Your conclusion is Perfect! I bought my Sony 85 1.8 used and with the current resale value the new Sigma has finally made it the right time sell the 1.8 and upgrade to the Sigma. The previous Sigma 85mm ART was just to big and heavy for the minimal image benefits. So if you are on a budget or just getting started a used Sony 1.8 is still a great decision.
I will take the Sony 85mm 1.8 as an exellent compact and light weight allround lens, I still have an analog Canon FDn 85mm 1.8. For portrait I use Sony 135mm 1.8 GM which have more shallow depth of field at 1.8 (than a 85mm 1.4) and a much more narrow back ground, so it is much more easy to get a good composition
If you`re a portrait photographer, get the Sigma. If you use the lens for street photography, hiking, sports, travel or family photography, get the Sony, because auf the weight and the auto focus speed. I do a lot of street photography with longer focal length, Saul Leiter style, and the Sony is PERFECT for that.
Thank you for the pro vs hobbyist conclusion. Too many channels assume everyone wants the best of the best no matter the cost and doesn't realize that many of us are hobbyist who want lenses that are good value and don't care for that last marginal bit of performance if it saves some money. Subscribed!
It's true. It's definitely a fine line of value vs performance. In my case, even as a hobbyist, I really am only after that ultra sharp image if I'm going to bother walking around with a camera. Gotta be the Sigma in that case.
Have and love both of them. 1.8 is my everyday family lens now, 1.4 is a prime for wedding and portraits. If you need light weight definitely take 1.8 but if you are bokeh master 1.4 is the best. Unless there will be 1.2 :D
I had ordered the Sony/1.8, but once I knew that there was a relatively compact and new Sigma DN 1.4 lens, cancelled the Sony/1.8 order and switched to the Sigma (after doing some research on the optical quality). The Sigma is smart money, despite being more expensive.
I'm sure it's just a matter of time to be fair. The 85mm kind of makes sense to start with in a way as the old 85mm is just so HUGE and really heavy. But I agree - I'd love to see them release new versions of all of their prime lenses!
This is an accurate assessment of the Sony 1.8 vs. Sigma 1.4. The Sony, especially used, ($400 US) is the clear value winner. If you need an 85 without breaking the bank the Sony is a great choice you won’t regret. The Sony is light, quick focusing, sharp and delivers excellent images with smooth bokeh. It has minor CA that’s easily remedied in post. An f1.8 prime is a big step above a 2.8 zoom. The Sigma is a level above the Sony not just in terms of f-stop and sharpness, which it far exceeds the Sony, but the overall Sigma “magic” is evident on every image. I’ve used both on a variety of subjects including combat sports/boxing and the Sigma’s images stand apart and are the best you can get. I previously owned two Sony 1.8 lenses and for the past year have used the Sigma 1.4.
I’ve had the Sony 85/f1.8 for years, but for the last few days thought I’d lost it on a complicated beach shoot that involved lots of lenses and lots of people. Turns out, it’d just fallen into a back section of one of my camera bags that I never use. If I hadn't found it, I probably would have bought the Sigma, But now, I’m staying put with the f18. Besides pro vs hobbyist, another distinction would be whether a purchase would be someone’s only 85mm E-mount glass vs an *upgrade* if they already own the f1.8. In scenario #1, I would have been a yes, but as an upgrade, I can’t justify the cost. (And I'm not even sure the added weight would have been worth it.)
Just received the sigma 85mm today and took some spontaneous portraits of my wife and maaan... this lens is so clean and smooth in the images it produces...i hardly care about sharpness but i passionately HATE Chromatic abberations. The images coming out of this lens are ridiculously clean in the highlights and contrasty edges. My only gripe is the harshnring touching the finger on the a7rii grip, but its not a big deal..
I like your reviews a lot. Concise, clear, perceptive, practical, no BS. (Am subscribing with bell!). To me the image on the left has softer bokeh (though both are wonderful), so I'm betting that it's the Sigma! To me that difference plus the sharpness is worth $600 extra. However, 85mm is the one focal length where I feel it's worthwhile to own two lenses, both a light 85mm f/1.8 and a heavier 85mm f/1.4. I bought the Batis 85mm f/1.8 back when it was the only game in town, and will probably still use it when I don't plan to shoot wide open at f/1.4, such as in studio (e.g. it does not need heavy correction in post, and since I raw-convert in Capture One and edit in Photoshop, polish in Lightroom, that extra step at the end to manually correct distortion and vignette is, well, an extra step.) I will likely sell my Samyang 85mm f/1.4, which, even though I LOVE it, does have that slight yellow tint you noticed as well (some people love it and call it "warmth", to each his/her own). Also the Samyang even with upgraded firmware is sometimes a bit flakey at times in autofocus, not bad at all, just the occasional missed shot. I'm a little hesitant to sell it because I think the Samyang image has a wonderful character, with unusually soft bokeh, ..... but I don't think I'd ever grab it over the Sigma when leaving the house. It's funny how we develop affection for our gear. I still have some of my Nikon DSLR gear, a few pieces that I always particularly loved, even though I don't have a use case for them any more. Sigh.
" I still have some of my Nikon DSLR gear, a few pieces that I always particularly loved, even though I don't have a use case for them any more. Sigh." Truly understand. Our old friends are still our friends!
Thanks for this helpful review! I own the Sony 85mm 1.8. What I struggle with is the chromatic adoration when shooting backlit subjects, especially when there are fine details (e.g. tree branches). I also find the minimal focal distance very limiting. Other than that, the price and the size and weight are pretty amazing, especially when you're looking at mounting your camera setup on a gimbal (even more so when considering the DJI RCS3 mini with it's weight limitations). My overall opinion is that if you're predominantly stills then the Sigma will be the way to go, but if you're a videographer then the Sony will be the winner due to the light setup. I shoot both, but with the price and weight difference, making the jump for the improved image quality isn't worth it for me. P.S. it was very refreshing to have a male model in a camera/lens review:)
I personally saved up and bought the Sigma DG DN 85 over the Sony 85 1.8 because I had the Sigma DG HSM 35 already and loved the build quality and image quality. I know the Sony 1.8 isn't a bad lens for the price by any means. I did have people ask me, "why didn't you just buy the Sony for half the price and use the $600 you saved for another lens?" My response was, "I wanted quality of lens over quantity of lenses. I'm also trying to make photography my full time job/career so I'm investing in that. Buy nice or buy twice." Either lens you choose won't have you disappointed. Also, Image A looks like it's shot at 1.4
Hey Tom , nice video. And I have burning question.I do have sony A 6100 which is aps-c and with sony 85mm 1.8. And I'm planning to buy sigma 1.4 for my sony A6100. Is it good combination or bad one, cz I don't have money to buy full frame yet. Hoping reply soon.
The Sigma is good for either full frame or APS-C. If anything it's potentially slightly better on APS-C as it crops out the distortion and vignetting at the edges of the frame. I hope this helps!
Truth is, if you use the lens for portraits, then pixel-peeping sharpnes really isn't all that important. Most subjects really don't want to see every wrinkle and bump. When I bought the Sony some years ago, the only comparable lens was the Zeiss 85mm f1.8, which was also US$1,000. I was lucky enough to be able to compare the two and found no real difference at all.
hahaha I just sold the sony 85mm f1.8 and bought the Sigma 85mm f1.4. So far there's certainly a sharpness difference especially when using it as a sort of landscape lens (I shoot a lot of city/architectural content along with portraits). The Sony lenses seem to have this sort of hazy kind of look to it sometimes, like their lens coatings aren't as good. But for what the Sony is, it's an excellent lens. The Sigma performs as expected for me.
Thank you so much for doing this comparison. I have the 85mm 1.8 and don't like it too much, so am interested in saving up for the Sigma hoping it will be much more likeable.
Cheers Tim! A sub well earned! Love the presentation and insight from all of your videos! Been looking at selling my 100mm Sony GM as it’s too specialist for me. I don’t have a fast portrait lens so I’ve watched all of your 85mm videos! I have to say, while I’m a hobbyist, I did go for the Sigma. I use the Sigma 24-70 and 100-400 and just love their lenses! Thanks again! :)
The Sigma would be worth it as it has the aperture ring, kind of a pet peeve of mine is lenses with no aperture ring. I'd be bothered forever by not having that ring...
If you shooting jpeg or capture video, your camera's lens compensation setting will clean it right up instantly. For RAW images, Adobe have added a lens correction profile now which cleans it up with a click of the mouse (or automatically if you set it up to do so). I hope this helps!
Great review, but I have a question. At the end you said that a pro should rather buy the sigma lense but I am not a hobby photographer and not really a Pro but I am starting to make money out of photography (just had like 2 clients) and want to make a living out of it. So is it a good idea to get the Sigma or be on the save side and get the Sony?
Very good question! My advice would be that if you intend to make money from photography and want the best possible equipment and image quality, of these two lenses I would invest in the Sigma if you have the capital to pay for it. However, that doesn't mean that the Sony is a bad option and you could easily use it to make money with. It's more a question of how much you care about the end result and whether you think you'd see a return on your investment by buying the more expensive option. I hope that makes sense? Thanks for your comment 👍
I own an A7II and I love my Sigma 50 1.4 - it is sooo sharp! I wanted to get the Sigma 85 1.4 as well but the weight and everything made me choose Sony FE 85 1.8 instead .. I really regret it now. My pictures are nowhere as sharp as with my Sigma 50mm but the WORST part is that it tends to miss focus A LOT (for some reason it front focuses quite often, have you experienced that as well??) and overall my pictures just don't feel as premium as with my Sigma glass.
The Sigma 50mm is great - I also have that lens. Can't say I've noticed any significant missfocusing with my Sony 85mm f/1.8 (other than what was shown in the video) but it's definitely softer. If you did want to make the switch to the new Sigma then you could always sell your Sony - there will still be people out there that can't stretch to the Sigma and are looking for the Sony as a starter lens 👍
If you have the lens comp settings on it fixes the distortion for video, yes. As for the crop, I'm not sure it does pinch in the image at all. I might be wrong on that though.
Now I am very torn between the batis and the sigma. Can somebody tell me which has a better rendering? I like the rendering on my 35 1.4 Art. Never tried a batis yet.
Thanks for the great review and for adding bokeh testing! 🙏😊👍 I'll keep both the 85mm 1,8 (if I want to travel light) and will wait for the Sigma as my main 85mm lens to arrive.
Ur comparison are always one of the best in RUclips thanks for sharing such as good as these videos .. I do have a question if u can get the sony Gmaster with the same price of the sigma which one would u pick ?
Thanks, you're too kind! Good question! I would pick the Sigma for sure, for reasons I explain in this video 😁 ruclips.net/video/2MJPgDAV0H8/видео.html
As I explained at the start of the video, I had a bunch of requests from commenters on my previous videos asking for this comparison. The Sony 85mm f/1.8 is a really popular lens (pretty good all rounder and very affordable) so a lot of people were asking whether it was worth selling the Sony for the new Sigma. I hope this answers your question! 😊
I can confirm that it is. You'd also potentially be able to sell the GM, buy the Sigma and still have some money leftover. Though, honestly, if you're happy with the GM, I guess you'd have to ask yourself whether it's worth the hassle? The GM is still a brilliant lens!
Tricky question. We haven't had any official specs from Sony about the A7IV so it's hard to know what to expect. Though, it's expected that the A7IV will be announced this year (hopefully sometime soon) so if it was me, I'd hold out for that announcement and then make my mind up. If you need a camera asap then the A7III is still a fantastic camera so you wouldn't be disappointed with it.
8:21 A was the 1.4, a little more creamy. But agreed difference is marginal. However, one thing that is IMO often overlook - and to be fair it depends of what you shoot with it - is vignetting. At F2, or even F1.8, the Sigma has much less vignetting. If you do portrait, you probably don't care and probably even like that vignetting. If you want to do high res mosaics of landscapes, that's another question
Good analysis 👍 True, vignetting can be a pain, but I find that the lens correction profiles in Lightroom and Photoshop are great at getting rid of this with a click (or you can set it up to remove it automatically if you want).
@@TomCalton corrections work usually well indeed but most people don’t seem to realize what it means to correct let’s say a 2 stops vignette. If you were shooting at iso 800, it means your corners will be boost at an equivalent of iso 3200... that’s quite different in terms of noise and image quality. But once again depends of your usage. If you shoot in daylight at iso 100, having corners at iso 400 is not dramatic. If you shoot at iso 800 or + that’s quite a different story :)
Very good point, never thought of it like that. But like you said, I mainly shoot portraits, so selfishly I've never really considered what it would be like for landscapers, etc. Thanks for your insight - really useful! 👌
@@TomCalton no worries :) I just find that in photography, there is a lot of misconception... :p and to name just another one... when people says that you have more reach with APS-C... which is false... as the resolution (how much you can zoom) is dictated by pixel size. What happens with APS-C is just your angle of view decreasing as a result of a smaller sensor.. but you don't get more reach. Anyhow, love photography and thanks for the test. I did order the Sigma 85mm because of that vignetting things as I do mosaics; but I also order the Sigma 65mm f2 as it seems to be a lightweight pearl.. will see how that goes !
You have a very small number of subscribers given the quality of your content. If you were to test the real lens transmission number (the T-Stop) that could be very useful. Also you forgot to compare weather sealing. Does it have a rubber gasket on the back? Thanks for the review!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed the video! There are a number of other things I left out of this review, mainly for time reasons. I've always thought that for portrait photography, weather sealing is a bit of a novelty as it's rare you'd ever want to shoot in the wet anyway. Especially if you're using off camera flash. But maybe I'll mention it in future reviews. Thanks for your feedback!
that's a great point actually! as far as i know the sony 85/1.8 has a t-stop of 1.8 as well, so chances are the difference in light gathering is even smaller than the f-stops suggest.
The Sigma is more expensive (I guess) largely because it's an f/1.4 lens rather than an f/1.8 like the Sony. You typically pay more for faster lenses. It's also much newer than the Sony, too, and generally a better lens in terms of optics. Thanks for watching!
I have a dilemma should I get this for 1200 or get the 55mm zeiss and the 85 1.8 sony for 1400. Side note I own a 50 1.8 sony already and feel like the zeiss is a bit redundant.
I guess it would depend on which focal length you use the most? If you use a 50mm more, get the Zeiss and the cheaper Sony 85mm. If you use 85mm lenses more, get the Sigma 85mm and keep the cheaper 50mm. That would be my thought process at least 😃
A couple of years back, I saw a comparison between Zeiss vs. Sony, and no difference could be seen. Probably, Sony just took advantage of the Zeiss blueprints. I got the Sony. What do you think about the pictures? Unless I shoot full open, at f/4, all the lenses will perform more than satisfactorily. LR lens profiles even out the differences. For 500 dollars, you can get something else. WTH should you be shooting backlit tree branches with an 85mm portrait lens in the first place?
could you re check the photo using sony 85.8 about image quality? I have had for 5 years, but there are no soft photos in sony 85.8 1.8 eye portrait. I agree that sigma is more sharp but sony 85.8 is not like soft you took. I think you can check resolution lense. my lense resolution was corrected few years ago. please check :)
Great comparison ! I keep my Sony 85mm as I am not making money out of it. For its price it's a good value. However the Sony's bokeh can get a little bit harsh on difficult backgrounds like foliage. But it's still not distracting. Sigma is a great lens too.
That was my thought before making the video, but I was asked by so many people to make this comparison that I couldn't ignore it. The video has had 26k views now, making it my 2nd most watched video, so clearly people want to see this comparison. 🤷🏻♂️
personally, i feel that the Sony 85mm f1.8 is great in its own class, but against the Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN Art, its nowhere near.. the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM might have been a better comparison vs the Sigma..
Hey Larry. As explained at the start of the video, my reason for making this comparison was due to a large number of people asking for it. It appears that a lot of people (myself included) own the Sony 85mm f/1.8 and are now wondering whether they should upgrade to the Sigma. I have already compared the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 to the Sony 85mm f/1.4 in my group test video, which you can watch here if you're interested (ruclips.net/video/2MJPgDAV0H8/видео.html). I hope this clears up any confusion.
I don't make any money from my photography, but I still got the sigma 85mm 1.4 anyway because I need that bokeh. The difference is small, but enough for me to notice.
I will take the Sony 85mm 1.8 as an exellent compact and light weight allround lens, I still have an analog Canon FDn 85mm 1.8. For portrait I use Sony 135mm 1.8 GM which have more shallow depth of field at 1.8 (than a 85mm 1.4) and a much more narrow back ground, so it is much more easy to get a good composition
Nice comparison, very informative, my favorite focal length for a prime (me and many others' I guess). When I hear "build quality" though I think of Lensrentals lens teardowns rather than how something's exterior feels in our human hands. Sooth, it aten't that interesting for your average consumer how much kapton tape is part of a lens' innards but longevity and cost/complexity of repairs may be.
Hey! Yes, I can confirm that Lightroom has updated recently to include a lens correction profile for the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and it sorts out the vignetting and lens distortion for RAW files 👍
great video thanks! Please give me some advice Which lens is better for portrait photography and why? Sony FE 85mm F/1.8. sony 90mm macro .85mm sigma art.
Hi Tom thanks for this video ! I need to buy an 85mm so... It’s better sigma 85mm 1.4 art( the new one ) or Zeiss Batis 85mm 1.8 ? Plz help me !? Thanks a lot
Noice! Even IF I came across this video before buying the Sony, I would have still bought the Sony. I do have the Sigma 14-24 2.8 Art lens, so I can attest to the awesome quality. But, I wanted a light run and gun 85mm for street. The Sony just fit my criteria for that type of style. Sharp! And lets face it, the photos I post get compressed to all hell on Instagram anyway. So NBD. Great video though. Confirmed I made the right choice for my circumstances.
i was choosing this two lens for my 85mm focal length. after i watch the video, i will definetely choose SIGMA :) sharpness at max aperture, nice bokeh, and for my clients. im a full time photographer also. thanks Tom!
@@TomCalton thanks for your reply. The sound I mentioned is not heard in photo mode, it is a sound heard when shooting video in a quiet environment, and this sound is heard in the video shot with the built-in microphone.
The built in mic will always pick up AF noise a lot worse than a shotgun mic as the vibrations rattle through the camera body and are picked up by the mic. Try using a shotgun mic on top instead. The audio quality will be much better and it should reduce if not get rid of that issue. 👍
Question, I'm currently hobbyist but I'm moving into pro territory as I'll highly likely be producing videos for hairdressers in the near future. I'm looking at getting a 85mm. So given that I'm not earning money yet, should I still go for the Sigma in the hopes that this highly likely job turns to 100% likely, or should I be cautious and stick with the Sony? Thanks heaps for this video! Definitely helps :D
Thanks for checking out the video! Honestly, for video work, the Sony might be the better option. You probably won't notice the difference in sharpness (even at 4k) or the chromatic aberration. It's lightweight, the AF is silent and accurate, and it's half the price. The only thing it doesn't have is the manual aperture ring, which is only really useful if you prefer to adjust the exposure using aperture rather than attaching a variable ND (personally I'd rather use an ND and stick with a consistently shallow depth of field). I hope this helps, and good luck!
@@TomCalton definitely helps in making a decision! I think I'll be doing mostly video work compared with portraiture (maybe 2/3 of my work) so I'll still use the Sony for portraits but I think the quality will be there anyway. Thanks heaps!
My Sony 85mm 1.8 is incredibly sharp and so fun to shoot with! It balanced so well on my A7iii and now on my A7iv. It's one of my favorite lenses for my Sony.
I have the sony well for years now but in this test he said the sigma is way sharper! I have a7iv and recently a7rv I think it would be upgrade time form.my sony 85 and 35 f1.8.. they haven't failed me ever but investment in better glass like f1.4 range would be better fir for my newer cameras?
Honestly, both are really good for video. If you're only shooting in HD, you might be better off saving your money and getting the Sony as you may not notice the increased sharpness of the Sigma 85mm. The Sony is a fair bit smaller and lighter, too. Hope this helps!
I gotta say after getting this lens and testing against the samyang 85 and even sigma 105, the new sigma is only barely sharper if u zoom into extremes to see it. Sadly I'll be returning it
Interesting. I've never used the Sigma 105mm before so I can't comment on that (I've heard it's very sharp), but when we tested the Sigma 85mm against the Samyang 85mm, the Sigma was significantly sharper at all focusing distances. It also doesn't have that yellow cast that the Samyang does. Thanks for the feedback though!
Yeah potentially. Bare with me and I'll see what I can do. We're pretty busy at the moment with corporate work and also producing more content, so forgive me if I don't sort this right away for you 😅
Thanks, glad you liked it! I don't normally include a breathing test, purely because I've found that most primes have some degree of breathing, so I'd only be repeating myself in every video. That said, if enough people request for this to be added to my tests then I'm more than happy to include it in future. Thanks for the feedback 😊
Thank you for the review Tom! Really appreciate this comparison. I think the left one is the Sigma 1.4. Only 2 months ago I switched from a Canon 5DII to the Sony A7III and I bought the Sony 85mm 1.8 just before the announced release of the Sigma. Your video does make me want to upgrade, but in time!
You're so welcome! I think you're totally right - if anything, this test has shown that, for the price, the Sony is a great lens. It only falls down in a few areas compared to the Sigma. Glad you found it useful! 😁 Out of interest, what made you pick the image on the left?
I have got the Sony 135mm 1.8 GM which are better than any of those 85mm lenses (in fact of ANY lens under 300mm!). If I was to get a 85mm lens, I would go for the Sony 85mm 1,8, but I will rather have the much more versatile Voigtländer 65mm 2.0 APO-Lannthar Macro lens which will do exellent in any kind of photography and it have a very high resolution which go very well with my Sony A7RIV.
Interesting take, thanks for sharing. I have the Sigma 135mm and although it's a great lens, it's sooooo heavy! So I've found myself using the 85mm a lot more recently just because it's better for my back. Isn't the Voigtlander manual focus only though? Not a problem for stationary targets, but for me, when shooting events/weddings/family's, this just wouldn't work unfortunately.
@@TomCalton to me, it looks like less area of the face was sharp on the left. It looks like starting around the edge of the eyebrow area, it already is a bit out of focus while the one on the right is still in pretty good focus. Also looking around the neck area, the one on the right looks to be more in focus than the left. The left's background also seems to be more blown out than the right.
Which lens would you go for? Let me know in a comment below and tell me why - I'd love to know!
I bought the Sigma... Got it the first day. It is very very impressive. And, the speed allows me to use it for Astral photography as well.
Your conclusion is Perfect! I bought my Sony 85 1.8 used and with the current resale value the new Sigma has finally made it the right time sell the 1.8 and upgrade to the Sigma. The previous Sigma 85mm ART was just to big and heavy for the minimal image benefits. So if you are on a budget or just getting started a used Sony 1.8 is still a great decision.
Awesome! My copy turned up yesterday - very happy with it 😊
Thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed the review! 😊
I will take the Sony 85mm 1.8 as an exellent compact and light weight allround lens, I still have an analog Canon FDn 85mm 1.8. For portrait I use Sony 135mm 1.8 GM which have more shallow depth of field at 1.8 (than a 85mm 1.4) and a much more narrow back ground, so it is much more easy to get a good composition
If you`re a portrait photographer, get the Sigma. If you use the lens for street photography, hiking, sports, travel or family photography, get the Sony, because auf the weight and the auto focus speed. I do a lot of street photography with longer focal length, Saul Leiter style, and the Sony is PERFECT for that.
Why not the signs for street etc?
If the weight of any 85mm lens is too much for you, go to the gym.
@@mrbaiser4133 what about if I only shoot videos ? What would you be your advice ?
Thank you for the pro vs hobbyist conclusion. Too many channels assume everyone wants the best of the best no matter the cost and doesn't realize that many of us are hobbyist who want lenses that are good value and don't care for that last marginal bit of performance if it saves some money. Subscribed!
You're very welcome! Thanks for the sub 🤜💥🤛
It's true. It's definitely a fine line of value vs performance. In my case, even as a hobbyist, I really am only after that ultra sharp image if I'm going to bother walking around with a camera. Gotta be the Sigma in that case.
Have and love both of them. 1.8 is my everyday family lens now, 1.4 is a prime for wedding and portraits. If you need light weight definitely take 1.8 but if you are bokeh master 1.4 is the best. Unless there will be 1.2 :D
What would you be your advice for a video shooter only ? On sony fx6
I had ordered the Sony/1.8, but once I knew that there was a relatively compact and new Sigma DN 1.4 lens, cancelled the Sony/1.8 order and switched to the Sigma (after doing some research on the optical quality). The Sigma is smart money, despite being more expensive.
I think you made the right move there! The Sigma is definitely worth the investment. I hope you enjoy using it 👍
Sigma f1.4 on the left and Sony f1.8 on the right. Thanks for doing all the test Tom. Now I know how to spend my money wisely.
You're welcome! I hope it helped 👍
Another heavily underrated channel - welcome to the club 🤣. Great comparison, thanks for your efforts!
Thanks! Appreciate the comment 😊
Nice 👍
I’m getting it. I wish they would update the 50mm 1.4 art as well. I am tired of using the old 50mm 1.4 art too heavy 😰
yeah, why didnt they start the update from 50mm...
I'm sure it's just a matter of time to be fair. The 85mm kind of makes sense to start with in a way as the old 85mm is just so HUGE and really heavy. But I agree - I'd love to see them release new versions of all of their prime lenses!
Have a look at the Sony Zeiss 50mm 1,4. It's smaller, lighter and the bokeh is much nicer than the one of the Sigma.
This is an accurate assessment of the Sony 1.8 vs. Sigma 1.4. The Sony, especially used, ($400 US) is the clear value winner. If you need an 85 without breaking the bank the Sony is a great choice you won’t regret. The Sony is light, quick focusing, sharp and delivers excellent images with smooth bokeh. It has minor CA that’s easily remedied in post. An f1.8 prime is a big step above a 2.8 zoom.
The Sigma is a level above the Sony not just in terms of f-stop and sharpness, which it far exceeds the Sony, but the overall Sigma “magic” is evident on every image. I’ve used both on a variety of subjects including combat sports/boxing and the Sigma’s images stand apart and are the best you can get. I previously owned two Sony 1.8 lenses and for the past year have used the Sigma 1.4.
I’ve had the Sony 85/f1.8 for years, but for the last few days thought I’d lost it on a complicated beach shoot that involved lots of lenses and lots of people. Turns out, it’d just fallen into a back section of one of my camera bags that I never use.
If I hadn't found it, I probably would have bought the Sigma, But now, I’m staying put with the f18.
Besides pro vs hobbyist, another distinction would be whether a purchase would be someone’s only 85mm E-mount glass vs an *upgrade* if they already own the f1.8. In scenario #1, I would have been a yes, but as an upgrade, I can’t justify the cost. (And I'm not even sure the added weight would have been worth it.)
Just received the sigma 85mm today and took some spontaneous portraits of my wife and maaan... this lens is so clean and smooth in the images it produces...i hardly care about sharpness but i passionately HATE Chromatic abberations. The images coming out of this lens are ridiculously clean in the highlights and contrasty edges. My only gripe is the harshnring touching the finger on the a7rii grip, but its not a big deal..
Glad you like the lens - my Sigma 85mm is constantly glued to my camera at the moment! ♥
I like your reviews a lot. Concise, clear, perceptive, practical, no BS. (Am subscribing with bell!). To me the image on the left has softer bokeh (though both are wonderful), so I'm betting that it's the Sigma! To me that difference plus the sharpness is worth $600 extra.
However, 85mm is the one focal length where I feel it's worthwhile to own two lenses, both a light 85mm f/1.8 and a heavier 85mm f/1.4. I bought the Batis 85mm f/1.8 back when it was the only game in town, and will probably still use it when I don't plan to shoot wide open at f/1.4, such as in studio (e.g. it does not need heavy correction in post, and since I raw-convert in Capture One and edit in Photoshop, polish in Lightroom, that extra step at the end to manually correct distortion and vignette is, well, an extra step.)
I will likely sell my Samyang 85mm f/1.4, which, even though I LOVE it, does have that slight yellow tint you noticed as well (some people love it and call it "warmth", to each his/her own). Also the Samyang even with upgraded firmware is sometimes a bit flakey at times in autofocus, not bad at all, just the occasional missed shot. I'm a little hesitant to sell it because I think the Samyang image has a wonderful character, with unusually soft bokeh, ..... but I don't think I'd ever grab it over the Sigma when leaving the house.
It's funny how we develop affection for our gear. I still have some of my Nikon DSLR gear, a few pieces that I always particularly loved, even though I don't have a use case for them any more. Sigh.
Thanks, I'm glad you like the videos! Welcome aboard and thanks for sharing your thoughts 😊
" I still have some of my Nikon DSLR gear, a few pieces that I always particularly loved, even though I don't have a use case for them any more. Sigh."
Truly understand. Our old friends are still our friends!
Not seen your channel before but this review was fantastic.
Thank you, really appreciate it! Glad you like the channel and thanks for watching 😊
The blue and purple fringing is such a moodkiller on the sony one and somehow the bokeh looks very busy
Thanks for this helpful review! I own the Sony 85mm 1.8. What I struggle with is the chromatic adoration when shooting backlit subjects, especially when there are fine details (e.g. tree branches). I also find the minimal focal distance very limiting. Other than that, the price and the size and weight are pretty amazing, especially when you're looking at mounting your camera setup on a gimbal (even more so when considering the DJI RCS3 mini with it's weight limitations). My overall opinion is that if you're predominantly stills then the Sigma will be the way to go, but if you're a videographer then the Sony will be the winner due to the light setup. I shoot both, but with the price and weight difference, making the jump for the improved image quality isn't worth it for me. P.S. it was very refreshing to have a male model in a camera/lens review:)
I personally saved up and bought the Sigma DG DN 85 over the Sony 85 1.8 because I had the Sigma DG HSM 35 already and loved the build quality and image quality. I know the Sony 1.8 isn't a bad lens for the price by any means. I did have people ask me, "why didn't you just buy the Sony for half the price and use the $600 you saved for another lens?" My response was, "I wanted quality of lens over quantity of lenses. I'm also trying to make photography my full time job/career so I'm investing in that. Buy nice or buy twice." Either lens you choose won't have you disappointed. Also, Image A looks like it's shot at 1.4
Hey Tom , nice video. And I have burning question.I do have sony A 6100 which is aps-c and with sony 85mm 1.8. And I'm planning to buy sigma 1.4 for my sony A6100. Is it good combination or bad one, cz I don't have money to buy full frame yet. Hoping reply soon.
The Sigma is good for either full frame or APS-C. If anything it's potentially slightly better on APS-C as it crops out the distortion and vignetting at the edges of the frame. I hope this helps!
You can get the Sigma far cheaper with various web deals.
Truth is, if you use the lens for portraits, then pixel-peeping sharpnes really isn't all that important.
Most subjects really don't want to see every wrinkle and bump.
When I bought the Sony some years ago, the only comparable lens was the Zeiss 85mm f1.8, which was also US$1,000. I was lucky enough to be able to compare the two and found no real difference at all.
Thanks Tom, solved my choice dilemma for me. Adobe have now added the profile for the Sigma too.
My pleasure Mick - glad it helped! Thanks for watching 👍
hahaha I just sold the sony 85mm f1.8 and bought the Sigma 85mm f1.4. So far there's certainly a sharpness difference especially when using it as a sort of landscape lens (I shoot a lot of city/architectural content along with portraits). The Sony lenses seem to have this sort of hazy kind of look to it sometimes, like their lens coatings aren't as good. But for what the Sony is, it's an excellent lens. The Sigma performs as expected for me.
Thank you so much for doing this comparison. I have the 85mm 1.8 and don't like it too much, so am interested in saving up for the Sigma hoping it will be much more likeable.
You're welcome! I'm glad you found it useful - thanks for watching 😊
Cheers Tim! A sub well earned! Love the presentation and insight from all of your videos! Been looking at selling my 100mm Sony GM as it’s too specialist for me. I don’t have a fast portrait lens so I’ve watched all of your 85mm videos! I have to say, while I’m a hobbyist, I did go for the Sigma. I use the Sigma 24-70 and 100-400 and just love their lenses! Thanks again! :)
I own the 85 1.8, but now I want the new Sigma!
Me too... better get saving, right? 😉Thanks for checking out the video!
The Sigma would be worth it as it has the aperture ring, kind of a pet peeve of mine is lenses with no aperture ring. I'd be bothered forever by not having that ring...
Nice Video, I still think that Sony one is a better buy because negligible difference and price is difference is double
Thanks for watching! I think you make a fair point. Both lenses are great and suit different needs 😁
I loved the look of the Sigma, but that distortion is insanely bad! Did they ever fix that?
If you shooting jpeg or capture video, your camera's lens compensation setting will clean it right up instantly. For RAW images, Adobe have added a lens correction profile now which cleans it up with a click of the mouse (or automatically if you set it up to do so). I hope this helps!
I have had the Sony for 3 years now and now wondering if it's time to upgrade to the Sigma vs the 85 GM
In 2024, should I choose the FE 85 or Batis or Sigma 85 DG DN?
Great review, but I have a question. At the end you said that a pro should rather buy the sigma lense but I am not a hobby photographer and not really a Pro but I am starting to make money out of photography (just had like 2 clients) and want to make a living out of it. So is it a good idea to get the Sigma or be on the save side and get the Sony?
Very good question! My advice would be that if you intend to make money from photography and want the best possible equipment and image quality, of these two lenses I would invest in the Sigma if you have the capital to pay for it. However, that doesn't mean that the Sony is a bad option and you could easily use it to make money with. It's more a question of how much you care about the end result and whether you think you'd see a return on your investment by buying the more expensive option. I hope that makes sense? Thanks for your comment 👍
@@TomCalton Thank you very much!!! Your video and your advice helped a lot and will probably save me a lot of money 😊
@@TomCalton And also thanks for responding although this video is a bit older and 🙂
No problem! Glad I could help 😊
But is that new Sigma 85 better for portraits than the Sigma 105 art lens?
That is a very good question! It's lighter in weight, that's for certain! 😂
Perfect! Just What I was looking for. I have the Sony, and will not be upgrading. Subbed!
Thanks! I'm glad the video helped 🙌 Welcome aboard sir
same here, pretty much one of my favourite lenses, keeping it
The Sigma definitely had CA, it was just green and not purple
I own an A7II and I love my Sigma 50 1.4 - it is sooo sharp! I wanted to get the Sigma 85 1.4 as well but the weight and everything made me choose Sony FE 85 1.8 instead .. I really regret it now. My pictures are nowhere as sharp as with my Sigma 50mm but the WORST part is that it tends to miss focus A LOT (for some reason it front focuses quite often, have you experienced that as well??) and overall my pictures just don't feel as premium as with my Sigma glass.
The Sigma 50mm is great - I also have that lens. Can't say I've noticed any significant missfocusing with my Sony 85mm f/1.8 (other than what was shown in the video) but it's definitely softer. If you did want to make the switch to the new Sigma then you could always sell your Sony - there will still be people out there that can't stretch to the Sigma and are looking for the Sony as a starter lens 👍
Bro some talk about sigma pincushion distrotion. Distrotion can be seen when using for video? When lens comp turn on seems picture litttle bit crop?
If you have the lens comp settings on it fixes the distortion for video, yes. As for the crop, I'm not sure it does pinch in the image at all. I might be wrong on that though.
Now I am very torn between the batis and the sigma. Can somebody tell me which has a better rendering? I like the rendering on my 35 1.4 Art. Never tried a batis yet.
I haven't tried the Batis, but hopefully someone can help you out! 🙂
Thanks for the great review and for adding bokeh testing! 🙏😊👍 I'll keep both the 85mm 1,8 (if I want to travel light) and will wait for the Sigma as my main 85mm lens to arrive.
No problem, thanks for the great suggestion! I hope you found it useful. 😁
Ur comparison are always one of the best in RUclips thanks for sharing such as good as these videos .. I do have a question if u can get the sony Gmaster with the same price of the sigma which one would u pick ?
Thanks, you're too kind!
Good question! I would pick the Sigma for sure, for reasons I explain in this video 😁
ruclips.net/video/2MJPgDAV0H8/видео.html
You comparing 85 F1.8? Is better than 85 F1.4 GM, what is the point comparing this?
As I explained at the start of the video, I had a bunch of requests from commenters on my previous videos asking for this comparison. The Sony 85mm f/1.8 is a really popular lens (pretty good all rounder and very affordable) so a lot of people were asking whether it was worth selling the Sony for the new Sigma.
I hope this answers your question! 😊
I’m thinking of selling my 85GM for the sigma 🤔
It's a tough call. The 85mm GM is a brilliant lens. What's making you want to switch?
From the previews I’ve seen the new sigma is slightly sharper and faster by just a bit.
I can confirm that it is. You'd also potentially be able to sell the GM, buy the Sigma and still have some money leftover. Though, honestly, if you're happy with the GM, I guess you'd have to ask yourself whether it's worth the hassle? The GM is still a brilliant lens!
Currently trying to do the same thing. Hopefully I have some money left for pizza
Splitting hairs, the GM has slightly softer bokeh in situations where the background is busy. Sigma is sharper wide open. Both absolutely glorious.
Bro need your advise. can I buy a73 right now or wait for a74?..
Tricky question. We haven't had any official specs from Sony about the A7IV so it's hard to know what to expect. Though, it's expected that the A7IV will be announced this year (hopefully sometime soon) so if it was me, I'd hold out for that announcement and then make my mind up. If you need a camera asap then the A7III is still a fantastic camera so you wouldn't be disappointed with it.
8:21 A was the 1.4, a little more creamy. But agreed difference is marginal. However, one thing that is IMO often overlook - and to be fair it depends of what you shoot with it - is vignetting. At F2, or even F1.8, the Sigma has much less vignetting. If you do portrait, you probably don't care and probably even like that vignetting. If you want to do high res mosaics of landscapes, that's another question
Good analysis 👍
True, vignetting can be a pain, but I find that the lens correction profiles in Lightroom and Photoshop are great at getting rid of this with a click (or you can set it up to remove it automatically if you want).
@@TomCalton corrections work usually well indeed but most people don’t seem to realize what it means to correct let’s say a 2 stops vignette. If you were shooting at iso 800, it means your corners will be boost at an equivalent of iso 3200... that’s quite different in terms of noise and image quality. But once again depends of your usage. If you shoot in daylight at iso 100, having corners at iso 400 is not dramatic. If you shoot at iso 800 or + that’s quite a different story :)
Very good point, never thought of it like that. But like you said, I mainly shoot portraits, so selfishly I've never really considered what it would be like for landscapers, etc.
Thanks for your insight - really useful! 👌
@@TomCalton no worries :) I just find that in photography, there is a lot of misconception... :p and to name just another one... when people says that you have more reach with APS-C... which is false... as the resolution (how much you can zoom) is dictated by pixel size. What happens with APS-C is just your angle of view decreasing as a result of a smaller sensor.. but you don't get more reach. Anyhow, love photography and thanks for the test. I did order the Sigma 85mm because of that vignetting things as I do mosaics; but I also order the Sigma 65mm f2 as it seems to be a lightweight pearl.. will see how that goes !
Thank you for this, exactly the two lenses I needed to compare.
My pleasure, glad it helped!
You have a very small number of subscribers given the quality of your content. If you were to test the real lens transmission number (the T-Stop) that could be very useful. Also you forgot to compare weather sealing. Does it have a rubber gasket on the back?
Thanks for the review!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed the video!
There are a number of other things I left out of this review, mainly for time reasons. I've always thought that for portrait photography, weather sealing is a bit of a novelty as it's rare you'd ever want to shoot in the wet anyway. Especially if you're using off camera flash. But maybe I'll mention it in future reviews. Thanks for your feedback!
that's a great point actually! as far as i know the sony 85/1.8 has a t-stop of 1.8 as well, so chances are the difference in light gathering is even smaller than the f-stops suggest.
Curious to know Its price is more expensive (85mm f1.4 dg dn). Is it because it is also a lens for video ?
The Sigma is more expensive (I guess) largely because it's an f/1.4 lens rather than an f/1.8 like the Sony. You typically pay more for faster lenses. It's also much newer than the Sony, too, and generally a better lens in terms of optics.
Thanks for watching!
I have a dilemma should I get this for 1200 or get the 55mm zeiss and the 85 1.8 sony for 1400. Side note I own a 50 1.8 sony already and feel like the zeiss is a bit redundant.
I guess it would depend on which focal length you use the most? If you use a 50mm more, get the Zeiss and the cheaper Sony 85mm. If you use 85mm lenses more, get the Sigma 85mm and keep the cheaper 50mm. That would be my thought process at least 😃
@@TomCalton thanks for the reply... I find the 50 1.8 is a little to unreliable. I wish Sigma made a 50 1.4 (DGDN) Model.
@@mr.j5526 Probably that will be next and a 35 1.4 if everything goes good with this
A couple of years back, I saw a comparison between Zeiss vs. Sony, and no difference could be seen.
Probably, Sony just took advantage of the Zeiss blueprints. I got the Sony.
What do you think about the pictures? Unless I shoot full open, at f/4, all the lenses will perform more than satisfactorily.
LR lens profiles even out the differences. For 500 dollars, you can get something else.
WTH should you be shooting backlit tree branches with an 85mm portrait lens in the first place?
Awesome! Thank you for this one! I’ve been waiting for these two lenses to be compared!
No problem, I hope you enjoyed the video 👌
Thats why i love my 85mm1.8
Image A is definitely at 1.4
I really liked the edited photos at 6:32
Thanks!
Sony clearly win by half of the price, lightroom can get rid CA and anyway u have to add shaprnes when daliver as final jpg, so big NO for sigma.
could you re check the photo using sony 85.8 about image quality? I have had for 5 years, but there are no soft photos in sony 85.8 1.8 eye portrait. I agree that sigma is more sharp but sony 85.8 is not like soft you took. I think you can check resolution lense. my lense resolution was corrected few years ago. please check :)
Great comparison ! I keep my Sony 85mm as I am not making money out of it. For its price it's a good value. However the Sony's bokeh can get a little bit harsh on difficult backgrounds like foliage. But it's still not distracting. Sigma is a great lens too.
Thanks, glad you enjoyed the video! The Sony 85mm f/1.8 is a great budget option - mine has served me well over the years 😊
I take sigma art for weddings. Sony aberrates too much on wedding dresses. The Sigma is a better lens overall. But it also costs 2x as much.
I feel its really not a comparison, it should have been the sony G Master 85mm 1.4 as thats 1400 pounds ..
That was my thought before making the video, but I was asked by so many people to make this comparison that I couldn't ignore it. The video has had 26k views now, making it my 2nd most watched video, so clearly people want to see this comparison. 🤷🏻♂️
@@TomCalton It's a great review given the prices of both, very relevant. It's certainly helped me!
personally, i feel that the Sony 85mm f1.8 is great in its own class, but against the Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN Art, its nowhere near.. the Sony 85mm f1.4 GM might have been a better comparison vs the Sigma..
Hey Larry. As explained at the start of the video, my reason for making this comparison was due to a large number of people asking for it. It appears that a lot of people (myself included) own the Sony 85mm f/1.8 and are now wondering whether they should upgrade to the Sigma.
I have already compared the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 to the Sony 85mm f/1.4 in my group test video, which you can watch here if you're interested (ruclips.net/video/2MJPgDAV0H8/видео.html). I hope this clears up any confusion.
Does the older Sony a6500's lens compensation work for the Sigma lens?
Why is this one in 1080p?
I don't make any money from my photography, but I still got the sigma 85mm 1.4 anyway because I need that bokeh. The difference is small, but enough for me to notice.
Some better raw editors use the embedded profiles to correct Sony images.
Yep, they do. Though, hopefully Adobe will add this lens to their set of lens correction profiles soon.
You forget about the best zeiss batis 85 1.8 😙
I think the Batis 85mm is for another video... If enough people ask me to take a look at it of course! 😉
I would still get the Sony over the Batis.
I will take the Sony 85mm 1.8 as an exellent compact and light weight allround lens, I still have an analog Canon FDn 85mm 1.8. For portrait I use Sony 135mm 1.8 GM which have more shallow depth of field at 1.8 (than a 85mm 1.4) and a much more narrow back ground, so it is much more easy to get a good composition
The Sony is still a fantastic choice if you prefer to travel light. Thanks for checking out the video!
Nice comparison, very informative, my favorite focal length for a prime (me and many others' I guess). When I hear "build quality" though I think of Lensrentals lens teardowns rather than how something's exterior feels in our human hands. Sooth, it aten't that interesting for your average consumer how much kapton tape is part of a lens' innards but longevity and cost/complexity of repairs may be.
Hey. Thanks for watching, hope you enjoyed it!
Has Adobe or specifically in Lightroom updated the lens vignetting support for RAW files?
Hey! Yes, I can confirm that Lightroom has updated recently to include a lens correction profile for the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and it sorts out the vignetting and lens distortion for RAW files 👍
Sony 1.8 is indeed sharp enough, but with lower contrast and lighter colour saturation.
great video thanks! Please give me some advice
Which lens is better for portrait photography and why? Sony FE 85mm F/1.8. sony 90mm macro .85mm sigma art.
Hi Tom thanks for this video ! I need to buy an 85mm so... It’s better sigma 85mm 1.4 art( the new one ) or Zeiss Batis 85mm 1.8 ? Plz help me !? Thanks a lot
Unfortunately I've not tested the Zeiss 85mm so I couldn't say. However, I have the Sigma 85mm and it's the sharpest lens in my bag by a long way. 👌
Thanks a lot !
Noice! Even IF I came across this video before buying the Sony, I would have still bought the Sony. I do have the Sigma 14-24 2.8 Art lens, so I can attest to the awesome quality. But, I wanted a light run and gun 85mm for street. The Sony just fit my criteria for that type of style. Sharp! And lets face it, the photos I post get compressed to all hell on Instagram anyway. So NBD. Great video though. Confirmed I made the right choice for my circumstances.
Thanks, glad it helped! Both are brilliant options - by the sounds of things you made the right choice. Thanks for watching 😊
DUDE, that was an awesome review !!! kudos !!
Thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed it 👍
1.4 was left pic
i was choosing this two lens for my 85mm focal length. after i watch the video, i will definetely choose SIGMA :) sharpness at max aperture, nice bokeh, and for my clients. im a full time photographer also. thanks Tom!
Thanks for watching! Yeah, I think the Sigma is the right choice for you. You'll love it, I'm sure! 👌
thanks for making this!
You're welcome! Thanks for watching!
I hear a sound like a signal from the auto focus motor in the video mode of my sigma 85 dg dn, does your sigma have this sound?
Thanks for your comment! I can't say I've ever noticed anything like that to be honest. Do you use a shotgun mic or the inbuilt mic on your camera?
@@TomCalton thanks for your reply. The sound I mentioned is not heard in photo mode, it is a sound heard when shooting video in a quiet environment, and this sound is heard in the video shot with the built-in microphone.
The built in mic will always pick up AF noise a lot worse than a shotgun mic as the vibrations rattle through the camera body and are picked up by the mic. Try using a shotgun mic on top instead. The audio quality will be much better and it should reduce if not get rid of that issue. 👍
@@TomCalton thanks. I have a shot gun mic and I will try. But I have 24gm and 55mm 1.8 without shot gun mic, they make no sound.
Question, I'm currently hobbyist but I'm moving into pro territory as I'll highly likely be producing videos for hairdressers in the near future.
I'm looking at getting a 85mm.
So given that I'm not earning money yet, should I still go for the Sigma in the hopes that this highly likely job turns to 100% likely, or should I be cautious and stick with the Sony?
Thanks heaps for this video! Definitely helps :D
Thanks for checking out the video! Honestly, for video work, the Sony might be the better option. You probably won't notice the difference in sharpness (even at 4k) or the chromatic aberration. It's lightweight, the AF is silent and accurate, and it's half the price. The only thing it doesn't have is the manual aperture ring, which is only really useful if you prefer to adjust the exposure using aperture rather than attaching a variable ND (personally I'd rather use an ND and stick with a consistently shallow depth of field). I hope this helps, and good luck!
@@TomCalton definitely helps in making a decision! I think I'll be doing mostly video work compared with portraiture (maybe 2/3 of my work) so I'll still use the Sony for portraits but I think the quality will be there anyway.
Thanks heaps!
No worries, any time! 🙌
My Sony 85mm 1.8 is incredibly sharp and so fun to shoot with! It balanced so well on my A7iii and now on my A7iv. It's one of my favorite lenses for my Sony.
I have the sony well for years now but in this test he said the sigma is way sharper! I have a7iv and recently a7rv I think it would be upgrade time form.my sony 85 and 35 f1.8.. they haven't failed me ever but investment in better glass like f1.4 range would be better fir for my newer cameras?
Shot A is the 1.4 id say.
sony 85 f1.8
A is the 1.4 photo? You did not unveiled which it is. :(
Hello can someone help me whether i should buy a new 910 USD sigma 85 dg dn art or the second hand 85mm gm for 990 USD. Thankyou
i've been doing the same research and about to make the same purcahse. get the sigma
Hi what you recommend only for video sony or sigma?
Honestly, both are really good for video. If you're only shooting in HD, you might be better off saving your money and getting the Sony as you may not notice the increased sharpness of the Sigma 85mm. The Sony is a fair bit smaller and lighter, too. Hope this helps!
1.4 on left. More bokeh-ish
"Bokeh-ish" - great word, love it 👍
I love my Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art DG DN. It is pretty sharp and fast focus.
I use mine a hell of a lot. Probably my favourite lens at the moment 👌
@@TomCalton It is a beast with Sony A7III
sigma 85mm f/1.4 is far better than sony
this was such a great video, appreciate the info!
Thanks for watching and commenting 👍🏻
A was the Sigma
Sony al poder
I gotta say after getting this lens and testing against the samyang 85 and even sigma 105, the new sigma is only barely sharper if u zoom into extremes to see it. Sadly I'll be returning it
Interesting. I've never used the Sigma 105mm before so I can't comment on that (I've heard it's very sharp), but when we tested the Sigma 85mm against the Samyang 85mm, the Sigma was significantly sharper at all focusing distances. It also doesn't have that yellow cast that the Samyang does. Thanks for the feedback though!
@@TomCalton is there anyway you would be able to give the sample raw photos for comparison? Thank you, much appreciated
Yeah potentially. Bare with me and I'll see what I can do. We're pretty busy at the moment with corporate work and also producing more content, so forgive me if I don't sort this right away for you 😅
nice review, the only thing I missed was a breathing test
Thanks, glad you liked it! I don't normally include a breathing test, purely because I've found that most primes have some degree of breathing, so I'd only be repeating myself in every video. That said, if enough people request for this to be added to my tests then I'm more than happy to include it in future. Thanks for the feedback 😊
@@TomCalton Jared Polin would include the smell test, the blow test. As well as the breathing test.
thank you so much.
You're more than welcome! Thanks for watching 👍
A cause bokeh is smoother
Good eyes 👀
What about the Tokina 85 1.8 vs the Sony 85 1.8? :D
Thanks for the suggestion! We may have to test this in the future 👍
@@TomCalton thank you Tom
Thank you for the review Tom! Really appreciate this comparison. I think the left one is the Sigma 1.4.
Only 2 months ago I switched from a Canon 5DII to the Sony A7III and I bought the Sony 85mm 1.8 just before the announced release of the Sigma. Your video does make me want to upgrade, but in time!
You're so welcome! I think you're totally right - if anything, this test has shown that, for the price, the Sony is a great lens. It only falls down in a few areas compared to the Sigma.
Glad you found it useful! 😁
Out of interest, what made you pick the image on the left?
@@TomCalton The biggest clue actually was the sharpness, not the bokeh. And after knowing for sure, I noticed that smoother Sigma bokeh.
probably...
A sigma
very good analyis
Thanks Ricky!
I have got the Sony 135mm 1.8 GM which are better than any of those 85mm lenses (in fact of ANY lens under 300mm!). If I was to get a 85mm lens, I would go for the Sony 85mm 1,8, but I will rather have the much more versatile Voigtländer 65mm 2.0 APO-Lannthar Macro lens which will do exellent in any kind of photography and it have a very high resolution which go very well with my Sony A7RIV.
Interesting take, thanks for sharing. I have the Sigma 135mm and although it's a great lens, it's sooooo heavy! So I've found myself using the 85mm a lot more recently just because it's better for my back.
Isn't the Voigtlander manual focus only though? Not a problem for stationary targets, but for me, when shooting events/weddings/family's, this just wouldn't work unfortunately.
Handsome man
Who? Me or my devilishly handsome model? OK, looks like I've answered my own question...
A is at 1.4
What made you choose A? 🤔
@@TomCalton to me, it looks like less area of the face was sharp on the left. It looks like starting around the edge of the eyebrow area, it already is a bit out of focus while the one on the right is still in pretty good focus. Also looking around the neck area, the one on the right looks to be more in focus than the left. The left's background also seems to be more blown out than the right.
Good detective work sir! 🔎👍
A is 1.4
Why did you pick A? 🤔