this lens, in part because the lenses in this focal length have always carried a much higher price tag, and I already own the best of the bunch – the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II. I was a little skeptical that Sigma could make a truly competitive lens at such a relatively low price point. I’m happy to report, however, like my first impressions, the Sigma 100-400 C is a lens that exceeded my expectations on nearly all fronts. Interested? Read on…

Prefer to watch your reviews? I’ve got you covered. Check out my full video review here:

Design, Build, and Handling

Sigma did something a little different with their lens announcements for the year in 2017. They simultaneously announced four lenses: the 24-70mm f/2.8 OS, 14mm f/1.8, and 135mm f/1.8 lenses in their “Art” lineup, with the 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS as the lone entry in the “Contemporary” line. (And no, I still don’t really know what Sigma was going for with the “Contemporary” branding. It makes no more sense now than it did four years ago.). The 100-400 C announcement was somewhat overshadowed by the more exotic ART series announcements, but the 100-400C has the potential to be most important lens in this lineup for many shooters (though few lenses are more indispensable than a 24-70 f/2.8 lens).

Why do I say this? There are three reasons I think the 100-400 C is going to be an important lens for Sigma.

The first is price. The main first party players (Canon, Nikon, and Sony) each have a 100-400mm lens (80-400mm in the case of Nikon), and each of these lenses sell for in excess of $2000 in the US market. The Sony sells for $2500 USD. The 100-400 C? It comes to the market at $799 USD. That’s less than a third the price of the Sony! The reality is that most photographers deal with some amount of financial restraints, so the incredible price of this new Sigma is going to make it very attractive to a number of photographers. I can speak as a person with a kit full of fabulous lenses and attest to the fact that I only occasionally shoot with focal lengths longer than 200mm, so I might be tempted by a lens like this (if it were competent) for the simple reason that I could then spend that difference in price on equipment I might use more regularly. I offer that anecdote as evidence that a competent, reasonably priced alternative to the more expensive first party lenses might appeal to a broader range than just those on a budget.

–For the record, I already own Canon’s exceptional EF 100-400L II, which I will use as a benchmark as it is, to my knowledge, the best lens available that covers this focal range.–

Secondly, I believe this lens could prove highly successful because of its focal length. The first lens I thought of when I first looked at the 100-400 C in person was that new Canon 70-300 IS II, and it struck me that this could be a credible alternative to the 70-300 variants because it isn’t vastly bigger (7.18”/182mm vs 5.7”/145mm in length, 2.55lb/1160g vs 1.56lb/708g in weight) or vastly more expensive ($250 USD more). Both of these are close enough to allow for some cross-shopping, and I think there will be a number of people tempted by the extra “reach” afforded by the 400mm telephoto end. The 100-400 C also offers some weather sealing, which, to my knowledge, isn’t included on most of the 70-300mm options this lens might compete against.

Finally, I think this lens could prove to be an attractive alternative to the significantly larger and heavier 150-600mm variants. No, it doesn’t have as much reach, but not everyone needs 600mm of reach, and the 100-400 C is much easier to tote around. This lens is about 2.5lb, the 150-600 C is 4.3lb, and the Sport version weights 6.3lb! That makes the 150-600 lenses close to 2x and 3x as heavy. One of the reasons I switched from the Tamron 150-600 VC to the Canon 100-400L II (+1.4x TC) was the portability factor. It just fit into my various bags and backpacks better. I can fit the 100-400 C mounted on a 5D Mark IV in something as small as my Lowepro Toploader 55 AW, something you could never say of one of the 150-600mm lenses.

Add to this the fact that the lens looks better than its price tag and promises to punch above its weight optically and you have a [potential] recipe for success. Take a look at this video where I break down the build and design:

Sigma’s current design language is excellent. Their lenses are sleek and modern, and, while they are essentially all black, I feel like Sigma does an excellent job of utilizing texture variation to make the lenses seem far from monochromatic. I particularly like the sections that utilize a very fine ribbing that adds both visual flair and added grip. The finish definitely feels a cut above the 150-600mm Contemporary lens, which feels a little cheaper by comparison. The materials are the standard engineered plastics (‘thermal composite’ in Sigma speak) over a metal core and brass bayonet mount, but the feel/finish of the materials feels more premium to me than the 150-600 C.

A definite area of improvement is in the manual focus ring, which feels and moves much better on the 100-400 C. It still feels like a MF ring on an autofocus lens, but the action is quality. The feel of the ribbed ring itself is also good. Its location may not be a favorite for some shooters, as the MF ring is closer to the mount end and the zoom ring is further out. Most photographers prefer the opposite order, but unfortunately there isn’t really a standard for this ring order. The Canon 100-400L II has the zoom ring first, but the Canon 70-300L has the MF ring first.

I wasn’t initially crazy about the shape/profile of the lens hood, which has a fairly pronounced “scoop” near the base. A conversation with a friend within the Sigma organization revealed a very practical reason for the design, and that was for it to be utilized as a push/pull type lens. You essentially can choose to either use the traditional “twist” zoom action or employ the push/pull zoom action if that is your preference. Finding out that the somewhat irregular hood shape had a functional purpose quickly changed my perspective of it, and I can attest that the shape is well suited to quickly gripping and extending the zoom.

The front element features a surprisingly small 67mm front filter thread. That’s a positive in that 67mm filters are both common and inexpensive, but it is also a reflection of the fact that at no point does this lens let in a lot of light. The 150-600mm variants from Sigma have a 95mm front filter (Contemporary) and 105mm front filter (Sport).

The lens features a traditional zoom lock switch near the “C” logo almost directly in the middle of the lens. It has all of the traditional limitations, too, namely the inability to lock at any position save the fully retracted (100mm) position. It also essentially guarantees that the major omission here cannot even be rectified with an aftermarket solution.

That omission is any kind of tripod collar/foot. This is typically considered essential for a lens like this, but Sigma has clearly bet on the assumption that most photographers will use this lens exclusively handheld. While I didn’t often miss the collar for most of my day to day shooting, I REALLY missed it when trying to shoot standardized results and comparisons from a tripod. Without that collar expect the lens to feel very front heavy on a tripod. It is difficult to set an exact framing, as you will mostly have to adjust the tripod with the lens aiming above the target level and then let gravity bring it back down to the desired level. This is far from precise, however, and was a bit of a frustration. Fortunately I am rarely in this kind of situation with this kind of lens in the real world, though I can see this being an issue when trying to use the lens for landscapes.

Some of you could care less about the omission of a tripod collar as it adds up to a lighter lens, but for some this will be a deal breaker. The nature of the lens design also means there isn’t really any room for an aftermarket tripod collar, and the zoom lock being in the one area without anything else prohibits attaching one there as well.

There are four switches located about two inches into the lens. The first gives you options for the autofocus, including the standard AF, then a MO (manual override) which will allow you to manually override the focus result at any point (my standard choice), and then the straight MF (manual focus) option, which will turn off the autofocus motor.

The second switch is the focus limiter, something always welcome on a telephoto lens. I find that the lens is just slightly slow to rack the full range of focus, so employing this selectively/appropriately will make a difference. Once again there are three choices: Full, 6m to Infinity, and 1.6m-6m.

The third switch enables control over the OS (optical stabilizer), and includes OFF| Position 1 | Position 2 choices. Position 1 is the standard balanced performance, while Position 2 disables one axis of stabilization for enhanced panning action.

The final switch allows you to access two previously programmed “Custom” functions. You enter these through the Sigma USB dock and the Sigma Optimization Pro software. This includes the ability to customize the AF performance (Fast AF, Standard AF (balance between speed and smoothness), and Smooth AF (optimized for video). You can also set a custom focus limiter setting in a second menu. The final option to program to a custom mode is the OS performance. Three options are present: Dynamic View (prioritizes smooth viewfinder), Standard (balance between the two extremes), and Moderate View (prioritizes applying stabilization to the image capture and focuses less on steadying the image in the viewfinder). I can’t say that I saw any major difference when applying these customization changes, but you might. I consider the custom modes to be a nice feature at this price point, however.

All in all there is only one thing to complain about, and that is the lack of a tripod collar, and, in particular, the inability to add one as an optional accessory. Sigma clearly made a decision to eliminate that from the design, but that will alienate at least a percentage of the market. Beyond that, however, there is little else to complain about. Everything else about the lens felt better than its price point suggests.

100-400 C Optical Performance

Let’s get the weak point dealt with first: this lens is definitely on the “slow” end in terms of aperture. It adopts the same variable aperture of the bigger 150-600mm lenses, except that maximum aperture of f/5 only lasts for a heartbeat. By 114mm the maximum aperture closes to f/5.6, and further closes to f/6.3 from 234mm on. Like the 150-600 variants, this is a lens that needs a good amount of light to thrive. This is one area where it really suffers in comparison to the Canon 100-400L II, which, while also variable aperture, lets in quite a bit more light at any focal length.

Lens	f/4.5	f/5	f/5.6	f/6.3
Sigma 100-400 C	N/A	100-113mm	114-233mm	234-400mm
Tamron 100-400 VC	100-137mm	138-184mm	185-280mm	281-400mm
Canon 100-400L II	100-134mm	135-311mm	312-400mm	N/A

As this chart shows, you are going to need quite a bit more light with the Sigma than with the Canon, which actually doesn’t reach it’s smallest maximum aperture until fairly late in the focal range. The rival lens from Tamron also does a bit better in this area, with a wider maximum aperture on the long end and the ability to hold onto the larger aperture values a little longer.

One thing that stood out to me is the nice level of saturation on the images I shot from the lens, even at maximum aperture values. It doesn’t need to be stopped down to provide saturation and contrast; you can get great results right from wide open. This helps to offset the slow maximum aperture values somewhat; there is no real need to stop the lens down to get maximum performance from it. Images look great right out of the box from the lens.

I did a direct comparison with the Canon 100-400L II lens, and, frankly, I expected the Canon to dominate the Sigma. It costs more than 2 ½ times as much and is the best lens in the class. What I found surprised me. To fully appreciate this I recommend that you watch this video:

At 100mm and a comparison shot with mirror lockup, on a tripod, and Live View 10x focused the Sigma unquestionably had the optical advantage across the frame. I tried it with both lenses wide open (f/4.5 for the Canon, f/5 for the Sigma), and then stopped them down to equivalent apertures. The Canon caught up in the middle at about f/5.6, but the Sigma was demonstrably sharper near the edges of the frame at all tested apertures. It also showed less chromatic aberration and better contrast. Wow! Each of the comparisons to come are pixel level crops from the far left, center, and then far right corners.

Comparison with both lenses wide open at 100mm:

With both lenses stopped down to f/5.6:

At 200mm the advantage shifted to the Canon, though it was marginal and the Sigma produced very close image quality stopped down. The difference between the lenses was only apparent at pixel level, and barely visible there.

At the most crucial 400mm position the Canon’s maximum aperture is f/5.6 while the Sigma’s is f/6.3. With both lenses wide open I was shocked to find a [very] slight advantage for the Sigma! When I stopped the Canon down to f/6.3, I felt it was ever-so-slightly better, but with both stopped down to f/8 the slight advantage shifted back to the Sigma. I was blown away by this result, as often budget telephotos fall apart on the long end.

The reality is that there is very little optically to distinguish these two lenses. The Sigma vignettes much more heavily compared to the Canon, and the 100-400L II also has an aperture advantage at every focal length, but the Sigma shows similar and even superior sharpness and contrast at various points. The 100-400 C also showed less CA in my testing. All in all I found this an extremely surprising result and have to really commend Sigma for putting together such a high performing lens at such a great price.

I was also pleasantly surprised by the bokeh quality from the lens, which seemed every bit as nice as that from the Canon.

Optically there are only two real weaknesses – a very slow maximum aperture and some vignette, but if you can live with these (and one other issue to come), you will find a lot of lens for your money. I would recommend visiting the Image Gallery to see a many more images and get a sense for yourself!

APS-C Performance

I realize that many APS-C (crop sensor) shooters will be interested in this lens, so I spent some time with it mounted on my Canon 80D camera body. Not every lenses translates well to an APS-C body, but the 100-400 C did great in this application. On a Canon body (1.6x crop factor) the lens has a full frame equivalent focal length of 160-640mm, so it offers a truly impressive amount of reach in this application. I was very pleased with the image quality from the lens on APS-C, and so no new optical flaws introduced that I could tell. Details continue to be good, no new chromatic aberrations appeared, and vignette is of course reduced by the crop factor.

Here are a few samples from 400mm, f/6.3, with near pixel level crops:

I see no reason why APS-C shooters should not strongly consider this lens. In many ways I think it makes more sense here than the 150-600mm lenses in many situations as the wide end remains more useful and the 600+mm equivalent long end is plenty in most situations. I also think the image quality (for me) held up better in the transition to crop than what I’ve seen from most of the 150-600 variants. This lens is much, much easier to pack around, too. I feel like it will balance much better than the larger first party 100-400mm lenses on any camera body save, perhaps, a 7D Mark II or equivalently sized body.

I’ve got an APS-C Image Gallery here:

I’ll comment further on the autofocus performance in general in a moment, but I will add here that I found autofocus performance roughly similar on the 80D to the 5D Mark IV. Accuracy was very good on the 80D, and speed was adequate for most things.

Autofocus Performance

The first thing to note is that while this lens has been on the market for less than a month, there has already been a firmware update specifically addressing some autofocus improvements. This is somewhat of a two-edged sword, as on one hand it indicates that Sigma is being proactive about supporting the lens. That’s a good thing. On the other hand I’m a little concerned by the message that is sent by this: it feels a bit like the lens might have been rushed to market before some of the final refinements were made. This isn’t a problem for owners of the Sigma USB dock, but leaves those without either having to purchase one or feeling the need to send their brand-new lens back to Sigma for the update.

Those reservations aside, I was encouraged during my calibration process to see nicely repeatable results and a linear pattern of adjustment. I used the USB Dock to input calibration at different focal lengths and focus distances, and saw the kind of pattern that I like to see (one that makes sense). The lens definitely required some adjustment, but didn’t show any of the random misfocus results that plagued some of the earlier Sigma lenses (18-35 ART, 35mm f/1.4 ART, 50mm f/1.4 ART) that I’ve reviewed. I would encourage you to check out my video series on how to properly do lens calibration if you are unfamiliar with the process here. There images show the difference in results after calibration along with the [lens specific] values that I plugged in. Note that these values won’t work with your lens/body combination but are simply shown to illustrate my process.

In the field I was further assured. I saw good, accurate results there as well, with images nicely focused in both One Shot and AF Servo modes. I’ve actually had pretty good success with Sigma’s telephoto lenses in this area. Autofocus accuracy is a strength rather than weakness for this lens.

There is only one area that I have a bit of concern, particularly for those who want to shoot sports or other higher speed targets, and that is the focus speed. I found the lens tracked acceptably in AF Servo with moderately speed subjects once I had focus locked, but I did have an issue with the lens picking up an object already in motion. This was using a Canon 5D Mark IV, which has an exceptional autofocus system.

I ran a number of tracking tests that I consider to be a “torture test” – a small dog charging towards the camera at full tilt. The Canon 100-400L II has an excellent focus system, and yet it doesn’t always pass this test. But it definitely showed its superiority here, where I was sometimes able to track a whole sequence across many frames in AF Servo mode (one sequence had 17 frames over a period of less than three seconds, all well focused). The Sigma, however, often only achieved a few frames in focus in similar conditions. At times it would lose focus and I wouldn’t be able to achieve a fresh lock, so pressing the shutter did nothing. Focus would also lag sometimes behind the subject, as if the focus motor wasn’t quite keeping up.

I would definitely recommend utilizing the focus limiter when possible, as while the lens is quick to make small to medium adjustments, it takes a while for it to rack the full range of focus. I would guess that the HSM motor doesn’t have as much torque as what the Canon 100-400L II that I own does.

Bottom line is that the focus system of the 100-400 C didn’t work nearly as well for higher speed subjects, and if you want to shoot sports, bird in flight, or fast moving wildlife I’m afraid you will be better served spending more money for the first party options.

For most of the subjects that I typically shoot, the lens works great, but I did have a few situations where I was left wishing for a little more focus speed in one shot mode. I also encountered a few isolated situations where (much like the 150-600 C) the 100-400 C didn’t want to lock focus at all. I do a lot of hiking (a great way for me to mix business and pleasure!), and so often will shoot scenes on trails where the lighting is mixed. The photo below particularly stands out, because I stood in what seemed to be plenty of light and tried to find a high contrast edge to lock onto on the foreground leaves with the defocused trail beyond. I was first using a grid with about 10 focus points active, and it simply wouldn’t lock focus. I switched to the finest point on my 5D Mark IV – just the single center point active and tried to put it right on leaf edges or something with higher contrast. No luck. I had to play around with it for probably 20-30 seconds with a little manual override before I finally got it to lock focus, though I had to switch to another point to focus on to make it work. The final result is focused just fine, but the process showed the lens hesitation in that kind of setting.

Bottom line is that the combination of a relatively slow maximum aperture and an autofocus system that isn’t top shelf (at least in terms of speed) is perhaps the only place where the budget origins of this lens are betrayed and could be a limiting factor for someone who is serious about moving wildlife or sports.

Sigma 100-400 C Lens Stabilization

Any lens with a focal length reaching out to 400mm is going to need a good image stabilization system, and that is particularly true of lenses with small maximum apertures. Sigma has outfitted the 100-400 C with its Optical Stabilizer (OS).

Sigma 100-400 C, handheld using careful technique.

At 400mm, 1/25^th of a second. All six shots (one extra) were acceptably sharp with about half of them perfectly sharp.
At 400mm, 1/15^th of a second. All shots were acceptably sharp with about half of them perfectly sharp (no change).
At 400mm, 1/10^th of a second. 1 shot blurry, 3 shots acceptably sharp, and 2 perfectly sharp.
At 400mm, 1/6^th of a second. 2 shots extremely blurry, 2 moderately blurry, 1 shot acceptably sharp, 1 shot perfectly sharp.

The Sigma OS is less effective at stabilizing the viewfinder image, but, much like Tamron’s “Capture Priority” VC setting seems to do a good job stabilizing the actual capture. Here’s one of the “keepers” I got at 1/6th second.

Canon 100-400L II, same process.

At 400mm, 1/25th of a second. 1 shot acceptably sharp and 5 shots perfectly sharp.
At 400mm, 1/15th of a second. 1 shot slightly blurry and 5 shots perfectly sharp.
At 400mm, 1/10th of a second. 1 shot blurry, 3 shots acceptably sharp, and 2 perfectly sharp.
At 400mm, 1/6th of a second. 3 shots extremely blurry, 3 shots acceptably sharp.

The two stabilizer systems operate slightly differently, but produce results more similar than different. I slightly favor the way the Canon image stabilizer works, but the end result isn’t all that different.

Conclusion

I really do feel like Sigma knocked this one out of the park…for many shooters. There are really only two things that should give you pause to consider: 1) do you need a tripod collar? 2) do you need to track fast moving action (particularly subjects that quickly move towards you)? If you are primarily a handheld shooter, then the reasonable weight of this lens is going to make it a favorite for you. If you will shoot occasional action and don’t need high end tracking, then the accurate AF system should meet your needs. I feel like the only thing that holds this lens back from being absolutely exceptional (and a very serious competitor to far more expensive first party lenses) is the unexceptional tracking performance. Still, I had good accuracy in One-Shot AF mode for everyday shots, and there is no question the lens has fantastic image quality that is on par with the top tier first party lenses. If you are on a budget and don’t need the absolute best AF system, I think the Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary should jump to the top of your list.

Pros:

Fantastic price to performance ratio
Excellent image quality across the focal range
Good color and contrast
Nice build quality for the class, including some moisture resistance
Accurate autofocus in One Shot mode
Reasonable size and weight
Effective image stabilization system

Cons:

AF system doesn’t track fast motion well
No tripod collar included; no room to add one
Particularly small maximum aperture across focal range
AF can hunt in dim light

Gear Used:
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (5D4): B&H Photo | Amazon.com | Amazon Canada
Canon EOS 80D: B&H Photo | Amazon.com | Amazon.ca |
Purchase the Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca
Adobe Lightroom CC Software for Mac and Windows (Boxed Version)
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X2 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

Travel Banner:

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 C Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

June 8th, 2017

Lost in the midst of the higher profile ART series announcements was the announcement of a lens that makes a whole lot more sense for many photographers. The Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS Contemporary helps to fill an important gap – a more affordable, compact way to get a significant amount of reach. The Canon 100-400L II, while a fantastic lens (and one that exists in my own kit), costs north of $2000, as do the Sony 100-400 G and Nikon 80-400. The Sigma? It can be had for right under $800, making it a tremendous value. The question will be whether or not the inevitable compromises to hit that price point will show up during my review. First impressions are quite favorable, and stay posted for my review coverage as things progress. In the meantime, however, enjoy these galleries of looks at the lens along with images I’m taking with the Sigma 100-400 C. Check back often for new updates!

Images of the Sigma 100-400 C:

Images taken with the Sigma 100-400 C:

Images Taken on APS-C (Canon 80D)

Gear Used:
Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (5D4): B&H Photo | Amazon.com | Amazon Canada
Canon EOS 80D: B&H Photo | Amazon.com | Amazon.ca |
Adobe Lightroom CC Software for Mac and Windows (Boxed Version)
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X2 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Review

Dustin Abbott

December 30th, 2015

Replacements to Canon’s key lenses are always major events, and for many photographers Canon’s EF 35mm f/1.4L has been one the top go-to lenses for some time. It was beloved for its beautiful “drawing” (look of the images) and accurate autofocus. It did have some drawbacks, however, most noticeably in fairly pronounced chromatic aberrations along with lower resolution at wide apertures than some newer competitors. The biggest threat came from a surprising source – third party lens maker Sigma, who launched their new Global Vision and their “ART series” with a 35mm f/1.4 of their own. That lens got a lot of publicity due to having (at the time) class leading resolution and a beautiful lens design. A great price didn’t hurt. It was introduced at $899 while the Canon 35L was closer to $1500. Suddenly it was entirely acceptable for professionals and amateurs alike to own a Sigma, and the success of the 35A (Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART) helped launch a whole series of lenses in the ART line since. But Canon has finally struck back, and the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM manages to raise the bar once again in almost every category.

I will be using the Sigma 35A as a comparison point throughout this review, and will publish a separate review of it with the Canon 35L II as a point of reference. One area where Sigma is certainly not threatened is in the matter of price; the Canon 35L II launches at a painful $1799 in the US market. That fact alone will assure that Sigma will continue to have a market for their flagship ART lens, through Tamron’s new 35mm f/1.8 VC prime lens may put some pressure from below on them as well. But for the purpose of this review there is a key question that must be addressed: is the Canon 35L II worth twice as much as the Sigma 35A? Read on to find out!

If you prefer to watch your reviews, here is my video review:

Build Quality

The lens is surprisingly large and heavy. It grew nearly 20mm over the first generation in overall length and put on a substantial 180g. The engineered plastic outer shell feels familiar, but the sheer heft and density of the lens does not. When holding it in the hand it feels a little front heavy – a lot of the heft is forward of center. I quickly adjusted to it, but the lens had a unique feel in my hand. The rubberized focus ring is nice and wide and falls quickly to hand. The damping is nice but not exceptional. Roughly 145 degrees of rotation – not as much as recent Tamron primes, but far more than the Sigma 35A. The dense feeling is explained by Roger Cicala’s tear-down, which reveals that the lens is more heavily engineered than any prime he’s seen before.

[Show as slideshow]

The extra care can be seen at the rear of the lens. Moving the elements forward on many lenses often reveals exposed electrical contacts or unsealed space. The 35L II glides forward and reveals a tightly engineered inner barrel with very small tolerances. There is no “easy access” into the inner workings of the lens when the lens is focused towards minimum focus distance. Both the front and rear elements have also received fluorine coatings to repel dust and liquids. This makes a very practical difference in the ease of cleaning these surfaces as well. This is a significant advantage for the Canon EF 35mm II as neither the original EF 35L or the Sigma 35A have any kind of weather sealing. The new Tamron 35 VC does, but the Canon probably tops its overall degree of sealing. Photojournalists, sport shooters, and event photographers typically prefer gear that can handle some adverse weather, and the 35L II is certainly built with that in mind.

I’m a little surprised by the 72mm front element. This was very common for Canon’s previous generation of primes (35/50/135), but there seems to be a lot of prime lenses in recent years that are either 67mm or 77mm (Sigma ART is 67mm, as is Canon’s 35mm f/2 IS and the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8). The 72mm is great if you invested in filters for the previous generation of Canon L primes, but there are few other modern lenses that share a 72mm filter thread.

Here’s a look at the raw numbers:

Lens	Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART	Canon 35mm f/1.4L II	Canon 35mm f/2 IS
Price (at time of review)	$899	$1799	$549
Overall Length	94mm	105.5mm	62.6mm
Overall Weight	665g	760g	335g
Front Filter Thread	67mm	72mm	67mm
Elements/Groups	13/11	14/11	10/8
Min Focus/Max Mag	30cm/.20x	28cm/.21x	24cm/.24x
Aperture Blades	9	9	8

There is only one switch on the lens, and it is an AF/MF switch. Full time manual override is available at any time, though, just grab the focus ring and twist. There is a focus distance window with very minor hyperfocal markings (f/11 and f/22). The minimum aperture is f/22 for the lens.

I continue to think of Sigma’s ART series lenses as being some of the most handsome on the market, and in a side by side comparison I do prefer the look of the Sigma over the Canon. The Canon perhaps suffers from familiarity; it is new and improved inside, but externally looks like a few dozen other Canon L lenses. One other positive for the Sigma over the Canon is in the inclusion of the nice, padded case for the Sigma. The Canon EF 35mm gets the familiar “padded sock”, of which I’ve got quite a few in drawer. My question is this: is anyone actually using these? Surely a nearly $2000 lens deserves a better nod at protection. Lowepro makes some great lens cases that will provide much better protection value.

Autofocus

My first act when receiving any new autofocus lens is to spend some extended time calibrating the lens to the body/bodies I intend to use it on. For this purpose I use the FoCal 2 program from Reikan. My typical process is to run the automatic calibration at least three times (I’m looking for a repeatable result) and I then follow up with a semi-automatic calibration where I take a closer look at the figure or figures that the automatic calibration produced. I will check results to either side of these figures to see if there is a better one. This allows me to both eyeball the actual focus results and ensure that I have the most consistent focus setting.

AFMA Notes:

Canon AFMA – Automatic calibration returned results in the +2 and +3 range. Closer examination through the semi-automatic calibration mode confirmed a +2, though there was a bit more inconsistency than I expected.

SIGMA AFMA – Automatic calibration gave inverse results (-2 and -3 range). Slightly more inconsistent results, but I settled on the -2 figure after semi-automatic calibration.

Throughout the period of my review I used the lenses in a variety of settings, from general purpose shooting to events (church, school, and family) along with some portraits. While impossible to encompass every type of shooting situation in a 4-5 week period, I feel that I used the lenses in enough of a variety of settings to be confident in my findings.

[Show as slideshow]

One of those events was at my children’s school. It was a “Duct Tape Fashion Show”. The 7^th and 8^th grade classes had fashioned various costumes and clothing items out of duct tape and paraded them up and down the “runway” in the gym. I used both lenses back and forth on the same camera body (the body they were calibrated to). I primarily shot in AF Servo mode, as the kids were always moving and rarely stopped long even when they were posing. As the official photographer for the event I was set up right at the end of the “runway” and kids came in from the far end of the gym, up the center aisle to me, then split to either side, quickly posed, and then retreated back the way they came. I shot 57 frames on the Sigma and 113 on the new Canon – all wide open at f/1.4. I used the lenses identically when shooting with the intent that I would compare frames at the end of the shoot and determine which lens had the higher hit rate.

I went through and counted 9 improperly focused shots from the Canon (out of 113), for a hit rate of around 92%. Most of these misses were with the subjects right on top of me and weren’t in situations where I would have expected to get good results. There were about 2-3 obvious misses where I would have expected accurate focus to be possible. This raises the keeper rate to better than 98% – very good under the circumstances I was shooting in.

The Sigma was another story altogether. I counted at least 15 missed focus shots, including almost all of those beyond 20 feet. My hit rate was highest when the subjects were in the range of 5-10 feet (the lens was calibrated at a six-foot distance). The keeper rate with the Sigma dropped to under 64%. If you intend to shoot events, sports, or photojournalism, the Canon proved the much more reliable option in this scenario…and that might be worth the premium price in and of itself. If you need to shoot this style and can’t afford the 35L II, I might recommend considering the 35mm f/2 IS instead. It has a slower aperture, yes, but it has an image stabilizer and similar full ring USM focus that is extremely fast and accurate. I’ve used it for a couple of years and it has proven one of my most accurately focusing lenses.

Purchasing Sigma’s USB dock might help somewhat with this, as it allows you to calibrate the lens at difference focus distances, but the various reports that I have received over the years suggests that even this doesn’t always solve the problem.

Thus far I have not found any third party lens that focuses quite as fast as the best Canon USM lenses. Large aperture primes have to move a lot of glass, and I find that Canon not only does the best job of producing speed but also the best job of masking how much effort is involved in quickly moving those elements. Sometimes with Tamron and Sigma lenses I find that major focus shifts involve a sound and sense of “sliding” as the elements move into place. There is no such feeling with the Canon 35L II. It just moves into focus virtually instantly. There is no hunting and no hesitation; just aim and lock focus. It works extremely in AF Servo mode as well. The Sigma is fast, for the most part, but there is a little pause while inertia builds when going from minimum distance focus back out to infinity.

It’s interesting to me the very different approach that Sigma and Tamron have taken with dealing the challenge of focus with large aperture primes. The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART has a large aperture and quite fast focus but at the expense of having a very small focus throw. It barely has 90 degrees of focus throw, and the distance between 6 feet and infinity is TINY on the focus ring. It makes manual focus very difficult and even makes me wonder if this doesn’t contribute to the lens’ somewhat poor focus accuracy in that range.

The Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC takes a different route. First, it has a somewhat smaller aperture (and thus a little less glass to move), but it adds a much bigger focus range with a good 180 degrees of focus throw (basically double that of the Sigma). The Tamron takes a perception hit in its overall focus speed (which is just a tiny bit slower), but the trade off is that you can both manually focus and autofocus with a bit more precision. This is even more pronounced in the 45mm VC vs. the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART. Which approach is better? The answer will probably change from photographer to photographer.

The Canon 35mm f/1.4L II is focus king in this category. It doesn’t have quite the focus throw of the Tamron (my favorite of the trio to manually focus), but definitely has the tops in focus speed and accuracy when autofocusing while still including a relatively long focus throw.

If you lean towards shooting more video than stills, the Tamron is a good choice as it has the best manual focus ring (by a good measure), longer focus throw, and adds an effective image stabilizer to the mix.

Some people find that the Sigma 35A works just fine for them; others have given up despite its impressive optical performance. I have now spent time with the 35A, 50A, 18-35A, and 24-35A lenses, and my own experience has been a mixed bag. The 24-35A performed the best for me overall, and the 50A did well in spurts, but my own conclusion is that autofocus accuracy continues to be Sigma’s Achilles heel. I strongly want them to solve this issue as they really are designing lenses with very impressive optics. At the moment, however, there are no Sigma lenses in my personal kit as I don’t feel like I can rely on the autofocus for professional usage. As the saying goes, however, “your mileage may vary”. Sigma’s USB dock makes a difference, but doesn’t always solve the problem entirely.

In conclusion, if you are a professional and need the best, most accurately focusing 35mm lens, the Canon 35L II is the new top choice; the Sigma isn’t even close.

On a Crop (APS-C) Camera

This is obviously a very expensive lens to buy just for a crop sensor (APS-C) camera, but the performance of the lens on a crop sensor both optically and in terms of the autofocus is exemplary. In this brief video I take a look at the experience of using the 35L II on both a Canon EOS 70D body along with a Canon EOS M3 via the EF adapter.

Image Quality

A Different Kind of December (Canon 35L II)

Step over, Sigma, because there is a new King on the throne. The Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II is the new resolution class leader!

My first real outing with the 35L II was somewhat revelatory. Perhaps it was the fact that I was shooting in similar conditions to when I was testing the Zeiss Otus 1.4/85mm last year, but I came home and began looking at images that felt quite “Otus-like”. While I recognize that lenses like this are going to be used at a variety of apertures by end users, I tend to test lenses like this primarily at apertures wider than f/2.8. The reason being that it is in this zone where prime lenses really need to show their worth. The reality is that a number of modern zoom lenses are already excellent at their wide open f/2.8 aperture, so a modern prime really needs to shine at even wider apertures to justify its existence. The 35L II is virtually the same size as Canon’s 24-70mm f/2.8L II (7mm short and 45g lighter), and it costs only $100 less. That lens is largely acclaimed as being optically awesome, so the 35L II needs to justify its existence between f/1.4 and f/2.8.

It does.

There is no real reason to step the lens down to improve image quality – only to increase depth of field. Even landscape type images look excellent at f/1.4, and that, in my experience, is reserved for just a few elite type lenses. There is just no evidence of that hazy, indistinct look of some wide aperture primes wide open. Resolution is crisp, contrast is strong, and image quality is generally excellent. Check out this landscape shot at f/1.4 and the crops from across the frame:

I took the shot above from a high promontory so that I could get a fairly flat plane of focus wide open. The detail on the distant pines is impressive. That amazing detail shows up in close focus shots as well:

Â© 2015 Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott

Some lenses just have the ability to make everything look better. You can point it at common things and get uncommon results. I've quickly found that to be the case with the new Canon 35mm f/1.4L II USM. This is Zeiss Otus-like image quality, and as I compare this new lens with the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART, it is quickly making me a believer despite its stiff price tag. Watch for my review in early 2016.

<b>Technical Information:</b> Canon EOS 6D, Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM, Processed in Adobe Lightroom CC, Photoshop CC, and Alien Skin Exposure X (use code "dustinabbott" to get 10% off)

<b>Want to know more about me or make contact? Take a look at my <a href="http://www.dustinabbott.net/" rel="nofollow">website</a> and find a lot of ways to connect and view my work.</b>

That wonderful combination of excellent sharpness along the plane of focus and then soft fall off to defocus is fairly unique. It oozes quality. It seems that everything I shoot with the lens just looks a little extra special.

I also find that the images I’m getting from the 35L II really process well. I’m enjoying spending time adding polish to them and producing final results that I’m very glad to add to my portfolio. Here’s a few from along the way:

[Show as slideshow]

The new Canon 35L II is expensive, but when you consider it as an autofocusing, weather sealed Otus, it seems much cheaper!

The following day I went on an extended nearly 10 kilometer hike through a misty forest with the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART. The conditions for photography were unquestionably better than my day out with the Canon, and, while I came home with some fantastic images, they lacked the wow factor of the Canon. Yes, this is a “perception thing” that is hard to demonstrate on charts, but I write as an experienced photographer who has used a very large variety of lenses. Above all I think this boils down to the brilliant optics being let down by inconsistent focus. Shooting at wide apertures really puts the onus on the focus system. The difference between a brilliant image and a mediocre one is as simple as that pinpoint focus being nailed. The Canon produced one hit after another, but the Sigma wasn’t nearly as consistent.

I also didn’t feel that the Sigma produced the same degree of microcontrast as the Canon. What I mean by this is that when zoomed into a pixel level there is a higher amount of contrast and less chromatic aberrations in the details of the Canon’s images which results in the appearance of higher resolution. At f/1.4 the Canon is definitely resolving higher, and, as a result, the lens is just that much more special. I also feel like the Canon is transitioning to defocus more nicely. It’s rendering is more “magical”.

With either lens I was reminded of how much I enjoy the 35mm focal length as a walkabout lens. It seems to be “just right” for a number of things, and whether in the woods or on the city street the 35mm focal length seems wide enough for most everything without adding distortion. It is the “Goldilocks” focal length: not too close; not too far. For that matter, I also prefer the versatility of a wide aperture to that of a moderate zoom range. The ability to shoot most anything at f/1.4 (if you want that narrow a depth of field) gives you a lot of flexibility as to how you choose to frame a scene. In some instances, a shot of a scene with a narrow depth of field is interesting where it might just be busy with more depth of field.

[Show as slideshow]

I wasn’t just impressed with the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II when out in the woods, but wherever I used it the results were just excellent. I used it at church, in portraits, to chronicle our holiday celebrations, and for a few creative projects. It just delivered…period. The rules of the internet seem to imply that everyone who buys a new lens must take a picture of a cat with it, so here are some of my contributions to the taking of cat and dog pictures with expensive lenses!

[Show as slideshow]

Canon has done a great job of seriously upping the resolution of the lens without destroying the beautiful drawing and character that the first generation of the lens had, and that is no small accomplishment. You can view many more samples in the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Image Gallery. Read on to see some of the “voodoo” they used to accomplish it…

Blue Spectrum Refractive Optics

The Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM’s biggest marketing buzz centered around a completely new kind of element in the optical formula which Canon calls “Blue Spectrum Refractive Optics” or BR Optics for short. This special organic material gives a greater control over reducing axial chromatic aberrations than any substance before, and is at least partially responsible for the amazing image quality. There are almost no chromatic aberrations, period, which is a noticeable improvement over the first generation of the lens. The image quality, is, well, awesome, and if the BR Optics are responsible for that, then bless them!

The lack of chromatic aberrations are at least partly responsible for the excellent resolution and part of the reason why the lens reminds of a Zeiss Otus in so many ways.

The only real fly in the ointment optically is the very heavy vignette. It isn’t exceptionally bad (the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART and Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS are roughly the same, although the new Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC blows them all away in this area). My objection is more because there is a mild regression compared to the first generation of the lens and I have to wonder that if they had migrated to a 77mm front element they could have eliminated a fair bit of this. I find that the vignette is very visible in a lot of standard general purpose shots (particularly if I’m shooting JPEGs and not applying a standard profile in Lightroom). While vignette is to be expected in a wide aperture prime, it just seems like they could have done better. This lens’ high price point holds it up to higher scrutiny to less expensive options. Those shooting video may have cause for concern at wide apertures.

I was also less than amazed at the flare resistance. I had a chance to shoot in highly directional sun while visiting the Mer Bleue conservation area in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. This is one of the most studied bogs in the world, and provided some very unique shooting opportunities. The setting sun was both intense and very directional; a perfect storm for testing flare resistance. Neither the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART nor the Canon 35LII really impressed me; I’ve seen much better performance from both the Canon 35mm f/2 IS along with the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC. Neither lens has as wide an aperture, true, but both are genuine competitors that performed better in this regard. The 35L II retained somewhat better contrast (the Sigma veiled a bit more), but both showed a bit more ghosting artifacts than what I would like – and those can be very difficult to remove in post. I don’t mind a bit of veiling (it often creates a stylish effect), but ghosting artifacts can ruin an image.

The Sigma had slightly better defined sunbursts than the Canon if that is big deal to you, though both are pretty decent.

One final note is that the 35L II turns in a quite good coma performance, so it is a viable option for shooting the night sky.

Bokeh Quality

One of the single best qualities of the Canon’s performance is in the bokeh transition performance. The lens really transitions from focus to defocus beautifully, and produces a very creamy bokeh region when shooting at close distances that produces stunning subject isolation. The nature of the focal length means that this will much less pronounced when the subject is further away, but the quality is overall very nice. I got a lot of very “high end” photos that look, well, expensive, which is appropriate in this case.

I did a controlled test to compare the quality of the bokeh highlights. The subject (an old 35mm f/3.5 Super Takumar lens) was 17” from the sensor. The bokeh highlights (Christmas tree lights) were about seven feet beyond. I lit the foreground with a Metz 64 AF-1 flash through a Lite Genius Super-Scoop II and bounced off a wall behind the camera. I used mirror lockup, 2 second timer delay, Live View 10x focus, and Rear Curtain sync to produce the smoothest light falloff result. I determined that I best liked the look of the image with a ¾ stop underexposure by the camera’s meter. For what it is worth, the Sigma needed a bit more light according to this metering method, so there is a minor variance in exposure values. I expect that DXOmark or others who measure the lenses T-stop performance will find a shade better performance for the 35L II. The 35 f/2 IS, which I also used in this comparison, had a t-stop value equal to its f-stop (f/2), while the Sigma 35A clocked in at a t-stop of f/1.6, which is actually fairly decent compared to earlier generation competition.

When comparing the Sigma 35A and Canon 35L II side by side at a wide open f/1.4 aperture it is actually surprising how similar the bokeh highlights looked. The shape of the highlights is roughly the same, and while there is just a hint of additional busyness in the Sigma’s highlights, that is only detectable at 1:1 pixel level. The Canon shows a slight bit more concentric rings while the Sigma shows more of a pattern. As you move away from the center of the frame both lenses show a tendency towards lemon shapes instead of circles – a pretty common phenomenon. At identical exposure the Canon’s image is noticeable brighter, but probably no more than a quarter stop.

Stopping down to f/2 helps correct the lemon or cat-eye shape, but also further accentuates the signature of both lenses. The Sigma is bit more “patterned”, and the concentric circles are slightly more defined on the Canon. The Sigma does a slightly better job of retaining circular shape, with the Canon showing the first hints of the shape of the aperture blades.

Little changes at f/2.8, although now both lenses show the slight shape of their aperture blades at a 1:1 level to a similar degree.

By f/4 both lenses are producing highlights looking more “nonagonal”. The shape of the aperture blades is now clear, though the result is far less objectionable than the odd shape of the old 50mm f/1.8 and its five blades. There is also far more light bleed around the edges of the shapes, but roughly at an equal level from both lenses. Ditto at f/5.6, just a step further. Here is a series from the Canon from f/1.4 to f/5.6:

[Show as slideshow]

Here is the same series from the Sigma:

[Show as slideshow]

The Canon 35 f/2 IS has perhaps the smoothest bokeh of any of the 35mm options, but I don’t see a major advantage in this kind of testing – and that bodes well for both these lenses. The bokeh highlights from 35IS look remarkably similar to those of the 35L II. While I don’t have the new Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC on hand for this comparison, I did a similar test a few months ago and did add the Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 VC which I had on hand to the test as another point of comparison. The longer focal length of the Tamron means that the size of the bokeh highlights are larger, but the bokeh highlights are also noticeably busier than any of these other contenders. Most Tamron lenses I have tested have shown a tendency towards the phenomenon often called “onion bokeh”, though the 45VC also shows the reason why its bokeh looks so nice in most other situations – the inner line of the bokeh circle is nice and soft and thus produces bokeh without hard edges.

Both the Sigma and the Canon 35L II will produce less busy highlights than the Tamron 35 VC when bright light sources are in the scene.

Where the Tamron will win over all of these is in the amount of bokeh it can create in some situations due to being to focus much closer and having a maximum magnification figure near twice that of Sigma (.40x).

I would encourage you to judge the quality of the bokeh from any of these lenses based more on real life usage rather than any isolated test. Bokeh quality is always a subjective thing, and most all of these lenses produce very good real world results.

I will say that I highly favor the “look” of the images coming out of the 35L II – they are definitely special. I find the transition from [very sharp] focus to defocus very smooth. The overall “drawing” of the lens is very, very good. While this test does little to determine the cause of that, the lens certainly performed well here.

In Conclusion:

Canon has continued its recent trend of delivering premium lenses at a premium price with its “L” lens releases. The high point of entry for the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM will be discouraging to many prospective buyers who will content themselves with the almost as excellent Sigma 35 ART, Canon 35 IS, or the Tamron 35 VC. The 35L II is a cut above, however, and sets the new standard for excellence in the 35mm focal length. It is razor sharp, has exceptional autofocus performance in both speed and accuracy (not something the Sigma can claim), and delivers beautiful, professional looking results. It also raises the bar for a Canon prime lens in its construction and degree of weather sealing. It is a genuinely professional grade lens that is designed for demanding use and will quickly become the new 35mm lens of choice for photo journalists, sport shooters, and wedding/portrait photographers. It is designed to be take advantage of high resolution sensors like those on the 5Ds/5DsR. Its shortcomings are confined to heavy vignetting and somewhat unimpressive flare resistance. It also effectively pioneers an impressive new Canon technology (BR Optics) that is sure to make its way into many of Canon’s new higher end lenses.

The 35L II is expensive, yes, but in an age where the Zeiss Otus lenses are commanding prices north of $4000, the 35L II represents a more attainable kind of excellence. For some it will unquestionably be worth the price tag double that of the Sigma, while others will decide that the Sigma’s almost as good optical performance makes the Canon’s price of entry too high. Decisions, decisions.

Pros:

Sets the new standard for optical performance at the 35mm focal
Sets the new standard for build quality in a standard prime
Has advanced weather sealing
Blue Spectrum refractive optics live up to their billing
Has unique blend of sharpness and beautiful drawing
Fast, accurate AF that leaves the Sigma in the dust
Manual focus ring has a good amount of focus travel
Takes fantastic pictures

Cons:

Fairly heavy vignette
Flare resistance could be better
Bigger, heavier, and more expensive than previous generation
Expensive (deserves a second mention)

Alternatives:

If you can’t afford the new King, here are a few still royal alternatives.

The original Canon 35mm f/1.4L USM remains an excellent lens and the release of this new lens has helped drive down the price on it to a more reasonable $1099. It lacks the weather sealing of the new lens, has more chromatic aberration, and has older focusing algorithms but is still a solid choice if your budget doesn’t extend all the way to the new lens.

I reviewed the new Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC a few months and was very impressed by it. It has a somewhat smaller aperture value (f/1.8) but offers up a professional grade, weather sealed build quality, great optics, and adds an image stabilizer to the mix. It also retails for a third of the price of the 35L II. It is not as great as the Canon, but is a solid alternative if you budget can’t handle the more expensive Canon.

The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART referenced in this review continues to be a solid budget alternative to the 35L II with nearly as good optical performance. It is held back somewhat by focus issues, but there are many delighted users of the lens. It retails for half the price of the 35L II and is hard to ignore.

The Canon 35mm f/2 IS has a slower aperture but has great focus, a wonderfully compact size, and a very effective image stabilizer. It is a bargain at $549.

Review notes: I reviewed retail copies of both the Canon 35L II and Sigma 35A provided to me by the great people at B&H Photo .

Gear Used:

Canon EOS 6D DSLR Camera (Body Only)
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens
Adobe Lightroom CC Software for Mac and Windows (Boxed Version)
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD Review

Dustin Abbott

October 4th, 2015

It’s been a long time since we have seen a prime lens from Tamron outside of some very good macro lenses. While Sigma has been making a name for itself with its ART series primes (along with a few innovative zooms), third-party rival Tamron was accomplishing something similar with its pro quality stabilized zooms like the 24-70mm f/2.8 VC, 70-200mm f/2.8 VC, and, most recently, the superlative 15-30mm f/2.8 VC (which has rapidly become one of my favorite lenses, particularly since I got the Fotodiox WonderPana filter system for it). But it’s clear that Tamron was keeping an eye on Sigma’ success with the ART series and has been quietly working behind the scenes to create its own pro-grade prime lenses. This new line of primes has now been unveiled, and I’ve been spending some quality time with the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 and Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 VC lenses over the past few weeks. The 35mm f/1.8 VC and the 45mm f/1.8 VC are only the first in a line of SP (Super Performance) prime lenses.

I spent time with both lenses at the same time, and I must confess that I initially was keyed in more on the 45mm than the 35mm for the simple reason that I already have a 35mm lens that I’m very happy with (the Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS) but don’t currently have an autofocusing 50mm lens in my kit (I’ve got some old manual focus 50s that I’ve got a love affair with). I’ve been reviewing a lot of 50mm lenses in the past year or so and wanted to see how the Tamron stacked up. When I began to give fuller attention to the 35mm I found that in some ways it is the more competent/versatile of the two, and the lens reminded me of just how much I enjoy using the 35mm focal length as a general purpose/walk-around lens. For those of you trying to decide which focal length you prefer, here’s a visual comparison of what the difference between the 35mm and the 45mm Tamrons looks like.

Here are the raw numbers: the Tamron SP 35mm is 479g and 3.2″/81mm long. The Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS is 335g and 2.46″/63mm long. The bigger end of the “under a thousand” autofocus 35mm club is the Sigma ART series. It comes in at 665g and is 3.7″/94mm long. The Tamron has ten elements in 9 groups, including 1 LD (Low Dispersion) element and 2 Aspherical elements. In short, the Tamron is a medium sized lens that is almost perfectly slotted between its two main competitors. But is that the sweet spot? Is the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC the new lens to beat?

Tamron Technologies

If you are reading both the 35mm and the 45mm reviews, you will find some overlap as they are released simultaneously and I had them both in hand at the same time. The reviews differentiate in a variety of areas to deal with unique qualities of each lens.

One area where Tamron has been on the cutting edge is in the implementation of its image stabilization systems. Tamron’s VC (or Vibration Compensation) systems have consistently been among the industry’s best since their introduction, and they have been the first (and, so far, the only!) lens manufacturer to successfully implement one in a standard wide aperture zoom (the SP 24-70 f/2.8 VC) or wide angle/wide aperture zoom (the SP 15-30 f/2.8 VC). These new prime lenses will be the first with an aperture this wide to receive in lens stabilization. In a Canon system the EF 35mm f/2 IS (an excellent lens that I own) has been Canon’s widest aperture prime to receive image stabilization. Both these new Tamron primes will now become the title holder. The Sigma ART prime lenses have a “sexier” (and larger) f/1.4 aperture, and while Tamron’s VC will allow for lower minimum shutter speeds in some situations (with a static subject), I suspect that some photographers will at least initially view these lenses as being less “pro grade” because of not having an f/1.4 aperture. The actual design and build of these suggest that they are most certainly pro-grade lenses (more so than the ART series, at least in build), but many photographers like the look (or at least the cache) of an f/1.4 lens. Tamron will have to fight a bit of an uphill battle in the “perception war” with Sigma over this.

Tamron’s way of equaling the balance (while undercutting it’s competition in size) is through the inclusion of VC. This is a feature that many photographers will perceive as very valuable, and is a matter of priority for those that shoot video. Tamron’s experience in implementing VC pays off here, as the VC performance here is very good. It is completely unobtrusive, with almost no hints of its operation beyond the steady viewfinder and the nicely stabilized images. High resolution sensors really punish camera shake, so having good stabilization makes a huge difference. The VC is almost silent and does no unseemly jumping when activated. Handholding 1/10th second images is a piece of cake, and slower shutter speeds are possible with good technique and a static subject. This image is .3 second and perfectly sharp:

I have to confess that I find IS/VC must surrender to the law of diminishing returns with wider focal lengths. Telephoto lenses realize huge gains with image stabilization, and its not unusual to be able to handhold 1/10th second shutter speeds with a telephoto. One would think that they would then be handholding 2 and 3 second exposures with a wider lens like this. But I can’t, myself. Not with my Canon, and not with this Tamron. It does make a difference, and handholding .3 or even .5 second shots isn’t a problem, but I rarely can handhold a 1 second exposure. It’s as if the shutter activation itself causes too much movement for these systems to overcome. The greater value here is that you will have a steady viewfinder and be able to handhold very low shutter speeds…and maybe you will do better than I in exploring in the limits of the what the VC on this lens can do. Nonetheless this is a well implemented stabilizer, and it does make a difference.

Sony mounts do not come with VC. I understand the reasons for this, but it does often feel that Sony users get shortchanged with third party stabilized lenses. Sony users are familiar with this pain, however, so this is nothing new.

Another area that Tamron has been developing some valuable expertise is in the development of moisture resistance/weather sealing. They have included this feature on a broader range of lenses than anyone else, and, while there are differing opinions on the value of moisture resistance, it is also a strongly desired feature by many photographers. Photographers with pro grade camera bodies (with weather sealing) want the liberty to match lenses that also have weather sealing so that they can shoot in a broader range of weather conditions. This is one area where Tamron definitely distinguishes itself, as the Sigma ART series 35mm f/1.4 lacks this option. Tamron has gone to a whole new level (for them) with the weather sealing on these lenses, with actual seals at the appropriate places (even the focus ring), a rear gasket, and expensive fluorine coating on the front element. They back up this weather sealing with an industry leading six year warranty (in North America), which suggests they are serious about the build quality of these lenses. And these lenses are beautifully built, with a premium feel that is a real joy to handle and use.

Here’s a video breakdown of the size and build quality of these new lenses:

This lens, along with its 45mm sibling, are among the nicest lenses that I’ve reviewed recently. The build quality is really high grade and is punching WAY above this lens’ price point. This is manifest in a number of ways, including a body that is primarily made of metal (including metal filter threads!!), a metal mount (obviously), and a quality feel to the switches. There is a rubber gasket around the lens mount, and Tamron has also included expensive fluorine coatings on the front elements that further help the moisture resistance and makes lenses both easier to clean and more resistant to scratching. The build here exceeded my expectations, and it is also an area where it really creates some distance between the Canon 35mm f/2 IS. It lacks weather sealing but is also has a more consumer grade build.

[Show as slideshow]

The new build design is really quite beautiful. It’s simple and clean, and faintly reminiscent of Sigma’s ART series, although the materials here are actually higher grade. I do find the texture variety on the Sigma ART series a little more appealing, but I do really like this new, clean design. The black is broken up by white lettering (etched rather than printed) here and there along with an “SP” (Super Performance) badge and a light metallic ring near the lens mount that Tamron euphemistically calls “Luminous Gold”. This deviation from the black on black is probably the design aspect that most distinguishes the lens from the ART series, however, and will help Tamron with branding. Several surfaces have a slightly rubberized/soft touch feel that has a tactile pleasing quality. It makes me wonder if Tamron will adopt this new design for future high end zooms, or if this “look” will be reserved for the SP primes.

The focus ring is extremely nice. It is very generously wide and almost perfectly damped. It glides smoothly either in MF mode or in full time manual override, and while the stops at minimum and infinity focus aren’t as definite as a true manual focus lens, they are definite enough that you don’t try to focus past them. There is also sufficient travel (nearly 180 degrees) to accurately focus manually. The focus rings on these lenses are some of best I’ve used outside of dedicated manual focus lenses, and are better than several of those, too. This becomes very important when one considers the amazing minimum focus ability of these lenses. At macro distances most photographers prefer manual focus anyway, and these lenses are joy to use in a pseudo-macro fashion. The lens has focus distance window but no hyperfocal markings (not surprising). Both lenses take a moderate, inexpensive, and easy to find 67mm filter for those nice metal filter threads that is shared with a number of other lenses. Manual focusing with the added bonus of vibration compensation is a treat I’ve rarely been afforded in the past. This is another area where the build really distinguishes it from the Canon 35mm f/2 IS, which certainly improved on the focus ring of its predecessor, but is both much narrower and less smooth in operation than this Tamron.

The build quality here is a new high for Tamron, and belies the moderate price point ($599 USD). The look of the Sigma ART series is still perhaps minutely better, but the build quality of these new Tamron primes exceeds any of the four Sigma ART series lenses I’ve used.

The attention to detail in the fresh design carries over to redesigned front and rear lens caps. The front cap is both chunkier and more contoured than previous Tamron lens caps. It has a more premium feel, which was (I’m sure) the point. As lens caps go it is very nice, and the center pinch portion has a notably precise action that feels better engineered than any previous lens cap I’ve used. The rear cap is also a huge step forward. The previous Tamron rear caps have been on the (ahem) bottom of my list of favorites. I tend to trade them out with Canon caps for the Tamron lenses in my kit while the Tamron caps tend to go to the more lowly vintage lenses in my collection that don’t get used often. Those caps only screw on at distinct points and lack flare. These new caps are another matter. They are contoured, for one, flaring out towards the lens in both a stylish and functional way. They mount easier as well and certainly wouldn’t get demoted in my collection.

Tamron has even redesigned the font for its name in a more serious, contemporary style. These two lenses represent an attempt to move upscale, and my perception is that it is working.

Perhaps to deflect some criticisms over moving some of its manufacturing out of Japan on some of its less premium offerings, these lenses remind us twice that they are both designed and manufactured in Japan (and then again on the hood).

There are two switches on the body with a different look and feel than any other Tamron lens I’ve used. They resemble (wait for it…) the ART series a bit more, save these are a bit wider and flatter. They are the basic switches you would expect, with an AF (Autofocus)/MF (Manual Focus) switch (full time manual override is always available), and the second switch is an ON/OFF for the VC (Vibration Compensation). The switches placement is a little different than usual, with a more side by side look than the typical stacking. There is internal sealing around them to complete the moisture resistance.

Another effective technology that Tamron has recently developed is in its coatings (eBAND and BBAR). This from Tamron’s press release, “eBAND Coating deployed to thoroughly suppress ghosting and flare eBAND (Extended Bandwidth & Angular-Dependency) and BBAR (Broad-Band Anti-Reflection) coatings, both providing outstanding anti-reflection effect, are applied to critical element surfaces for maximum light transmission. Internal reflections from element surfaces which cause ghosting and flare are reduced to an absolute minimum. Flawless, crystal clear images can be obtained. eBAND Coating, a hybrid nano-structured layer with extremely low refractive index coupled with multilayered anti-reflection coating technology, efficiently minimizes reflection of extremely angulated incident light—something that cannot be achieved by conventional anti-reflection coatings alone.”

[Show as slideshow]

Techno-speak aside, these coatings provide an almost complete resistance to flare and ghosting. Many prime lenses are susceptible to a variety of flare defects, from veiling to ghosting to a variety of flare related artifacts., but despite thorough torture testing during my time with the lenses I found them extremely resistant to flare. The only time I saw any kind of flare artifact at all was when I had an ND8 filter mounted on the lens and shot into the sun in the middle of day. I still only got the light hazing at the top of this image, and I suspect that it was caused by the filter rather than the lens because I never saw anything similar with the bare lens.

As you read the various reviews as they start to pour in, I think you will find a general consensus that these lenses are seriously well made pieces of kit. Tamron’s six year North American warranty is another huge advantage for shoppers in that market, and the European warranty is five years, which still eclipses the competition by a wide margin.

My only indictment on the build/packaging is that while Tamron includes a lens hood, they don’t include any kind of protective case – a Sigma strength.

But Are They Super Performance?

Watch the video here to see me break down Tamron’s various claims about the “Super Performance” of these lenses.

I’m happy to announce that yes, the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC is a super performing lens in most regards. In some ways it is a more well rounded lens that its big brother (45mm), and I was seriously impressed by the images I saw out of the camera.

I’ve long been impressed with the great sharpness from Canon 35mm f/2 IS wide open. I mostly shoot it that way, as the 35mm focal length presents a fair amount of depth of field at portrait distances even at f/2. At 10 feet the depth of field at f/2 is right over 3 feet; plenty of depth of field to even shoot a small group if they are positioned roughly on the same focal plane. I only stop it down when I want more DOF for landscapes. Sigma’s 35mm f/1.4 ART is even a bit sharper, so the standard is set high. I don’t think that anyone is going to be disappointed with the wide open resolution from the 35mm lens, however. I looked at image after image at a pixel level and was consistently impressed.

Sharpness is strong across the image frame from wide open. I don’t see the biting resolution/contrast of the Otus series (not surprising), but even wide open landscape shots show high resolution across the frame without any hint of that haziness/indistinct edges that softer lenses will show. This is great news for the times when you are shooting in lowering lighting conditions and want to keep the ISO setting down. The lens also exhibits a nicely flat focal plane. I haven’t found a situation where I would hesitate to use the lens wide open. I’ll leave the chart testing to those that excel at it, but I suspect that one would be hard pressed to realistically tell a difference from the Sigma 35mm ART even if there is one. Stopping down to more typical landscape apertures produces biting sharpness across the frame. I’m always happy when I zoom in to images at a pixel level and discover that images look even better then. Here is a series of images and crops that have certainly been impressive.

[Show as slideshow]

I’ve previously mentioned the excellent flare resistance. This is important in a wider prime lens, as the circumstances when the sun will be in the frame are more frequent. With a telephoto you typically have to purposefully put the sun there, but that’s not always the case with a 35mm focal length. The lens passes this test with flying colors, with no apparent hazing, ghosting, or flare artifacts that I’ve seen. These lenses perform more strongly in this aspect than any ART series lens that I’ve used, though the Sigmas are far from poor in this regard. This is also an area of strength for my Canon 35mm f/2 IS, and as a portrait photographer I’ve frequently used backlighting in shots because I don’t fear the image being affected by flare/haze. One could definitely do the same with this Tamron.

Bokeh quality is very nice from the rounded nine bladed aperture iris. I’ve not seen anything jittery or objectionable, and the lens actually does a better job of retaining circular highlights towards the edges of the frame than the 45mm. Where the 45mm (and the Canon 35mm) surpasses it is in “busyness” of bright circular highlights. In the 35mm they exhibit a fair bit of what is often called “onion bokeh”, although I only saw this with my Christmas light test. This shows the bokeh quality at f/1.8, f/2, f/2.8, and f/4. Bokeh highlights stay rounded even beyond, but I only shot this series through f/4.

[Show as slideshow]

The Canon series below shows that it has less “activity” with the bokeh highlights (and it is the top performer in this regard among 35mm lenses). The Canon shows a similar series without the f/1.8 shot (for obvious reasons).

[Show as slideshow]

Finally, just to give you a quick visual comparison, here are the two lenses side by side at f/2:

In field use I didn’t notice any of that busyness, and actually felt the lens handled the transition zone (medium distance bokeh) quite well. That is the area where some lenses really fall apart, and produce hard edged bokeh that is eye catching in a bad kind of way. Still, if you have bright bokeh highlights in the image you may see some concentric circles (onion effect) in the bokeh. I’ve found that using a brush in Lightroom that reduces clarity does wonders if this is an issue for you. One advantage for the Tamron shows up in this test, however, and that is in the overall roundness of the bokeh circles, which are rounder than the Canon’s throughout the frame. Where the Tamron excels is in its ability to produce bokeh/defocus. It can get so close to subjects that it can really, really throw backgrounds out of focus, and there are myriad ways to utilize such an ability.

The combination of nice optics and strong bokeh performance means that this is a lens capable of producing a lot of beautiful images! The ability to focus down so much closer than other 35mm lenses by a wide margin (more on that in a moment) opens up all kinds of new possibilities. On the other end of the aperture spectrum, stopping down the nine bladed aperture produces some delightful sunstars/sunbursts that add a lot to an image.

Vignette control is also a strength. There is a negligible amount of vignette visible in the corners at wide open apertures, but far less than competing primes. This is an area of weakness for the Canon 35mm f/2 IS (nearly three stops of vignette in the corners), but the Tamron also improves on the Sigma’s performance in this area as well. Take a look at the comparison between the Tamron and Canon here:

The use of a slim circular polarizer did not add any obvious vignette. In most situations there isn’t enough vignetting to even be noticeable. In field use I haven’t noticed enough vignette from the lens that I would feel the need to correct anything. This, combined with low native distortion (a tiny amount of barrel distortion), means that those of you concerned about not having a lens profile in camera to correct for these things shouldn’t have much to worry about.

Color rendition seems very good overall. Colors are natural and rich. You can judge for yourself by checking out the Lens Image Gallery.

The 45mm VC struggles a bit with chromatic aberration control, but the 35mm does a better job overall. They do exist, but you will only see them in extreme situations. Here is an example from a very high contrast target – the white lettering on the Tamron cap. They aren’t noticeable on the full size image, but a 100% crop will show that there is purple fringing beyond the plane of focus and light green fringing beyond. I’ve thrown in a second crop where I brightened the subject to bring out the purple fringing, but it really isn’t bad.

[Show as slideshow]

There isn’t enough to be objectionable, however, and I think the situations where this will be an issue for you are few and far between. They are much more pronounced on the 45mm, unfortunately.

Overall the optical strengths of the lens far outweigh the very minor negatives. I’m always happy when Roger Cicala from LensRentals weighs in on any lens. He has the unique opportunity to test large batches of lenses (unlike most of we reviewers) and can thus spot trends like sample variation. He tested the two new Tamron primes on the optical bench and found that A) they resolved very highly and B) the sample variation result was excellent on the 35mm and exceptional on the 45. That’s an encouraging report, and you can check it out here if you would like.

Close Encounters of the Magnification Kind

I’ve saved one of the best features of the lens until last. When I first saw the press release for the 35mm, I have to confess I completely missed just how good the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC’s maximum magnification figure was. I saw 1:2.5 and read .25x, which seemed to make sense, as the Canon 35mm f/2 IS had the peak figure I was previously aware of at .24x. Tamron claimed a class leading performance, and so a .25x figure was class leading, if only by a small margin (but isn’t that the nature of marketing?). But a kind viewer on my YouTube channel set me straight. I was misreading the figure; the value was 1:2.5, equaling a .40x magnification. This blew me away, as it is (I believe) the highest figure I’ve personally seen from a non-macro lens. It isn’t far behind the .50x figure offered up by the Zeiss Makro Planar T* 2/50mm that I reviewed late last year. I can’t even begin to tell you how useful such magnification is. Tamron accomplishes this through the use of a floating element (Tamron calls it their “Floating System”). They’ve done a fabulous job of its implementation, and it enables the 35mm to focus down to a miserly 20cm (under 8 inches). Remember that this figure is from the sensor, so once you remove the 3.2″ of the lens (and another 2″ of hood if you have it mounted), it means you can pretty much get on top of your subject and still focus. To get this picture, for example:

I was set up this close to the subject. (Forgive the distinctly not glamorous iPhone picture).

The challenge then is to not shade your subject with the lens itself. It will probably help to remove the lens hood when you want to shoot at such close focus. Here is the difference between the previous record holder (the Canon) and the new record holder (Tamron) when it comes to close focus for a 35mm lens:

This is enough magnification to treat the lens essentially like a macro lens in a lot of situations, and the use of an extension tube would add even more magnification (though getting you ever closer to your subject). I like the working distance of the 45mm a bit more, but its magnification (.29x+), though also class leading, is behind this lens by a fair margin. If you don’t have a dedicated macro lens this will probably be a reasonable replacement until you get one. The resolution at minimum focus is still very high, and the fairly flat plane of focus from the lens makes it useful. Here are a few close focus examples (the one with the red lights is actually the tip of an iOS Lightning cable!)

[Show as slideshow]

This is one of the features that I’m most excited by because it fits my own shooting style so well.

AF Performance

This is an area where these lenses really need to distinguish themselves. I own the Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS, and it is a focusing standout. It’s fast, but more importantly, it is exceptionally accurate. My images from it are always well focused, so its a lens I will frequently use for professional work – from portraits to reportage. I can trust it. I won’t own a lens that I cannot trust to consistently and accurately autofocus.

The Achille’s heel for the Sigma ART series in my experience (and that of many other photographers – particularly other Canon shooters) has been sometimes inconsistent autofocus accuracy. Both Tamron and Sigma are forced to reverse engineer Canon, Nikon, and Sony’s autofocus algorithms because these companies will not license their technology to them. My experience says that Tamron has been able to more effectively accomplish this, and I get very consistent results from some of the professional grade zooms from Tamron. I use them almost exclusively for my event and wedding work and typically don’t have to discard one image out of a thousand for missed focus. Large aperture primes are very demanding for autofocus, so this is a key point for Tamron if it wants to convince photographers to choose its lenses over first party choices.

Things got off to a good start when I performed calibration. The Tamron 35mm needed a -2 adjustment; a value that was highly repeatable. I prefer small adjustments as a matter of principle; it means that those without the ability to perform microadjustment in their camera bodies can still expect reliable performance out of the box. Autofocus performance would have been good without any adjustment, but that bit of microadjustment produces slightly more repeatable autofocus accuracy. The one advantage that Sigma has to offset its autofocus issues is the ability to tune focus through the Sigma USB dock. Some report that this makes a huge difference; others report that autofocus inconsistencies remain for them even after tuning via the dock. This Tamron lens doesn’t have the dock, but fortunately what it does have is highly accurate autofocus.

The autofocus motor in the lenses is Tamron’s USD (Ultrasonic Drive). This is a true ring type AF motor similar to Canon’s USM. The AF feels a bit more snappy in the 35mm than the 45mm. The 35mm is roughly similar in speed to my Canon 35mm f/2 IS in most situations (which is to say very good!), although I would still give the Canon the slight nod. This slight advantage doesn’t manifest itself in normal use, but will show up in low contrast/dim situations. The Tamron is more prone to hunt for a second before locking focus while the Canon is more likely to grab focus rather than hunting. I never had a situation where the Tamron didn’t focus, but I did feel that the Canon remained the more confident focusing lens. It has, in fact, been one of the best focusing lenses in my kit, both equaling and surpassing some of its more expensive L series brethren. The fact that I didn’t see a major difference between it and the Tamron is a high endorsement of the focus quality of the Tamron.

I was consistently delighted when I zoomed in 100% on images and saw amazingly good focus and fantastic sharpness. I hate seeing images fall apart at a pixel level due to missed focus, so I guess I must confess to being a pixel peeper. The accuracy and sharpness here more than passed my expectations.

[Show as slideshow]

Portrait notes: Some of you that have read my reviews in the past know that I like to try wide aperture lenses out in a portrait environment. Environmental portraiture is typically very demanding on an AF system because you are shooting at wide apertures and looking for pin point focus on eyes. This is where the focus inconsistencies of many lenses are exposed. I went out today to shoot a portrait session. The weather was not particularly cooperative; it was a very, very bright and my open window for shooting was not the best. But, I was on a deadline with these lenses, and I thought, “Why not a torture test?” I shot almost every portrait shot wide open (f/1.8), except for three frames I dialed down to f/2.2.

I took a few tools to help combat the light. I used the Lite Genius Lite-Scoop II flash modifier I reviewed a few months back for my Metz 64 AF-1 flash unit. I prefer to shoot with my flashes off camera, but did not have time nor the inclination for a complicated light setup. The flash was on the camera with the modifier in place. I also took along an ND8 filter that I happened to have in the appropriate 67mm size so that I could bring the shutter speed down in certain situations. I also went with Manual HSS mode and shot with really high shutter speeds in other situations to just overpower the ambient light. The Metz has a lot of power and enables me to do this in most circumstances. I went through the roughly 100 shots from the session at a pixel level and found that my focus consistency was very good despite the challenging conditions. I slightly prefer the 35mm’s focus speed and accuracy, but the 45mm was rock solid as well (the 35mm may be a bit sharper).

There are a number of portrait shots in the gallery above. These were all shot at f/1.8. They will also give you a chance to evaluate bokeh and color in an environmental portrait environment. These are not conditions that I would normally like to shoot portraits in, but the lenses themselves worked very well. The Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC will be a solid tool in a portrait or wedding photographer’s arsenal.

Manual focus is exceptional for an autofocus lens due to the combination of the nice focus ring I mentioned previously along with the rock solid VC. I don’t usually have the luxury of an image stabilizer when I manually focus, so it makes manual focus a kinder experience than on most AF lenses. Videographers will appreciate this along with a full 180 degrees of focus throw.

EOS M3 notes. While these lenses are on the larger side of what I would deem natural for my smaller EOS M3 mirrorless body, the focal lengths are appealing crossover ones. The improved grip on the M3 means that slightly heavier lenses (for mirrorless) like this one still work fairly well. This lens provides a 56mm equivalent on a crop sensor, which makes this lens perhaps the nicest 50mm equivalent lens currently available (though I’m looking forward to using the manual focus only 50mm f/1.2 coming from Rokinon). I was happy to find that the lenses focused nearly as quickly and accurately as native M mount lenses in one shot mode, although video AF Servo shooting can be a bit slow when making major transitions. Images produced with the combination are very appealing. It’s ironic that many recent Tamron lenses behave more mannerly via the EF adapter than most of the Canon lenses. Something about the way they achieve focus seems to agree with the M3. Here are a few M3/35mm combo samples.

[Show as slideshow]

How about Canon’s DPAF? A few readers were interested in how these lenses would work with Canon’s DPAF. I have a Canon 70D body, the first to use DPAF, and one of the few DSLRs to have quality servo AF during video recording. The lenses that work best with DPAF for video are those with stepping motors like Canon’s STM, but I’m happy to report that while these lens don’t focus quite as quickly as STM motors (and are bit louder in doing it), they focus smoothly and accurately. If you are using something else to record your audio I don’t see an issue. Here’s a little sampling of videos using DPAF.

Canon's DPAF Focus with the new Tamron Primes - Any Good?

DPAF works well for stills, too, though not as fast as typical contrast AF. The 35mm is also a very, very nice lens mounted on a crop body like my 70D (and gives a nice weather sealed combo for general shooting or portraiture). By the way, using the lens on a crop sensor body gives you a little more working distance when shooting near minimum focus, and this lens is definitely better optically than the crop sensor specific Sigma 30mm (not 35mm) f/1.4 ART. This is definitely a lens you should consider if you shoot a crop sensor body and even remotely think you might move to a full frame body in the future (or even if you don’t plan to make that move). Here are a couple of samples taken with the 70D + 35mm VC.

[Show as slideshow]

Conclusions

I’ve already been asked the question I knew was coming several times. Many people know I use the Canon 35mm f/2 IS or have watched/read my review of it. So, “Which one would you choose?” was inevitable. It’s a tough question, as there is some give or take. I already own the Canon and am happy with it, so for now I am keeping it. But what if I were starting fresh and trying to choose between them? I honestly don’t know. I like the compact size of the Canon, I like its image quality, and I’ve found it to be superbly focusing instrument. But the Tamron is built better, has a wider aperture, also has an image stabilizer, has a much higher magnification figure, and much lower vignette. You see why it is a hard choice! I probably would choose the Tamron for the pro-grade build and wider aperture, and I love the magnification figure, but having owned the Canon I would also want to test them side by side for an extended period before making a final decision. So yes, I am a waffler…

It was the 45mm lens (read my review here) that most excited me and initially captured my attention, but when I turned my attention to this Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC I found one fantastic lens. Using this lens reminded me of how much I enjoy the 35mm focal length, and the extreme flexibility of this instrument was a real joy to use in unleashing my creativity. In the US market it is priced equally with the Canon 35mm f/2 IS (still a very valid option!) at $599. This undercuts the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART by a fairly wide margin of $300 (the Sigma is currently $899). In the US market this makes the Tamron an extremely compelling option on price, but some other markets are currently showing a much less definitive price advantage for the Tamron. Price aside, however, this is certainly a lens that can compete on merit. Tamron came out swinging for the fences with these lenses, and the Tamron has a lot of strengths to offset its slightly slower aperture when compared to the Sigma. Its amazing close focus capability, exceptional build, image stabilizer, and great optics overshadow the occasionally busy bokeh highlights and slight bit of chromatic aberrations. The good news for consumers is that we now have three compelling options in the “affordable” 35mm category, and frankly there isn’t a bad choice in the bunch. I look forward to seeing more of the SP primes from Tamron in the future.

Pros:

Exceptional build quality
High grade weather sealing
Fluorine coating
Bar raising .40x maximum magnification
Excellent manual focus ring with good focus throw
Excellent resolution from wide open on
Extremely low vignetting
Quality bokeh from nine blade aperture
Well performing VC system
Fast and accurate autofocus
Excellent price to build/performance

Cons:

Somewhat busy bokeh highlights (onion bokeh)
Chromatic aberrations not perfectly controlled
Autofocus isn’t quite as confident as the Canon
No case included

A big “thank you!” to Canada’s Amplis Foto for providing these retail samples for review. I’ve bought many lenses and accessories from Amplis myself, and they are great to deal with! You can use the Coupon Code AMPLIS52014 to get 5% anything in their store, including these new lenses!

Gear Used:

Canon EOS 6D DSLR Camera (Body Only)
Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD
Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (USA and World)
Adobe Lightroom CC Software for Mac and Windows (Boxed Version)
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure 7 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Review

Dustin Abbott

April 4th, 2018

Batis 25mm f/2 Build, Design, and Handling

Batis 25mm Autofocus

Batis 25mm Image Quality

Batis 25mm Resolution and Contrast

Bokeh, Coma, Flare, and Color Rendition

APS-C Results

Conclusion

Pros:

Cons:

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2 Image Galleries

Dustin Abbott

March 24th, 2018

Images of the Zeiss Batis 25mm F2

Images taken with the Zeiss Batis 25mm F2

APS-C Images taken with Sony a6500 and Batis 2/25

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART Review

Dustin Abbott

September 1st, 2017

Build and Design

Autofocus

Optical Stabilizer

24-70 ART Image Quality

24-70 ART Resolution

Other Optical Qualities

Sigma on Sony Thoughts

Conclusion

Pros:

Cons:

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM ART Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

August 7th, 2017

Images of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS ART

Images taken with the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 OS ART

Images on Sony a6500 via Sigma MC-11 Adapter

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 Contemporary Review

Dustin Abbott

June 30th, 2017

Design, Build, and Handling

100-400 C Optical Performance

APS-C Performance

Autofocus Performance

Sigma 100-400 C Lens Stabilization

Conclusion

Pros:

Cons:

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 C Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

June 8th, 2017

Images of the Sigma 100-400 C:

Images taken with the Sigma 100-400 C:

Images Taken on APS-C (Canon 80D)

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Review

Dustin Abbott

December 30th, 2015

Build Quality

Autofocus

On a Crop (APS-C) Camera

Image Quality

Blue Spectrum Refractive Optics

Bokeh Quality

In Conclusion:

Pros:

Cons:

Alternatives:

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD Review

Dustin Abbott

October 4th, 2015

Tamron Technologies

But Are They Super Performance?

Close Encounters of the Magnification Kind