Sigma 340101 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Lens for Canon, Black

Product Information

The 'Auto' position on the aperture ring will control aperture, well, automatically if you're in Program Auto or Shutter Priority modes, for example, but will simply pass off aperture control to a camera command dial if you're in Aperture Priority or full Manual control. Above: Next up the Sony 35 1.4 G Master at f1.4 which is delivering similarly-sized blobs to the Sigma 35 1.4 which are also mostly bereft of textures within – note any dots on the Sony blobs are due to some dust on the lens, sorry. The Sony blobs also have less outlining which may have you preferring one result over the other, but both lenses here are rendering very attractive blurred areas – a good result for the Sigma given its cheaper price, although note the Sony can focus a bit closer, allowing it to deliver bigger blobs if you prefer. What does all that stuff in the name Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art mean? Well, DG means it’s made for full-frame digital cameras. This lens will work on a crop sensor, too. Full frame lenses work on crop bodies, but lenses designed for crop bodies aren’t fully compatible with full-frame cameras. Despite this, the Sigma gives up nothing in terms of ambition when it comes to optical design. Its 13 element, 11 group construction is the most complex in its class, and includes no fewer than four elements made from Super-Low Dispersion (SLD) glass, along with one formed from fluorite-like 'F' Low Dispersion (FLD) glass, and two aspheric elements. According to Sigma this allows the minimization of an array of aberrations including both longitudinal and lateral chromatic aberration, astigmatism, and field curvature. Above: And finally the Sigma 35 1.2 at the bottom, reproducing 165mm across the frame, making all three Sigma lenses similar in this regard. The Sigma 1.2 is however sharper than the 1.4 in the middle and maintains this closer to the edges too – and remember this was shot at f1.2 as well. All four lenses improve their edge sharpness when closed, but the two most expensive models are already excellent out of the gate.

This review is based on my experience with the Nikon version of the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART lens. You can extrapolate this information for other versions, such as the Canon or Sony copies. 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.It is also a champ in low light, as shown above. The lens grabbed focus despite our dark, dusty barn conditions. Focus ring I tried shooting the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART lens as I would my telephoto lenses…just closer. And it felt weird. I was all up in my clients space and the proportions were off. Dave was right. It wasn’t the lens falling short, it was me. Since then I’ve worked at letting the Sigma 35mm lens help me tell a story. And now I’m a fan. It’s made me a better storyteller and a better photographer. This is lens isn’t magic If it's simply beyond your budget, though, there's certainly plenty to like in the crisp results delivered by the Sigma, even when shooting wide-open. The Sigma 35mm does show a strong vignette effect, dimming corners and edges at wide apertures. Image corners lag behind the center by -5.7EV at f/1.4, a deficit that's cut to -3.2EV at f/2, -1.5EV at f/2.8, and -1EV at f/4. At narrower apertures it's not noticeable in field conditions. As with distortion, you can brighten corners and edges in Lightroom. The pricier Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM shows about the same amount of the vignette effect. The best fast 35mm we've seen in controlling it is the Tamron SP 35mm, which shows just -1.4EV at f/1.8. But the Tamron has more of a tendency to exhibit chromatic abberation, in the form of purple color fringing, which both the Sigma and Canon lenses avoid. Conclusions

I can't claim to know what Sigma was thinking when they produced the 35 f/1.4, but I like to think it was an evolution to their approach with the 50mm f/1.4, and a reaction to the (potentially unfounded) general opinion of their brand. It's no secret new Canon lens prices have been particularly high as new technology, coating, and build methods are integrated. Maybe this gave Sigma some more leverage to manufacture a product that they could put a bit more money into, something that would still be competitive in price while appealing to everyone who's always been on the fence about buying something from anyone but Canon with great optics as well. That's not to say the Sigma is a poor performer when paired with a high-resolution sensor. Its center is extremely sharp at f/1.4, although as you move away (to the middle and outer third of the frame) the resolution dips to about 2,100 lines, which appears slightly soft. Above: And finally the Sigma 35 1.2 on the right at 1.2, delivering the largest bokeh blobs of them all from the same distance again thanks to its slightly longer actual focal length coupled with the slightly faster 1.2 aperture. Both lenses show a little outlining which you may or may not like, and arguably the 1.2 blobs have slightly more visible textures within, but I’d be delighted with either – so again a good result for the new 35 1.4 given its lower price.

Update History

I’ve been shooting the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art lens for several months now and I’ve changed my tune. I love how this lens performs, its sharpness and contrast. And I love that I have a professional caliber 35mm lens for a fraction of what the name brand lens would cost. Why do you need a 35mm lens?