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.

News LUMIX S Series Camera Lens - 40mm F2 Compact Prime L-Mount Lens - S-S40

dirk said:
@xaviergut

Does the Lumix 40/2.0 beat the Sigma 45/2.8 in image quality or is on par with the Sigma 35/2.0 or 50/2.0?

I would love to have a small 40mm FFL, but I need an image quality on par with the Sigma i-series 50/2.0 or 35/2.0.
Click to expand...

The TTA 40/2 certainly doesn't come up that standard, though it's not bad.

Maybe Sigma should make a 40mm f/2 I-series lens, then we could choose from 35, 40, 45 and 50mm :)
 
dirk said:
@xaviergut

Does the Lumix 40/2.0 beat the Sigma 45/2.8 in image quality or is on par with the Sigma 35/2.0 or 50/2.0?

I would love to have a small 40mm FFL, but I need an image quality on par with the Sigma i-series 50/2.0 or 35/2.0.
Click to expand...
It's very difficult for me to judge whether the new Lumix 40mm is better than the Sigma 45mm f/2.8, because I had the Sigma for a couple of months and my copy of the lens didn't impress me much. In fact I sold it. But of course, to make a serious judgment I would need to test at least five copies of the Sigma 45mm...

Regarding the Sigma 35mm f/2, the truth is that I haven't used that lens, nor have I been able to use the 50mm f/2. But if this lens is as good as the Sigma 65mm f/2, which I do own and is my favorite prime lens I've used on an L-mount, then the new Lumix 40mm f/2 would be below the Sigma 50mm (and the 65mm) but above the 45mm f/2.8.

For example, this YouTuber wasn't very impressed with the new Lumix 40mm, because he said that when he uses it at f/2, that is, wide open, it sometimes doesn't focus properly. I asked him in the comments if he had the same problem with video, and he replied that no, it focuses perfectly wide open for video.



I haven't had that experience of focus failures with my copy of the 40mm f/2, and the photos in your video seem very good to me.
 
I like Pav's reviews and I think we can all have a lens which is reputed to be very good, can give us great results and yet we still fail to feel that we really like it. In the samples in that video I didn't see the fringing or poor colours he was referring to, I didn't see any technical problems with the results at all. Yes, I think we do expect first-party lenses to be virtually perfect these days but if this one doesn't fit the bill is that why he doesn't like it?
 
I saw that video too and because of his image quality comments, I decided not to buy it.

The Sigma 45/2.8 is definitely worde than the 35/2.0 and 50/2.0. The 65/2.0 is kind of sharper than the other two, but kind of clinical sharper. I do not like that lens that much because of size and weight. The 35 & 50 are kind of inbetween, but are a lot closer to the 65 than to the 45. I love the 50 and prefer it to the 65.

But in general, I like 40mm and 28mm focal lenght a lot. 35mm is not my "type".
 
dirk said:
I saw that video too and because of his image quality comments, I decided not to buy it.

The Sigma 45/2.8 is definitely worde than the 35/2.0 and 50/2.0. The 65/2.0 is kind of sharper than the other two, but kind of clinical sharper. I do not like that lens that much because of size and weight. The 35 & 50 are kind of inbetween, but are a lot closer to the 65 than to the 45. I love the 50 and prefer it to the 65.

But in general, I like 40mm and 28mm focal lenght a lot. 35mm is not my "type".
Click to expand...

I also love the Sigma 50mm f/2, it's a really great lens, though I wish it was sealed, but you can't have everything.

I have grown to like the 35mm focal length over the last eight years or so, especially since I changed to FF. Equivalent focal length on APS-C didn't do it for me for some reason.
 
I had the GR3x and it made me work for composition and it showed off. Somehow if I look back at those Images I really like the look. But it was really out my comfort zone. So maybe I should try it again. But the, I can take the 35 and with the hybrid zoom function just crop it slightly and have a 40/2.2 equivalent with only a tiny bit less resolution.

Just to simulate the focal length.

I sold of the GR3x for GR3, which actually has been sold of just 2 weeks ago. Too little use.

Somehow I would like that this lens could replace my 35 & 50. But actually selling those off and getting the Sigma 35/1.4 II makes more sense. I use the 35 for indoor casual portraits and then a 35/1.4ii works very well for that.

Currently have too many lenses in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top