Thanks for the great testing and comparison. I’m not seeing a blow you away difference in sharpness, auto focus, flare and sunstars Sigma vs. GM. The size and weight of the Sigma, metal build quality, at half the Sony price, while offering almost every bit the performance makes it attractive to me. Sony’s other worldly f1.4 aperture, weather sealing, and better feature integration with Sony camera bodies, (focus breathing compensation, better IBIS than 3rd party lens mfrs, ability to leverage full capability of burst shooting for the more capable camera models where capped at 15fps for 3rd party lens), separates it. For me, (hobbyist), I’d occasionally appreciate the bokeh of the Sony. All the other features and marginally better performance characteristics would be lost on me. I feel I would more likely use the Sigma every day, appreciating the great performance, size & weight, and price I paid for it, without really caring that something slightly better could be had for double the price.
Excellent summary. I have been eyeing the GM 35 f1.4 for sometime now but the price difference is huge. I can pick up the Sigma used for less than $400 whereas the GM is still near $1K marker even used. I have plenty of Tamron zooms that cover the range for now. I'll have to do some more soul searching to see if I really need a prime 35mm!!
Am looking at both these two lenses, and both are fantastic in my opinion. Enjoyed the review, liked the split screen comparison 👌🏼, and enjoyed the humour 👍🏼. Cheers.
Great video, as always, I went with the Sony 35mm f1.8. Smaller lighter less expensive and much better in focus breathing. Did I want the f1.4 absolutely, did I need it.....hard to say no.
Thanks for sharing, interestingly, the 1.8 seems to have even less breathing than the 1.4 corrected! Pretty darn good lens if you're not super picky with bokeh
I actually own the Sigma 35 1.4 DGDN. I just bought the Sigma 35 2.0 on a whim (discounted OB) for my A7Cii. I didn't do any research LOL and just trusted the Sigma brand. I watch Dustin Abbotts review before your's. According to the charts, its lags in sharpness just behind the Sigma 35 1.2. So, I'd say it's pretty dam sharp!
Here's the bottom line, if you shoot street photography at 35mm the Sigma obliterates the Sony GM for the following reasons: 1.-smaller, more discreet 2.-at commonly used street photography apertures (f2.8-f4) both lenses are identical in sharpness, yet the sigma renders colours more vibrantly (Subjective of course). 3.- The sigma cost half the price of the GM and offers 95% of the performance. 4.-it looks more beautiful on your camera. This is obviously not a lens for video but surprisingly the Sigma has a lot less focus breathing and it's unlikely you will be doing Hollywood focus pulls to notice it. I think Sigma's move to make such tiny, well-built and premium performance lenses was a brilliant strategy to lure fuji/apsc users to full frame.
Except in this comparison the GM was shown to be sharper at all apertures which is to be expected given the price difference. Also consider that differences in optical performance will be made more noticeable on higher megapixel bodies and in particular the A7RIV. I own one and a 35mm f1.4 GM for street it’s just about at my limit for a small setup its true but at the same time there’s no better 35mm lens on emount for sure or any other platform I would guess at the moment.
I have both and honestly I only pull the 35 gm out when I take night pictures. If it's just some dark restaurants it's fine with the sigma. So honestly, I only use the GM 5% of the time. This lens is sooooo pretty when you carry it around with my a7c. Actually makes me want to use my camera!
@@nipshardafGood perspective. Sigma 35mm is clearly Smaller, lighter, cute/more esthetic, and really close to equivalent performance, at 1/2 the price. I have seen in other videos that the Sony, 35mm, f1.4, GM has better distortion control than the Sigma 35mm, f2,dg dn but apart from this, honestly, I’m not see any perceptible difference in the comparison of the two lenses. Still, there is the cost. $640 for the Sigma, 35mm would be painful to the wallet, but $1400 for the Sony, 35, GM would be like losing an appendage!😮. Some where in there there is diminishing returns if going with the Sony.
Thanks for the video. Why is the weight of the GM only 509 grams versus the spec of 524 grams.is your scale accurate or do you measure it differently than the manufacturer? I like he’s but leave out the grunts and groans. For me they don’t add anything and lower the quality. Just my feedback. Take care.
Thanks for the great testing and comparison. I’m not seeing a blow you away difference in sharpness, auto focus, flare and sunstars Sigma vs. GM. The size and weight of the Sigma, metal build quality, at half the Sony price, while offering almost every bit the performance makes it attractive to me. Sony’s other worldly f1.4 aperture, weather sealing, and better feature integration with Sony camera bodies, (focus breathing compensation, better IBIS than 3rd party lens mfrs, ability to leverage full capability of burst shooting for the more capable camera models where capped at 15fps for 3rd party lens), separates it. For me, (hobbyist), I’d occasionally appreciate the bokeh of the Sony. All the other features and marginally better performance characteristics would be lost on me. I feel I would more likely use the Sigma every day, appreciating the great performance, size & weight, and price I paid for it, without really caring that something slightly better could be had for double the price.
Excellent summary. I have been eyeing the GM 35 f1.4 for sometime now but the price difference is huge. I can pick up the Sigma used for less than $400 whereas the GM is still near $1K marker even used. I have plenty of Tamron zooms that cover the range for now. I'll have to do some more soul searching to see if I really need a prime 35mm!!
Good comparison. Just want to point out that F1.4 and F2 are one full stop difference, not 2/3 stops.
Am looking at both these two lenses, and both are fantastic in my opinion. Enjoyed the review, liked the split screen comparison 👌🏼, and enjoyed the humour 👍🏼. Cheers.
Love your sense of humor!
Great video, as always, I went with the Sony 35mm f1.8. Smaller lighter less expensive and much better in focus breathing. Did I want the f1.4 absolutely, did I need it.....hard to say no.
Thanks for sharing, interestingly, the 1.8 seems to have even less breathing than the 1.4 corrected! Pretty darn good lens if you're not super picky with bokeh
Excellent review. Love your split screen comparisons... the bar chart to show the percentages in favor of each lens.
I actually own the Sigma 35 1.4 DGDN. I just bought the Sigma 35 2.0 on a whim (discounted OB) for my A7Cii. I didn't do any research LOL and just trusted the Sigma brand. I watch Dustin Abbotts review before your's. According to the charts, its lags in sharpness just behind the Sigma 35 1.2. So, I'd say it's pretty dam sharp!
Dustin Abbotts often gives very general review. I'd love this side-by-side comparison with clear criteria and values
This Sigma lens are something above prefection!
Like a motivated stalker...LOL I really enjoy your videos. Great content, and you always say something that makes me laugh. See you in the next one.
Here's the bottom line, if you shoot street photography at 35mm the Sigma obliterates the Sony GM for the following reasons: 1.-smaller, more discreet 2.-at commonly used street photography apertures (f2.8-f4) both lenses are identical in sharpness, yet the sigma renders colours more vibrantly (Subjective of course). 3.- The sigma cost half the price of the GM and offers 95% of the performance. 4.-it looks more beautiful on your camera. This is obviously not a lens for video but surprisingly the Sigma has a lot less focus breathing and it's unlikely you will be doing Hollywood focus pulls to notice it. I think Sigma's move to make such tiny, well-built and premium performance lenses was a brilliant strategy to lure fuji/apsc users to full frame.
Except in this comparison the GM was shown to be sharper at all apertures which is to be expected given the price difference. Also consider that differences in optical performance will be made more noticeable on higher megapixel bodies and in particular the A7RIV. I own one and a 35mm f1.4 GM for street it’s just about at my limit for a small setup its true but at the same time there’s no better 35mm lens on emount for sure or any other platform I would guess at the moment.
I have both and honestly I only pull the 35 gm out when I take night pictures. If it's just some dark restaurants it's fine with the sigma. So honestly, I only use the GM 5% of the time. This lens is sooooo pretty when you carry it around with my a7c. Actually makes me want to use my camera!
@@nipshardafGood perspective. Sigma 35mm is clearly Smaller, lighter, cute/more esthetic, and really close to equivalent performance, at 1/2 the price. I have seen in other videos that the Sony, 35mm, f1.4, GM has better distortion control than the Sigma 35mm, f2,dg dn but apart from this, honestly, I’m not see any perceptible difference in the comparison of the two lenses. Still, there is the cost. $640 for the Sigma, 35mm would be painful to the wallet, but $1400 for the Sony, 35, GM would be like losing an appendage!😮. Some where in there there is diminishing returns if going with the Sony.
Thanks for the video. Why is the weight of the GM only 509 grams versus the spec of 524 grams.is your scale accurate or do you measure it differently than the manufacturer? I like he’s but leave out the grunts and groans. For me they don’t add anything and lower the quality. Just my feedback. Take care.
...great review and comparison...
Great review, I just ordered the gm lens earlier today. I’ll use it with my Sigma 85 f1.4 for travel. I have tamron zoom lenses for event work.
sounds like a fantastic kit!
Best content man. Thanks
🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Thank you for a very comprehensive but a succinct review. Yeah, when the wife wastes your time, it's cute. Others, not so much! :D
Pourquoi ne pas comparer le 1.4/35mm Sigma ?
I think it was because I happened to have the lenses, small creator, I didnt have all the access to all lenses at the time.
seem like the skin tone of 35GM is better than sigma
Dear oh dear! It's a full stop difference between f/1.4 and f/2 --- not "two-thirds of a stop". So, I stopped watching after 15 seconds.
Us Asians 😅😅😅
Thank you for a very comprehensive but a succinct review. Yeah, when the wife wastes your time, it's cute. Others, not so much! :D