SIGMA 135mm f1.8 ART Real World Review: Best Portrait Photography Lens?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 июл 2024
- This is the "Real World Review" of the SIGMA 135mm f1.8 Art Lens. Is it the best portrait lens for the money? Does it deliver on quality or does it fall short? Access sample RAW files right here froknowsphoto.com/sigma135/
Download MyGearVault FREE for Apple iOS right here mygearvault.com/#download
Get 11 Days To Better Photography here froknowsphoto.com/11days
bhpho.to/2n6VYt1 Order from B and H
Order from Amazon amzn.to/2tPTa3f
What is the BEST PORTRAIT lens you can get for the money? That's a question people ask who own Nikon, Canon, Sony digital cameras. Photography, DSLR, Art Lens, Mirrorless Camera. I used the Nikon D5 for these photos.
Follow me on
RUclips bit.ly/frotube
/ froknowsphoto
/ jaredpolin
/ froknowsphoto
Get The FroKnowsPhoto Guide To Building Your Online Presence FREE right here as a download froknowsphoto.com/branding
USE CODE FRO at squarespace.com/fro to get your 14 day FREE Trial.
Access sample RAW files right here froknowsphoto.com/sigma135/
Download MyGearVault FREE for Apple iOS right here mygearvault.com/#download
Get 11 Days To Better Photography here froknowsphoto.com/11days
Jared Polin so focusing on the eye to get a really sharp shot if you're shooting @f1.8 will both eyes be tac sharp? If not is there a proffered eye to focus on?
KrUzEpArX you need to focus on the eye closest to the camera. At 1.8 if the subject isn't dead on you more than likely won't have both eyes in focus. That's why it's important to focus on the eye nearest the camera.
KrUzEpArX at wide open aperture like 1.8 you can make only one eye sharp if it's an angled shot. Both eyes can be sharp only if you pose the model flat straight which is often boring. A rule of thump is to get the near eye, to camera, should be in focus though you can change that rule to have some creativity at times based on the situation and light.
Jared Polin folks offering advice as if this man isn't a paid, working photographer. I think he was focusing on the eye farthest from camera purposefully, perhaps just to put the lens through it paces and see what's possible, let's get crazy and try different points of focus
Daddysports79 I think either I misunderstood your comment or you misunderstood theirs buddy. I was asking advise and they answered me. They aren't talking to Fro :)
Best. Model. Ever.
Looking good!
Todd Wolfe hands up and look through your eyes
Seriously these headshots were amazing. I am a straight guy, but damn
How much for ya to be a model? ;-)
he look like Sergio Leone
The distance is 3 feet from the sensor, not the end of the lens. This is why you may have felt you were closer.
Have had both the Canon 135 and this 135. No contest for me. The Canon is a great lens, but the IQ and build is just that much better with the Sigma. For what I do, it's a fantastic lens and I'm very happy to have it in my bag.
It's always cool you share the RAW files!
Great video and education content! I like Fro's style and delivery execution on his videos. For me it's not just about technically talking about how a piece of hardware does what but on suggesting how to better realize it's full potential.
Awesome review as always, Jared! Putting this lens Into consideration!
Thanks for the review Fro. I was just thinking a couple weeks ago if you would review this lens. Now I'm probably going to buy it. Keep the great content coming.
Thanks for making this video Jared!
wow. Really gorgeous pics!! Amazing
Good job Fro
The Sigma's colours and contrast as always amazing!
If Nikon released this lens, it'd be $3000
Not quite *that* bad... their latest 105/1.4 is $2200. Then again, it's made in China. Make it in Japan and they'd certainly jack up the price.
@@ericpmoss Well, their 200 f/2 is 5500 bucks, so I think a 135 f/1.8 would be likely to indeed sit somewhere between 3000 and 3500 bucks.
Pretty close. The plena is $2500 (6 years later)
Nice review! Nice and short, much better compared to some of the 1h+ reviews. Keep it like this Jared.
This is a phenomenal review. Even during your reviews I learn things about photography. Thanks for posting!
+efman2k3 that's great to hear!!
Really like your colour editing. Great job!
Great review. Gave me a lot to think about since I have a d7000. Much appreciated.
Bro. I purchased my first dslr a few months ago and subscribe to a few channels for tutorials and advice. I get most of it from you. You know your stuff!
I have an old Nikkor-Q 135mm lens (converted to AIS) that is f2.8. I use it on my Nikon D750 and D7100. I was curious about the new 135mm lenses. Since I rarely shoot portraits, I was wondering about getting a new 135mm lens. This video answers that question with a resounding "No!" Thank you for the great video with such a clear demonstration and explanation about the pros and cons.
I'll just keep playing with my old 135mm. It is a lot of fun.
BTW, I sure like the commonsense evaluations in your videos!
Great review, thanks Fro
LOVE the pictures of Todd. Superb!
Thank you Jared for this video.
I rented this lens for a wedding in 4 weeks, so excited :)
Great Review Jared!
Thanks for the test. In my case what i do is use single point and focus on the frame of the glasses.
Todd flexing those model skills 👌🏼 good job guys you killed this review!
Video is amazing as always, what a lens!
I like how Jared talks about the great contrast the lens gives but then you look over at the Lightroom panel and the contrast slider is bumped up quite a bit. So it could be taken as misleading if it's not clarified that we're looking at the edited jpeg shots during the shoot. However, this is why he also supplies us with the RAW files so we can so our own research. Regardless, it was a nicely done review!
I've shot the Canon f/2 and was really happy with the sharpness, so I don't know if the f0.2 extra aperture is worth another $400
fro i love your stuff keep it up
Excellent review Jared.
Man these portraits look amazing!
thank you jared for the app it's simple to use and organized . thanks
sweet, glad to hear.
How the hell you don't like Perfect Circle!!!! :). Nice job as always Jared!
Really cool review, and also amazing lens!
Great shots mate. Especially when you put the blinds down.
WE LOVE THIS LENS! BEST FOR THE MONEY!
Comparing Sigma 135/1.8 with 105/1.4 for Sony A7iii, what is your first choice for the portrait?
Its crazy how you can get serious with Todd for the review. I love this lens review.
good job fro is portraits look amazing of Todd that lens is freaking good
I shoot alot of sports photo (Running) under low light condition (8pm-9pm) i know this is not an ideal lens for sports but when the lens nailed the focus during the running test shot, i was sold. what are your thoughts Jared? Maybe you can do a follow up sports test under low light in your next video? Cheers
Hey Jared, Ive been hearing a lot about the Rokinon 14MM EF AF. Some are saying that it is a must have for the Sony a7. I know there a ton of lenses out there and it is impossible to test them but at $600 this lens is beating its competition by about $1100 and it seems like it may spark the interest of a lot of us Sony shooter.
Thanks for what you do I love your style and am learning a lot from it all!
Thinking about the canon f2 just to save the money. But would love to see a comparison video on both canon and sigma 135. Awesome video!
Most of my equipment is used. I picked up a Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro (2nd gen) lens to replace a Rokinon 85mm 1.4 . The ONLY reason I traded the Rokinon 85mm for the Tamron is that Rokinon was manual focus only and I wear glasses. Subjects did not like waiting longer while I attempted to get the lens tack sharp. At 1.4 on the 85mm, there was such a shallow depth of field, that if I slightly moved while taking the photo, I could throw the subject out of focus. But I love the 90mm.
I would assume that the Sigma is a similar type lens.
One of the most amazing lenses I ever shot with was the Nikon 200mm F2 (Canon version is equally awesome, shot with that too) on a full frame camera. I had the pleasure of shooting Little League baseball and Pop Warner football with them. They are truly remarkable due to blazing AF, sharpness, and wonderful bokeh. It helped make everything pop.
Here is where I am going with this. I normally shoot Nikon D500's and my usual subjects are dogs. I am wondering if this would be a good lens for shooting dogs in action? Do you think it is fast / accurate enough for that use? Of course, I do take pet portraits with their people and it would be useful for that as well. This isn't essential because I have lenses that do a great job with that. My dream would be to be able to use it in place of the 70-200 for some action shots and to use it as a long portrait lens to get even softer bokeh then the 70-200. Note that I would be shocked if it met those expectations because I am comparing a $1400 to a $5700 lens.
@5:35 don't forget to mention that your DOF F stop is also x the crop factor.
That was for me the go for a full frame camera.
Nice review. Please also consider to review the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art. Not many reviews on that lens at this moment. Thanks.
the eyes of this model are amazing!
This is dope. I bought my 135mm F2 from canon 1 week before they announced this. My canon lens has REALLY huge issues with flaring and its autofocus is slow as fuc*, but I can use it to shoot basketball and some sports, except when they run towards me. Its a fantastic piece of glass, but if I were to chose between them, Sigma all the way: more advance optics, probably better focus but its more expensive.
the reflections are in the same point of focus that the glases or mirror, if you want the reflections out of focus you need the glasses out of focus. am i correct?
I have a canon 70-200 2.8,...mk2, and am totally happy with the results.
I use my gear vault. Thanks for the android version. Great review on this lens. Im a Tamron 85mm 1.8 kind of guy. But really thinking about this lens.
Jared would you do a comparison between the Sigma 135 1.8 art and the Sigma 85 1.4 art? Thank you
Hard to compare the two since they are fairly far apart in terms of focal length. For what its worth, the relative difference feels like of like a 35 to a 50mm.That said, there are lots of reviews like that out there! The 85mm is somewhat sharper than the 135mm, but the 135 has better tonality, less vignetting, and almost no CA. You'll also get a shallower DOF with the 135 at 1.8 than you will with the 85 at 1.4 from the same shooting distance... if that matters to you. Both are fabulous lenses though.
Jared ,Pleeease make a review of it is already on the market but i'm still wondering if its worth it so i will be more than appreciated if you do the review ! Thank you for being that honest in you reviews! Best regards!
at 1:27. The glare on his glasses would be reduced dramatically with a polarizer filter. It's likely there would be some glare left but,
as you pointed out, those purple rectangles were pretty cool. Perhaps leaving some of the glare intact would be a decent effect.
Hey Jared what was the keeper rate of images in terms of sharpness. I'm really interested in adding this lens to my collection, however I've been hearing stories of focus issues with this lens. What's your take. I'll be using this lens on a D750, D600 and a D7000
I actually use the Canon 135 f2 every single shoot. I am a dance photographer, and it does pretty well with action. It can be a pain to get that tack sharp focus while using the AI-servo mode on my 5D mark iii. But I don't know if that is the camera's problem or the lens. I recommend it to every wedding photographer or portrait photographer because it is a beast of a portrait lens! I never leave it at home!
Christian Moore This lens blows the Canon 135L out of the water. It is sharper at the edge at f1.8 than the Canon at the center at f2. Sold my L and bought this. Worth every penny. Really fast and accurate AF too, unlike the L at f2. I use it on a 6D.
www.lenstip.com/501.11-Lens_review-Sigma_A_135_mm_f_1.8_DG_HSM_Summary.html
Sigma is senseless. It's epically heavy and big. It's more expensive and I suppose has those sh1tty sigma colors. Canon 135mm f2l rules.
Have to admit its heavy with the 82mm front glass. Didn't notice any color issues, contrast is pretty good. Sharpest lens I've owned so far.
The Sigma is sharp, but I don't see image samples really much better, if any, that I find in my Tamron 70-200mm files that some people say are too sharp. And there's no "blowing away" for sharpness. I can see subtle differences. The weight increase is certainly not subtle. I don't think people can go wrong on the Sigma. I think the choice will boil down to factors other than image quality. The f/1.8 is almost meaningless, because that's almost too shallow a depth of field more many couple photos. I find f/2 to be risky sometimes with single individuals.
Thanks for the video!!.. two questions... did you calibrate the lens?...what about outer point focus reliability? tks
God damn 1.8, I love the Nikon 135 F2
Haven't we seen this a month or so back?
Either way, the eyes at 15:52 are freaking amazingly sharp as hell - I want this glass!
Me. Polin, I was lucky enough to just purchased a new Nikon D850, and trying to pick out a great portrait lens. Would you recommend spending money on this sigma 135, or focusing more on a true 70 to 200 mm lens? My portraiture is typically friends, family, local jobs. Some events mixed in there as well as shots for local businesses of employees etc. appreciate any thoughts!
Which one you can recomend, Canon 135 or Sigma 135?
Nice 'fro', one day mine will almost be as massive as yours
the canon 135 f2 is a BEAST you got to test it out. 1st choice EVER!
Struggling to decide between this and the sigma 105 f1.4, for my sony a7riii, I'm a wedding photographer.
What did you decide on?
@@brownbrood5 went with the sigma 105 f1.4. I absolutely adore it. Well worth its size and weight trade off for the results it gives.
@@Jonners that low aperture...sounds like a dream, and that you made the right decision. 😎👌
What's your thoughts on this format for a portrait lens vs a 85 1.4?
I thought about the 135mm ART
In the end i chose to go the Samyang 135mm F2 - its stellar and the price is unbeatable.
That said i have it in nikon mount but adapt on Sony, focus peaking aids make MF a breeze
Great video, expecting this lens today and owning the 50mm and the 85mm Art lenses makes my portrait lenses complete.
Really a big Sigma Art lens fan and prefer them above the Nikon lenses, well for portraits that is..............
This lens is a beast. Can't for the Sony E mount version to come out.
Jared,
At around 4 mins in this video you go into the close focusing distance of the lens. You definitely can get closer than 3 ft. from the front element of the lens, but the number is also accurate. You probably already know this, but the close focusing distance is typically measured from the sensor plane, not the front element, so it's actually 3 ft. from the sensor, which seemed about right from what I saw in the video. Hope this comment doesn't annoy you :) Cheers!
Great review Jared, just a question how to process NEF (Nikon Raw) files in Lightroom. Point note that I downloaded Adobe Camera Raw & installed but not working. I use LR 4.4 64bit on Windows 8.1 machine. Cheers
What's the absolute best lens for portraits for the Nikon D500 in your opinion?
I have canon 80D(APSC) please help which one is more better sigma 85 mm 1.4f art OR sigma 135 1.8f art OR canon 85mm 1.4 IS due to IS. Hope for you kind feedback soon. :)
Any thoughts on this lens vs. the Nikkor 135mm f2 DC? I'm of the mindset that the sharpness of this, along with wider aperture, will likely make for a more noticeable impact than the defocus control of the Nikkor, but if anyone has used both and can provide insight, that'd be awesome!
Don't forget to apply the crop to the aperture too. 202-216mm F2.7-F2.8 nikon/canon.
MchalesNavy who told you that Tony Northrup?
So you're basically saying when you take a Picture then crop it in post it becomes darker too? Have to multiply Aperture there too?
Nah, I don't think so. Cuz on Crop bodies its just croped version of the field of view. Aperture doesn't change.
No, Fro didn't "forget", he's just not a Tony Northrop fan boy.
That is very misleading. The light falling on image circle of a crop sensor and that of the DX image circle of the Fx sensor is identical. What they are referring to is total light aggregated over a larger sensor is greater. But the light reflected from your subject is the same. If you are taking images of white walls and total all the light falling on the larger sensor it might be right but that is not how we use cameras. Maybe your advisor is thinking only of equivalent isolation, and not light. The same lens on a Dx sensor will appear to have more depth of field than when used on a Fx and reframed to fill the same proportions of the frame. But that is due to the all-important sensor to subject to background ratios. You have to move closer to the subject to fill the Fx frame which means the greater ratio between camera>subject>background. Not a a lens issue but a subject distance issue.
With any lens, increase the ratio of camera to subject versus subject to background and subject isolation is under your control by your feet.
Too many camera video personalities out there and not enough common sense.
@@stanspb763
WOW!
😍
666k subs, congrats Jared
hi jared do you have a problem with the lens packfocuing or frontfocusing when using it on AF-S or AF-C?
I have this lens for my Nikon D810 and it's probably the sharpest lens and most consistent Sigma art lens I have. It's way sharper than the 85 f1.4 Art lens!
Model Todd is too serious! BTW, Todd, welcome to the salt and pepper beard club. Great RWR!!
I really like the 130-ish range for headshots. 85 on a crop, or this on a F.F.
Hi Jared. Have you heard Canon is supposedly announcing a new 135L f.2 IS in August? I'm very interested in this Sigma 135 but as a canon shooter I think I should wait for the reviews on the new Canon as having that IS in a fast 135 would be great. But that 1.8 would help when subjects aren't close to camera to get that extra separation. I hope you can review the new Canon lens once there's some pre release test copies around and perhaps compare it to the Sigma. Thanks for all the great reviews.
*Oops my bad! I was confusing the upcoming Canon 85 1.4 L IS. They are rumored to also be making a 135 f2 L IS but I think that's early next year. I guess I'll be seriously considering the Sigma option now. My biggest concern was the AF acquisition as that's been the Achilles heel with Sigma and you've demonstrated that it's good on this newer offering.
hey fro,
what was the minimum focus distance like? and how was todd so quiet?
"Put your hands up and look through your eyes" was my favourite part lol . Great lens ... i have the 85 F1.4G .. but now i dont know what to get the 105 or this new 135.
Daniel Donovan if the budget allows by all means get the Nikon 105 f1.4 ed FL lens
It depends, the 105mm 1.4E and 135mm 1.8A are of very similar rendering and bokeh.
Both are far better corrected for CA and bokeh fringing, than the 85mm 1.4G, but neither is quite APO lens.
With the 105mm you will have to step back and with the 135 even more since it’s noticeably tighter. 135 AF is around 2x faster than the 105.
With IS it would be perfect! So lets see what Canon is doing maybe in 18/19'.
I miss the IS in my 135 2.0L.
OMG that iMac G4 in the top corner. You should do a video editing photos on it! Maybe even only use gear from around then like a EOS-1D
Clacking Computer unfortunately it'd dead, just turns on to a blank loading screen 😔
3:00 close your eyes and listen. Sounds like pov porn.
Jared, I would challenge you to test the Canon 135 version. Yes, it's only 2.0 and a few years old, but I DO know that it can hold it's own against the new Sigma Art.
Good work bro
Hey Jared...did you shoot any with your D810? Looks like this lens would be a dream with that great pixel density of the 810.
Hello from Mexico, I think a Sigma 135 1.8 vs 50-100 1.8 On DX would be so awesome to compare for portrait
That is great for portraits but how would it do for sports?
Hi Jared: watching this video helped me immensely as I took your advice and opted to NOT buy this lens and instead, use my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2 in its place. As you said, based "on the style of shooting..." That simple statement is the light bulb that when turned on, helped with the decision.
hi Jared, when do you think you'll make a real world review for the sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG OS HSM for canon just to confirm my test that this lens is really soft focus at 2.8 at any focal lenght
thanks
What's that model's story?
Hey Jared :) since led Stage lights get more common i always have the problem that they look horrible on the camera ... has this something to do with colorspace or something ... do you know what i mean and can you help ?
Theses images look super sharp! I do have a question though and it may seem ridiculous to ask but is there a worry or opportunity for the sharpness of these and other third party lenses to decrease over time? Will the quality of image results decrease?
no the quality of images will not change unless the lens has gone through some really heavy wear or mishandling of some sort.. dont bother about that. these brands are welll established
Man, I would love one of these in my camera kit looks so good!
what is the best lens Sigma 135 or 85 art ?
I found a rare problem in godox ad360ii c, while shooting at ISO 100 from my canon 700D it is giving me a red tone in all the pictures, in ISO 200 it is getting reduced and in ISO 400 natural colour tone can be seen. can you please explain it, why it's happening? I took few shots with other canon DSLRs and giving more or less same kind of images in different iso level. please help me in this issue.
How is this lens for night time photography.
Does this misfocus sometimes? I get my 18-35 and 50-100 misfocuses sometimes.... and it kills me. IDK if it could be the body too. I have a d3400....