The optical formulas are different. The older Zeiss lens is (I think) a four element lens with all traditional glass while the Sigma lens is made up of eight elements in seven groups, and I think at least one of the elements is made of fancy glass. But still, the people at Sigma could be working around the design ethos of the Zeiss but adding more corrective elements because....they can.
Both are slightly softer wide open and both get sharper as we stop down to f5.6. The Sigma is good to go (sharpness-wise) by f4.0 but the Zeiss needs at least 5.6 to be modern sharp.
The benefits of both these lenses have to do more with the "look" or visual fingerprint of their output than brute force sharpness and resolution. That said, by f5.6 the Sigma is a match for just about anything out there.
Both have beautiful rendering of out of focus backgrounds. Both make interesting images.
Side by side the Zeiss is smaller front to back buy you have to cut the Sigma some slack because the engineers had to fit in an autofocus motor whereas the Zeiss has only finger-drive focus.
It just struck me as interesting when I saw them in the lens drawer together.....
9 comments:
Great camera porn!
I keep hearing the Sigma 45 2.8 is rather affordable. My thought is compared to what? It's near 50mm in focal length and slow compared to more affordable nifty fifty's that are a stop faster. Just sayin.
Michael, I get it. Pie at the local bakery = $10. Pie at Whole Foods = $30. Because they can?
8" Lattice apple pie at HEB? $3.98 LOL. Hey I'm cheap :)
Michael, I had one of those....once. Step up to the mid range pie. Life is too short.
Never mind the lens what about the camera that's attached, have we been to the local bricks and mortar camera store again?
Seany, No. Definitely not! That's a shot from several years ago when I was less well informed about cameras.... I'm very happy being one of the few, lone Lumix S1 series owners right now. I'll let you know with a big, splashy blog post if that changes.
I've always had a thing for Tessar lens designs and the way they render, and the C/Y 45/f2.8 is no exception.
FYI, one little known feature of this lens is that it projects a surprisingly large image circle.
So large, in fact, that it can be used as a shift lens when mounted on a camera or lens adapter having this capability (although the image does go a little soft at the outer edges.)
On a related note, I'm really enjoying the Canon 40mm f/2.8 as my go-to normal. While it's a fly-by-wire unit-focusing pancake, it renders with a touch of subtle character, is excellent wide-open, and is very flare resistant.
And perhaps most importantly, I find the compact size and (relatively) tiny front element doesn't really intimidate people, making it easier to capture candids with genuine expressions.
Between this and the 75mm Schneider Kreuznach Xenar on my Rolleicord Va, I suppose I've developed an affinity for the Tessar design.
Post a Comment
We Moderate Comments, Yours might not appear right after you hit return. Be patient; I'm usually pretty quick on getting comments up there. Try not to hit return again and again.... If you disagree with something I've written please do so civilly. Be nice or see your comments fly into the void. Anonymous posters are not given special privileges or dispensation. If technology alone requires you to be anonymous your comments will likely pass through moderation if you "sign" them. A new note: Don't tell me how to write or how to blog! I can't make you comment but I don't want to wade through spam!
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.