Shared publicly  - 
I'm afraid +David Jacobowitz is right. The new Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens can show some awfully nervous bokeh. Check out the jitters on the west face of the cathedral in Orleans, France.
Stephen Shankland's profile photoDavid Jacobowitz's profile photoBud Gibson's profile photo
Do you have the lens? Overall impressions?
I'm testing it -- had it a few days now. It's got a solid build and I like it for a lot of my shooting at higher f-stop -- landscapey architecty stuff with deep DOF, nice and sharp, minimal distortion and chromatic aberration, fast autofocus. I like the focal length more than I thought I would. (I'm generally a zoom guy.) But some shots are showing painful bokeh with shallow DOF, so I'm not sure I could recommend it at this stage.
I think you'd go f/1.4 for narrow DOF. Otherwise, the investment isn't worth it. I have a 24-70 zoom which also works great stopped down, so there.

Overall, I think it's hard to get good DOF separation at focal lengths less than 50mm for most shooting situations. The Nikon-made prime lens at this focal length is insanely expensive and has CA issues.
Yeah, it's really hard to get good DOF separation, even with f1.4 often. My style of shooting doesn't require it all the time, so I mention the performance elsewhere in the aperture range, but of course it's the f1.4 where the rubber hits the road.
I dream of f/1.4 for shooting kids sports indoors. Probably not worth $900 though I do fantasize about it.
I'm going to stick it out a bit longer with this lens, especially since I sold my 35L. It's not the greatest bokeh, but not awful. The lens is sharper than the 35L in every part of the frame and at all apertures and the difference is noticeable especially at f/1.4.

Now, if a 35L II comes out for six gajillion dollars, I might be tempted to add that second mortgage.

I love this focal length and could shoot it all day. In fact, I do most of the time!
+Bud Gibson I've been wowed at how much more can be done at f1.4 in dim conditions. I've grown accustomed to thinking ISO 1600 is great and 3200 is fine (though obviously they both come with a lot of sacrifices) but it's kind of nice to be grabbing ISO 400 and even lower indoors without a flash. For some reason, perhaps the wider field of view, I find the 35mm f1.4 more useful indoors than my 50mm f1.4.
I'll also add that close-in f/1.4 photography has always been very hit or miss with AF cameras -- actually a lot more miss for me. So I usually stopped down at least to f/2 and often f/2.8 to make focusing practical.

However, I'm so pleased with the 5D3's AF accuracy that I'm starting to feel comfortable shooting wide open again. Pair that with a lens that doesn't get "dreamy" at f/1.4 and things get exciting!
BTW, I decided to rent this and give it a shot
Add a comment...