What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

SIRUI AURORA Series Lens

For the S9, of course, 35/1.4 (500gr) is a bit big unless you're constantly filming people. Thinking out loud: Sigma 35/2 (400gr) is available for L Mount but I never took it because of the weight and expensive for the price., also Meike 35/1.8 pro (400gr) , Lumix 35/1.8 (300gr) average performance. We will wait for the tests/ reviews...
557475129_10229426690642880_6175117305349916172_n.jpg
 
sergun80 said:
For the S9, of course, 35/1.4 (500gr) is a bit big unless you're constantly filming people. Thinking out loud: Sigma 35/2 (400gr) is available for L Mount but I never took it because of the weight and expensive for the price., also Meike 35/1.8 pro (400gr) , Lumix 35/1.8 (300gr) average performance. We will wait for the tests/ reviews...
View attachment 15645
Click to expand...
I like my Sigma 35/2. I bought it used and it was cheaper than this Sirui. It’s also smaller and lighter. I’m in no hurry to change - I’m not much of a “max background blur” photographer so the f1.4 isn’t really of much benefit to me.
 
While having a 35/1.4 appeals to me and the Sirui is a lot cheaper than the Sigma, it's only one stop faster than my Sigma 35mm f/2 and it's a lot bigger, so less useful in precisely the circumstances that a 35mm is best at - social events and kids. The Sigma really is superb.
 
Jonathan-Mac said:
While having a 35/1.4 appeals to me and the Sirui is a lot cheaper than the Sigma, it's only one stop faster than my Sigma 35mm f/2 and it's a lot bigger, so less useful in precisely the circumstances that a 35mm is best at - social events and kids. The Sigma really is superb.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. It seems to me that a 35/1.4 (or even 1.2) is really only necessary for those uber-shallow DOF shots that many people seem to like. I guess if I were doing lots of portraits it might be of more interest. As it is, I think the Sigma 35/2 is a great option on the S5 for social situations.
 
I'd like to have less DoF at 35mm but not at the cost of size and weight which is necessary. Nikon make a 35/1.4 that's only 8.65cm long, which is only 1.65cm longer than the Sigma 35/2, that might not be bad, but Sigma's 35/1.4 Art is 11.15cm long, which is too big.
 
Jonathan-Mac said:
Nikon make a 35/1.4 that's only 8.65cm long
Click to expand...
But that doesn't fit to an L-mount camera.
So only take into account lenses that fits L-mount. Otherwise buy a Nikon camera system if you want make use of Nikon lenses.
 
Babylonia said:
But that doesn't fit to an L-mount camera.
So only take into account lenses that fits L-mount. Otherwise buy a Nikon camera system if you want make use of Nikon lenses.
Click to expand...
But it shows that it's possible to make a smaller 35/1.4, albeit with optics that may not be up to the standard of larger models: being sharp right across the frame from wide open.

I'm sure the package as a whole would be larger as it's a Nikon and they designed their Z mount to be unnecessarily large to overcompensate for their small F mount. Such a lens on a Lumix would make a relatively small combo.
 
Maybe Sigma shall renew their "older" 35/1.4 lens design within a reasonable time to a version II ?
Smaller, less weight. As what they did e.g. with the 35mm/1.2 II
It remains a continuous development. At one moment one has the advantage, at another moment the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top