Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Review

Dustin Abbott

January 13th, 2016

I recognize that I’m a little late to the party in reviewing the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART lens. It has been on the market for more than three years, and has gotten both writer’s ink and photographer’s dollars like no Sigma lens before it. I had never reviewed the lens previously, but when the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM was released I knew a lot of people would be interested in knowing how it compared to the current benchmark in the industry, and shockingly, that benchmark was not made by Canon, Nikon, or Zeiss; it was made by Sigma. Just pause for a moment and consider just how incomprehensible that would have been four or five years ago. Four years ago most professionals sneered at the notion of owning a Sigma over a first party lens, despite the release of a fairly good EX 50mm f/1.4 and a very good EX 85mm f/1.4. But Sigma (along with Tamron) was still stuck in a third party/third world mentality, namely, that their niche was to offer budget alternatives to first party lenses that undercut them in price, offered competitive optical performance, but were usually inferior in build and autofocus performance. Then Sigma shocked the photography world at the end of 2012 by introducing this beautiful new lens that looked nothing like a Sigma. The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART lens launched Sigma’s rebranding/coming out party with their Global Vision initiative.

Part of this was a completely new branding system for their various products. Sigma abandoned the EX designation and instead introduced a three-pronged approach of “Art”, “Contemporary”, and “Sport” lines. A few of these categories are admittedly vague (what exactly makes a lens “Contemporary”?), but there is no arguing with the direction the design team has taken with the lenses designated “Art”. Sigma not only dramatically improved upon their older design (which frankly I was not a huge fan of), but have designed some of the best looking modern lenses, period. I’ve reviewed the 50mm, 18-35mm, 24-35mm, and now this lens from the ART designation, along with the 150-600mm in both “Sport” and “Contemporary” variants, so the new Sigma look is not quite so new any longer, but I still favor it over most all other lens designs.

I decided to go ahead and do a review of the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART (35A for short henceforth) that took into account the new releases from Canon and Tamron. Sigma is no longer the de facto choice, but do these new options make it any less deserving of your consideration?

Build Quality and Design

There is a very pleasing blend of glossy, matte, and ribbed surfaces that has both a modern yet elegant design. The “flocked” finish is a thing of the past (good riddance, I say), as is the gold ring that seems almost garish now when presented with this sleek, understated new design. Yes, the lens is essentially all black with some small white print in a few points, but the blend of textures keeps the lens from being monochromatic or boring. The lens has small white text on one side that says, “Made in Japan”, an understated SIGMA brand on the top, and then the lens designation and filter thread size near the distance window of the top of the barrel. Less obvious is a very small sized serial number in a grey text that is only obvious under close examination. An elegant little silver circle with the letter A (for ART) rests next the focus distance window. On the bottom of the barrel is an 0xx number which clearly and obviously states the year of manufacture (bravo for simplicity!)

[Show as slideshow]

The lens has four distinct bevels that flow into a wider section as you move towards the front element. The first bevel flares from the lens mount section into the area of the distance window and the single switch that controls focus (Auto/Manual). The HSM (Hypersonic Motor) allows for full time manual override. The next bevel moves into the slightly wider focus ring. It has a nicely ribbed, slightly rubberized texture. The movement isn’t as smooth as, say, Tamron’s new 35mm f/1.8 VC lens. I find the damping a little on the heavy/stiff side, but on the plus side it doesn’t feel “gritty” at all. Manually focusing the lens is also limited by a very short “throw” distance, particularly between about 6 feet and infinity. Making a fine manual adjustment is difficult in that range due to the very small focus throw of only about 90 degrees (the Tamron 35 VC has nearly double that!). The final flare is to the front of the lens where the lens hood bayonet attaches with a soft touch material transition to the hood that still impresses me when I encounter it even after seeing it on 5 or so other lenses. This is a very classy approach to lens design that borrows a page from Zeiss more than any other design.

If there is a shortcoming here it is that the lens does not have any kind of weather sealing. In that sense the beauty is only “skin deep”. At the time that this lens was released, that wasn’t really a big deal, as the main competitors from Canon (35L) and Nikon (35mm f/1.4G) also lacked any kind of weather sealing. But that has changed with recent releases, and while the Canon 35L II is twice the price of the Sigma (and is thoroughly weather sealed), the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC is not only nicely weather sealed but also undercuts the Sigma’s price by $300 (at least in the US market).

While it is not surprising that this lens lacks weather sealing, I am surprised that all new subsequent ART series releases (including the very new 20mm f/1.4 ART) continue to lack it. Sigma seems to be reserving this for their telephoto lenses at the moment. Tamron has seized this as means of differentiating its new SP series of primes, and if that line enjoys success one wonders if Sigma will persist in not adding weather sealing to the design of future ART series lenses.

This 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 and Nikon 35G even more. It’s release managed to completely overshadow the release of Canon’s excellent EF 35mm f/2 IS, a lens that was quickly relegated to being one of Canon’s “underrated gems”. I actually chose that lens over the Sigma back then, and it has served me well for years, but it seems like only now is it starting to receive recognition for being a stellar lens. The larger aperture, beautiful design, and amazing resolution of the Sigma caught the attention of the public. 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 it is now 2016, and Sigma faces pressure from an excellent lens beneath it in price (the Tamron), and a new class leader above it (the 35L II). The debate about the merits of the original 35L vs. the Sigma 35A went back and forth, but there were a number of points that could not disputed: the Sigma was much, much sharper at wide apertures and had far less chromatic aberrations. The 35L might have a better drawing (global look to the images), but that is something that doesn’t show up on a test chart, and in every “chartable” category the Sigma was coming out on top.

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…but it is also twice as much money. 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	Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC
Price (at time of review)	$899	$1799	$549	$599
Overall Length	94mm	105.5mm	62.6mm	81.3mm
Overall Weight	665g	760g	335g	479g
Front Filter Thread	67mm	72mm	67mm	67mm
Elements/Groups	13/11	14/11	10/8	10/9
Min Focus/Max Mag	30cm/.20x	28cm/.21x	24cm/.24x	20cm/.40x
Aperture Blades	9	9	8	9

There is one figure here where Sigma lags behind several competitors that I will note, and that is in minimum focus distance/maximum magnification. This has been and continues to be an area of strength for the 35mm focal length. 85mm lenses typically have very poor figures here (a maximum magnification figure of .11-.13x is common), and even 50mm lenses (where the standard used to be around .15x), but 35mm lenses have always bettered those figures. The Sigma’s ability to focus down to one foot/30cm and have a .20x magnification (1/5th life size) is useful, but not nearly as useful as the Canon 35 IS at .24x and is doubled by the Tamron’s .40x figure (one of the greatest strengths of that lens!).

The Sigma was a large lens upon its release, but there has been a trend towards larger and heavier lenses since its release, so the new Canon 35L II adds nearly 100g of weight and 10.5mm of length. This comparison shows that it certainly exceeds the dimensions of the Sigma in every regard.

Beyond that, however, the Sigma ART line has also seen a number of larger releases (most notably the 50mm f/1.4 and the 24-35 f/2), so the 35A is now only middle of the pack in size. It is a dense feeling lens, and is largish, but probably not so much that it will prove an impediment. Still, if low weight and small size are a priority to you, I would recommend looking at the Canon 35mm f/2 IS (Canon shooters) or the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC (Canon, Nikon, or Sony shooters) as those lenses offer competitive image quality and image stabilization, though at the cost of a somewhat smaller aperture (but one that is still plenty wide for most applications).

I always commend Sigma for the inclusion of a nice, padded case that offers real protection for the lens. It is much more useful than the drawstring pouch that Canon throws in with their L series lenses. I wish others would take a cue from Sigma in this nice extra touch.

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.

I calibrated both the Sigma and the Canon 35L II on the same day, and eventually settled on a -2 for the Sigma and a +2 for the Canon. I had a little more variability in hunting down the Sigma value, but was confident with the figure I produced. 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.

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 (all of which back focused beyond the main subjects). Here’s a case in point:

Reviewing the data in Lightroom via a plugin called “Show Focus Points” tells me that I was using AF Servo focus and that focus was locked with the center point square in the middle boy’s face…and yet the lens is actually focused on the far wall. By contrast the Canon 35L II shots in the same situation were all accurately focused.

My hit rate was highest when the subjects were in the range of 5-10 feet (the lens was calibrated at the recommended 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 is one means of helping with this, as it allows you to calibrate focus at various distances, while the camera’s AFMA function only allows you to calibrate at one focus distance (the distance I calibrated at is the recommended distance). The dock also allows you to upload firmware updates to the lens that should, theoretically, help to eliminate future incompatibility issues should the camera manufacturer make some change to the autofocus process. This is one distinct advantage for Sigma lenses, though reports from a variety of subscribers indicate that it doesn’t always solve the autofocus issues. This has been, in my experience, the Achilles’ heel of Sigma’s ART series. Some photographers are very satisfied with the autofocus performance; others have given up on the lens in frustration. I find myself typically somewhere in the middle. I’ve had mixed results with a broad section of Sigma lenses, with only one bad experience (the copy I had of the 18-35 f/1.8 ART was quite inconsistent) but mostly fairly good results overall with occasional, inexplicable misses. Take, for example, this shot of a lingering oak leaf in the winter. The shot was stopped down to f/3.5, which gives the AF system more depth of field to work with, so I would not have expected this shot to have missed. I’ve included a screenshot from the software plugin for Lightroom called “Show Focus Points” that I use, and it shows from the EXIF data that the lens/camera indicated focus lock (middle focus point) and yet the photo (look at the crop) is clearly not really in focus at all.

[Show as slideshow]

In many (even most) cases I got well focused results, but the misses were more frequent than what I’m accustomed to. At wide apertures I would sometimes find that the focus was acceptable but not really nailed, either, if I examined the image at a pixel level. I’ve been spoiled by the focus accuracy of the Canon 35 f/2 IS, and both the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC and the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II performed very well for me while reviewing them. This video breaks down autofocus among the chief competitors in detail, and will give you a good idea of how the lens performed overall.

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. That sensation is much more muted with the Canon 35L II. 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 accompanied by a slight “shhhhtck” sound as the elements slide into place.

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.

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.

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.

Image Quality

This has been and continues to be the area where the Sigma punches far above its price point. It is the reason why this lens is now in so many photographer’s kit; it delivers in the resolution/image quality department. In the past it was common for wide aperture primes to be a bit “dreamy” wide open. This was frequently caused by both a lack of contrast at wide apertures along with chromatic aberrations that would rob the lens of apparent sharpness and make images look somewhat hazy in the details. This isn’t the case with the Sigma 35A; it delivers at all apertures. Not only that, but while some primes are sharp in the center but get increasingly soft as you head out across the frame, the Sigma does a stellar job of extending that sharpness across most all of the frame.

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 Sigma 35A certainly does.

Even at f/1.4 images look crisp and sharp, providing a great “pop” of subjects from backgrounds. Even landscape type images look quite good at f/1.4. 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:

This was unprecedented resolution from a 35mm f/1.4 lens, and it is only now that this performance has been surpassed. The new Canon 35L II gets the edge in overall resolution, and 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”. It is also, of course, twice as expensive.

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. It’s nine bladed aperture also makes for nice sunstars/sunbursts when stopped down.

I used the lens as a part of documenting our Christmas celebration this year, and after sharing the images one of my sisters-in-law remarked that I always make everything look so “sparkly”. A big part of what she is referring to is that special 3D quality that high quality optics give to photographs. Wide aperture primes have the ability to make everything (even ordinary things) look just a little bit more special!

[Show as slideshow]

Sigma did a good job of suppressing chromatic aberrations with the optical elements and coatings. While not nonexistent, the chromatic aberrations are well controlled and rarely objectionable in any way. You will see a little bit of green fringing in the out of focus area occasionally like this:

Canon has once again leapfrogged Sigma in this area, but I would say that the Canon advantage might be seen more in the microcontrast than in green or purple fringing in typical images. In this video segment I really break down resolution and overall image quality in detail:

Another strength of this lens is a near complete lack of distortion. I really noticed how nicely this helped when shooting handheld exposures to be combined in a panorama – everything lined up nicely. It makes it a very reasonable lens to shoot architecture with, though 35mm isn’t as wide as one might like.

The type of images that the Sigma is capable of is truly impressive. That incredibly sharp resolution on the subject at wide apertures was and is revelatory. You can view many more samples in the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART Image Gallery.

Optical Weaknesses?

The only real fly in the ointment optically is the very heavy vignette. It isn’t exceptionally bad (the 35L II is basically the same, although the new Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC is far and away the winner in this area), but will be noticeable in a wide variety of settings. This is pretty common for wide aperture primes used at wide apertures. In some cases a vignette produces a desirable effect, but I would rather add it in post rather than have to remove it. Add to this that you won’t be able to load a profile to correct for this in JPEGs to your camera, though correction to RAW images is simple in post processing.

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. Here’s a quick video segment showing flare resistance from the Sigma and its chief competitors.

Still, as you can see, the list of optical objections is pretty short when compared with the numerable strengths of the lens.

Bokeh Quality

Determining a lens’ bokeh quality is somewhat challenging because bokeh is both a subjective measure (the Helios 44-2 “swirly” bokeh is either wonderful or terrible depending on your perspective) and it is also notoriously difficult to demonstrate in a controlled test. Since its introduction there has been some debate about the bokeh quality from the Sigma. I myself have referred to it as being somewhat “clinical”, and feel that the lens tipped the scales more towards sharpness than overall drawing. The reality is that while the lens is perhaps not exceptional in this regard, it is in no way objectionable either. I’ve been using the lens side by side with the Canon 35L II over the past five weeks, and while I instinctively prefer the “look” of the images from the 35L II, the reality is that the differences are subtle at most.

Bokeh is a matter of taste, but one area where I can measure it is in how a lens handles bright out of focus specular highlights. 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]

Here is the Canon 35 IS series:

[Show as slideshow]

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. You can see something similar in my review of the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC. The longer focal length of the Tamron 45 VC here 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.

[Show as slideshow]

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 twice that of Sigma (.40x).

But as I said before, this test really only shows bokeh quality in one very specific way, and doesn’t tell the whole story. 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…including the Sigma. Here is a little gallery with a few bokeh examples:

[Show as slideshow]

In Conclusion:

The merits of this lens are not going to be determined by my conclusions. Over the past three years this lens has received both critical and commercial success, and is, in my opinion, perhaps the most important lens that Sigma has ever made. Sigma was able to completely redefine its position in the market based primarily on the strength of this lens. It is telling that while chart tests show an advantage in resolution for the new Canon 35L II, that advantage is slight despite three additional years of development and a price point double that of the Sigma. The new Canon’s advantage in image quality is a matter of degrees, but it certainly has a stronger advantage in autofocus consistency. That remains the one area that might should give you pause when considering the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART. There is little else to strongly criticize, and some have reported having good autofocus success with their own copy. As the saying goes, “Your Mileage May Vary”. If your budget doesn’t extend to the new Canon 35L II, and you feel you need an f/1.4 aperture, then the Sigma remains the clear choice for quality optics at a reasonable price. I guess some things haven’t changed.

Pros:

Set a new standard for optical performance at the 35mm focal that has only now been mildly surpassed
Beautiful and functional build
Well controlled chromatic aberrations
Low distortion
High resolution even wide open
Fast and quiet autofocus
Includes nice padded case
Excellent value to performance ratio

Cons:

Autofocus performance can be inconsistent
Fairly heavy vignette
Flare resistance could be better
Lacks weather sealing

Alternatives:

The new Canon 35mm f/1.4L II USM is now the class leader for Canon shooters and surpasses the Sigma is most metrics. I reviewed it here. It rings in at twice the price of the Sigma.

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 three hundred dollars less.

The Sigma 24-35mm f/2 ART is also an interesting alternative. It has a slower aperture but delivers similar image quality along with a small zoom range. I reviewed it here. It retails for a hundred dollars more.

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. I reviewed it here.

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)
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.

35mm Shootout!

Dustin Abbott

January 12th, 2016

20Over the past month I’ve been taking advantage of having a number of 35mm alternatives on hand at the same time. I’ve owned Canon’s underrated EF 35mm f/2 IS USM for several years, and recently acquired Tamron’s new SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (standing in for the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC). I’ve also been in the process of reviewing Canon’s new 35mm f/1.4L II USM and comparing it with the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART. All of these are excellent lenses in their own right, but the purpose of this 35mm Shootout! is put these lenses head to head to head to head and determine which areas they excel or fall short in.

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Review

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART Review

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM Review

Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD Review

Tamron SP 45mm f1/.8 Di VC USD Review

This little article will both give you access to all of the YouTube videos that are a part of the series and will also give you access to some of the raw materials used in the process like images and crops for you to examine a little more carefully. My hope is that this series will help you make a highly informed decision when you decide what 35mm lens to put in your bag! Check back as more info and videos will be added.

35mm Shootout! Focus

Accuracy Images and Crops:

There is a consistent sort order to each group. First shot is the 10x Live View control shot, second the crop from that shot, followed by the 5 autofocused shots with the lens first defocused to infinity, then finally the 5 autofocused shots with the lens defocused to minimum focus. Recognize too that this test emphasizes the misses, most all of which are slight enough to be missed at standard viewing size (see the worse case scenario full size image at the very bottom for perspective).

Canon 35mm f/2 IS:

20 foot Images

[Show as slideshow]

10 foot Images

[Show as slideshow]

5 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

Missed image sample (worse case scenario for the test):

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM

20 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

10 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

5 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

Missed image sample (worse case scenario for the test):

AF Servo example of proper focus (a strength for the 35L II)

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART

20 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

10 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

5 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

Missed image samples (worse case scenario for the test):

AF Servo example of backfocus (a weakness for the Sigma 35 Art)

Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD

20 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

10 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

5 foot images

[Show as slideshow]

Missed image samples (worse case scenario for the test):

Full size missed image that demonstrates these misses are hard to see at standard viewing sizes.

Gear Used:

Canon EOS 6D DSLR Camera (Body Only)
Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (in Canada)
Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (USA and World)
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens
Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM 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.

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

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]

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.

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.

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”.

[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.

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.

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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 VC USD Review

Dustin Abbott

October 2nd, 2015

A few years ago Sigma began to carve out a very nice niche for itself with the introduction of its ART series primes. These quickly became legitimate alternatives to some of the top first party primes and it was no longer “second rate” to have one in your lens kit. Meanwhile 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.

It’s been a long time since Tamron has been associated with prime lenses (with the exception of some fine macro lenses like the recent 90mm f/2.8 VC). At one point, however, Tamron was making a number of quality prime lenses and had an innovative “Adaptall” mount system that allowed a user to swap mounts according to their camera’s mount system. I’m glad to see Tamron returning to the production of prime lenses, and fully anticipate that the newly released 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 will refer to Sigma’s ART series primes some during this review because I do believe that these are the most logical competitors for these new lenses. Sigma has produced some excellent prime lenses (and even a few innovative zoom lenses) in its ART series with exceptional optical performance and beautiful designs. I’ve reviewed the majority of them (see my reviews here). But Tamron has a few tricks up its sleeves as well. They have pioneered a number of their own innovations over the past several years, and most of those are being implementedcheck out my reviews here into their new primes. And fortunately for Tamron, several of these play to some of the weaknesses of the Sigma ART primes.

45mm? Yeah, I scratched my head, too. I posed the question to Tamron, and got the reasonable response that these two lenses were the opening salvo of more Tamron SP primes, and there was a certain amount of shared R&D costs between these two first lenses. They share the same front element sizes, and perhaps the move towards 50mm might have exceeded the shared design for the two lenses. I would have preferred 55mm to 45mm, myself, but that’s not what we got. Some readers have already expressed additional interest because of the 45mm focal length – so it all comes down to your own preferences. Tamron (probably wisely) elected to develop an excellent 45mm lens rather than a less excellent 50mm lens. The reality is that it doesn’t behave much differently in practice to any 50mm lens. Here’s what the difference between a 45mm and a 50mm looks like in real life:

Step back a few more feet (this is from about four feet/1.25m away) and that difference will become near imperceptible. By the way, this is also what the difference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 looks like. The 50mm f/1.4 shot is from my SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4, which, despite its age, still has some of the nicest drawing I’ve seen from a 50mm lens. Those of you debating between a 35mm and 50mm prime may find this focal length (45mm) an acceptable compromise. And, just for fun, here’s what the difference between the 35mm and the 45mm Tamrons looks like.

Here are the raw numbers: the lens is 544g and 3.6″/91mm long. This is 270g less than the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART (815), but 254g heavier than the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 (a lens not in the class of these lenses in any way). the Sigma is also 9mm longer. The Tamron has ten elements in 8 groups, including 1 LD (Low Dispersion) element and 2 Aspherical elements. In short, the Tamron is a medium sized lens that is visibly smaller than its Sigma competition.

Tamron Technologies

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 amongst 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 consumer grade prime lenses also have an f/1.8 aperture (including Canon’s own “nifty fifty” that costs only $125), so Tamron will have a “perception gap” to overcome.

The inclusion of VC is a feature that many photographers will perceive as very valuable, and is a matter of priority for those that shoot video. 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 1/8th second and essentially perfectly sharp:

Sony mounts do not come with VC. I’m always a bit disappointed by this, for, while I know that there is the possibility of interference with the in body image stabilization (and users would have to choose between the two systems), my feeling is that the best stabilization is in the lens where the system can be tuned to the individual needs of the lens. 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. The options for a weather sealed 50mm lens have been very slim. 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:

Moisture resistance is an area where the ART series has lagged, with no lens in the series claiming moisture resistance, so this is one more area where Tamron can distinguish its new primes. The 45mm VC appears to be a seriously pro-grade lens, with one of the higher levels of build quality that I’ve seen in a while. I’ve reviewed a LOT of lenses this year (I’m somewhere near 25 for the year), but this lens is near the top of the heap when it comes to build quality. Only the Canon 100-400L II and the Zeiss lenses that I’ve reviewed this lens match the build level here (and this includes several Canon L series lenses that I’ve reviewed this year).. 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. This lens quickly becomes one of the top options for a 50(ish)mm lens for photographers that need to shoot in sometimes adverse weather conditions.

[Show as slideshow]

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.

Another effective technology that Tamron has recently developed is in its coatings. 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]

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.

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, they are definitely super performing prime lenses. Both lenses have been able to perform extremely well in my tests. They aren’t Zeiss Otus level (nothing is), but they will stand against anything else on the mere mortal level.

The New Bokeh Machine (Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC)

Here’s an image quality breakdown from the Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 VC in bullet form:

Sharpness is strong across the image frame from wide open. I don’t see the biting resolution/contrast of the Otus series, 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. 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 these lenses are resolving just about as high as the ART series lenses at equivalent apertures. 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 been a bit mind blowing:

[Show as slideshow]

[Show as slideshow]

Flare resistance is exceptional. No 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 they are good performers as well. I simply could not introduce any kind of flare artifacts when putting the sun into the frame. Very nice!
Bokeh quality is very nice from the rounded nine bladed aperture iris. Bokeh quality is creamy and soft, with a nice transition to defocus. This is true of the bokeh before the plane of focus and beyond it. The nine rounded blade aperture is doing its job, too, with bokeh highlights remaining round when you stop the lens down. My own objection is a common one – towards the edge of the frame the bokeh highlights take on a somewhat “cat-eyed” quality and are less round. When putting bright defocused lights into the scene (like with the Christmas lights below) the bokeh shows a minimum of busyness.

[Show as slideshow]

At a pixel level there are some very, very light concentric circles (commonly referred to as “onion bokeh”) that become a little more pronounced as the lens is stopped down. This “activity” is less pronounced than it was with the Zeiss Otus 1.4/55mm, however, and none of us are complaining about it’s bokeh. Inside many bokeh circles there is an inner line, and typically the less pronounced that is, the better. Bokeh highlights will be softer. The Tamron does a better job with this than many of the 50mm lenses I have similarly tested. The overall roundness of highlights across the frame is better than that of, say, the Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM that I recently reviewed. At close focus distances the lens creates extremely strong blur that looks a lot like a macro lens.

[Show as slideshow]

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 50mm lenses (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 slight bit of vignette visible in the corners at wide open apertures, but far less than competing primes. 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, and when you compare it side by side with other lenses you quickly get a sense of how good this performance is. The frame below (which should be white from corner to corner) shows a small amount of vignetting (roughly one stop) wide open on a full frame body. 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.

This landscape shot was taken wide open and the primary corner (upper left) that should be light shows relatively little vignette.

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

The parade of optical goodness comes to a crashing (and surprising) halt when it comes to the chromatic aberration control. This is definitely the optical weak point. I was surprised by the amount of both purple and green fringing I saw in high contrast areas. This is one area where the Sigma ART 50mm definitely exceeds the optical performance of the lens. It seems like so many modern lenses seem to have this monster defeated, so I’m frankly disappointed by this performance. In most cases chromatic aberrations can be easily corrected in post, but it’s a stage that I personally prefer to avoid. Here is the worst example I saw during my review period.

This sample also shows off the very impressive sharpness, though. If you want to see many more image samples, including some full size images you can download, please visit the Lens Image Gallery here. 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 45mm, I did a double take. High maximum magnification figures are not the norm for 50mm lenses. I’ve got an older Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50mm that I really love, but I don’t use it as often as what I’d like because its minimum focus distance is two feet/60cm. Here’s what minimum focus distance looks like for my Zeiss – this is a not very impressive amount of magnification of my little SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8.

I will often reach for the SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4 when I’m shooting with my vintage glass primarily because it’s minimum focus distance is much better. It will focus down to 45cm (around 18 inches), resulting in a somewhat standard for 50mm .15x magnification. Here’s what that standard looks like:

Some of the new releases better that mark by a bit (the Sigma ART allows for .17x magnification). The fresh design of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM is much better and allows for focus down to 14″ or 35.5cm, giving a .21x magnification figure. But the new Tamron SP 45mm is in a league of its own, allowing for a minimum focus distance of 11.4’/29cm, and maximum magnification of .29x. Here’s what minimum focus distance looks like with it.

Umm, wow! I doubt that I need to tell you how impressive this performance is. Here’s a side by side visual comparison:

You can get close enough to give a very macro look to the image, with the background completely diffused. This opens up any number of creative shooting options, and just look at how high the resolution is here even at f/1.8.

I find that it can focus close enough and resolve highly enough that I can treat it much like a macro lens, right down to needing to consider closing down the aperture because the depth of field is so narrow (depth of field at minimum focus is only .18 inches or just 4.47mm – that’s tiny!). The performance is good enough that if you don’t need true 1:1 life size reproduction and mostly want to shoot flowers or similarly small objects you would probably be very satisfied with using this lens as your macro lens. The working distance isn’t terrible and that is already a lot of magnification. A bit of cropping and suddenly you have life size. Adding an extension tube would get you even closer! The fact that the focus ring works so well (most macro photographers like to use manual focus) makes this a treat to use at close focus range. This is a very, very key selling point for me. By the way, the Tamron 35mm f/1.8 is even more impressive, offering up a .40x magnification that is just incredible!

[Show as slideshow]

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 if they manage to do something similar with an 85mm lens (magnification figures are even worse there!) it could be a pretty revolutionary lens.

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

AF Performance

Things got off to a good start when I performed calibration. The 45mm required only a +1 AFMA adjustment while the 35mm needed a -2. 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. I did notice a difference even in that +1 adjustment, however, as autofocus accuracy was improved.

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. The 35mm is roughly similar in speed to my Canon 35mm f/2 IS in most situations, although I would still give the Canon the slight nod. The 45mm is a bit slower, however, though it is marginal. I rarely find Tamron’s AF speed with its wide aperture lenses to be top of the class (the 70-200 f/2.8 VC is the best of the bunch). They are more like middle of the pack. The best USM motors from Canon focus faster, and I would also give a slight edge in speed to Sigma’s 50mm f/1.4 ART. One thing to consider is that these lenses focus closer than their competitors, so if the lens is completely defocused it will take a split second longer to achieve focus as it has a larger focus range. Less extreme focus changes come quickly, and the lens has proven able to focus confidently even in challenging situations like backlit or dimly lit environments. There is a split second feeling of momentum gathering before the elements fly into motion which is accompanied by a faint sliding sound like the elements moving along. It isn’t as quiet as Sigma’s HSM motors, nor is it as fast as the better USM motors from Canon. If you are familiar with the focus speed of Tamron’s 24-70mm f/2.8 VC lens then you have a pretty good idea of the focus speed of this lens. The 45mm lens is probably a hair quicker. I’ve used the 24-70 VC on several different continents and in many professional applications and its always gotten the job done for me, so I suspect this lens will as well. The reality is that I haven’t really seen a 50mm lens that focuses with the speed of, say, the Canon 135mm f/2L. I would say that the Tamron 45mm is a bit behind Canon 50mm f/1.2L or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART, but these lenses advantage is marginal.

It seems like every 50mm lens has some kind of focusing quirk. The 50mm f/1.8 even in STM guise focuses at a similar speed. The EF 50mm f/1.4 has inconsistent focus and tends to break. The 50mm f/1.2L tends to backfocus, and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART simply focuses inconsistently at times. The Tamron? I’d just love to see a bit more speed here, particularly considering that it is moving a bit less glass than its top competitors (f/1.2 and f/1.4 respectively).

Focus speed is adequate…but what about focus accuracy? This is where the rubber meets the road!

I’m happy to report that I’m getting excellent focus accuracy results. As per usual, lenses on the 6D prefer AF points closer to center (it has a super focus point in the middle and unexceptional focus points beyond). While focus takes longer on the outer points (and will hunt in poor conditions), once focus locks it does so accurately. My 70D body has more robust cross-type AF points across the frame, and the lens focuses more quickly with them. Par for the course for the 6D, but I’m very accustomed to that by now. Fortunately the 6D makes up for it in a lot of other ways!!

I’m very happy with focus accuracy; if the 45mm focused just a little more quickly I’d be ecstatic. Here’s a few other focus samples (all wide open):

[Show as slideshow]

Interestingly, however, in a Japanese language interview (it doesn’t translate perfectly) Tamron engineers intimated that they prioritized accuracy over speed. It was probably the right choice. The 45mm is fast enough…and accuracy is paramount for me.

Here is a gallery of portrait shots from the sessions and crops. 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.

[Show as slideshow]

Manual focus is actually quite nice 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. These are perhaps the nicest manual focusing autofocus lenses that I’ve come across.

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. I was happy to find that the lenses focused nearly as quickly and accurately as native M mount lenses, 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. I recognize this affects only a few of you, but just in case…

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. All in all, the autofocus doesn’t wow you with speed, but makes up for it with accuracy. My guess is that the primary reason is that the lens has a longer focus throw than many competitors, a detail that will bring a sparkle to videographer’s eyes.

Conclusions

I’ve reviewed a LOT of 50mm lenses in the past year or so. I’ve reviewed the Canon 50mm f/1.2L along with the nifty fifties (50mm f/1.8II and STM), Sigma’s 50mm f/1.4 DG and 50mm f/1.4 ART, the Rokinon 50mm f/1.4, Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50mm, Makro-Planar 2/50mm, and the Otus 1.4/55mm. On top of that I’ve done mini-reviews of some vintage 50mm glass, including the SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4, 55mm f/1.8, Helios 44-2, and Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50mm. That’s thirteen, by my count, not including the lens at hand. I’ve been on a bit of a “holy grail” quest for the perfect 50mm lens. This Tamron isn’t it, but it comes closer to finding the balance that I want than most. It’s currently on my personal Christmas list.

The fact that this lens is only f/1.8 and a Tamron might cause you to think that this is not a serious, pro-grade lens. This could not be further from the truth, though. My time with these lenses (not enough!) lets me know that Tamron means business. These are lenses designed for working professionals despite the reasonable price. They are built more like Zeiss lenses than Tamrons of old, save these are weather sealed. The optical performance is stunningly good, and there are some killer apps like VC and a crazy minimum focus distance that really set this lens apart from the pack. If it was a 50mm f/1.4 VC lens the line-up to purchase would already be forming.

It’s a reasonably sized lens that wouldn’t be onerous to pack along or carry. The image quality and bokeh is as good as anything not called Otus. My only nitpicks are that I’d like a bit faster focus and a lot less CA. But these principle shortcomings (along with a smaller than f/1.4 aperture) seem positively offset by so many strengths. Unless you absolutely feel like you need f/1.4 this lens is a stunning pick and highlights just how desperately Canon’s own EF 50mm f/1.4 needs an update. Tamron has undercut the price of the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART by $350 in this lens, and it is a LOT of lens for $599. Remember too that these lenses come with Tamron’s 6 year North American warranty. That in itself is a great value. I’m strongly considering adding this particular lens to my own kit as it seems to be filling the void I hoped Canon would fill with an equivalent to the 35mm f/2 IS in the 50mm focal length. Canon hasn’t (yet) built that lens, but it seems like Tamron has in the Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD. My understanding is that these lenses are only the first in a new line of Tamron prime lenses. All I can say is, “Bring them on!”

Pros:

Exceptional build quality
Better weather sealing than any other 50mm lens
Fluorine coating
Amazing .29x maximum magnification
Excellent manual focus ring with good focus throw
Excellent resolution from wide open on
Low vignetting
Quality bokeh from nine blade aperture
Well performing VC system
Accurate autofocus

Cons:

Larger than other 50mm f/1.8 lenses
More chromatic aberrations than expected
Autofocus speed could be faster
Doesn’t include a case/pouch
Smaller maximum aperture than main competitors

Gear Used:

Canon EOS 6D DSLR Camera (Body Only)
Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (in Canada)
Tamron SP 45mm 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.

Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 VC Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

September 26th, 2015

The second of Tamron’s stunning new prime lenses is the SP (Super Performance) 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD. I’ve been reminded of how much I enjoy shooting with the 35mm focal length during this review, and the combination of great resolution, amazingly close focus, and great focus makes this lens a real treat to use. I’ve enjoyed it more and more as the review has gone alone. I’ll be sharing a number of photos taken by the lens, of the lens, along with some full size samples for you to download. Most all of these photos have received minimal processing and represent what the lens can achieve. Watch for my full review next week. You can watch my video that examines the build quality below: