Thanks Gerald! There's some geezer on yours who's stealing my style! Thanks for having me on! PS - Gerald's video review, featuring your's truly at ruclips.net/video/JJl8MPb3Pr4/видео.html
You're a machine, Gordon! Love how every test is illustrated and presented rather than just asserting stuff. Your reviews have been a help to me from years ago when I started choosing systems and cameras, to now when I am buying lenses.
@19:55 Sony 35mm 1.8 G? Great and thorough review! I hope that a firmware update will fix that focusing issues seen by other reviews too. But the blurriness wide open will probably remain (considering it goes away at smaller apertures)
Thank you for such a thorough review Gordon. I noticed that all the GM images seem a bit darker than the Sigma at the same settings. Is it possible that the Sigma has slightly better transmission?
Outstanding review, thanks a lot Gordon. So I will stay with the f/2 for smaller bags and if I need to lift heavy, I'll take the f/1.2. Didn't know it's that good! Now I have even more fun with it, although on L-mount sometimes and some lenses are some different stories. Somehow...
Nice to see the 35mm F2 included. The size difference is quite apparent and for traveling, I think it's hard to beat. It's nice to see a slower F2 model as well with an aperture ring and above average OOF rendering. Up from there...and if I were looking for the speed...I'd probably just go 35mm 1.4 GM. Although, some end of year rebates on the Sigma 35mm 1.4 could make it significantly more attractive by widening the price gap over the GM. Sooo, I'd go Sigma 35mm f2 for travel and 35mm 1.4 GM if I wanted it all...size be damned.
Wow, was surprised to see the complex field curvature of the Sigma 35/2.0 at 11:20! Pretty sure that is field curvature rather than general softness right?
As an owner of the Sigma 85 DG DN, this time around, i will go with the Sony GM. That additional money that Sony charges for it, is well worth it, in this instance. The only challenge with the Sony is its lack of availability, despite being introduced months back.
Thanks a lot for the thorough review, Gordon! Did you realise any heavy CA with the Sigma 1.4 DG DN? Considering the even larger price difference in Germany to the Sony 1.4 GM (converted: Sigma £726 vs Sony £1450!), I heavily tend towards the new Sigma 1.4. Will likely order it later this week. Cheers
Sony and sigma are both really killing it lately, but having both options really helps make the sony bodies more enticing than anything in the L-mount alliance. If the panasonic S bodies were priced lower to match the sigma lenses it'd be a different story, but with all the same lenses available on sony, what do the Panasonic bodies have to offer?
They have room for your fingers between the lens and camera grip. Even the little S5 has much better ergonomics than any of the Sonys. I wish that wasn’t the case because I really wanted to buy a Sony.
For either $1700 for the Panasonic S5 or $2500 for the S1, you get a truly pro quality stills and video hybrid. If I went Sony, to get all the same features, I'd have to buy two Sony cameras. If I sold my S1, but wanted 10-bit 4K (not to mention 6K which Sony doesn't have at this level) and pro features for stills, I'd need an A7siii and an A7c or A7riii or iv. Until the A7iv comes out ones day, Panasonic really does save money, especially if you lean video centric.
You gotta wonder if there is some artificial limitation to the burst speed with third-party lenses on the A9 and A1 bodies. Is the reduced burst speed really based on a less than optimal communication or synchronisation between the body and the lens or just a few lines of code to make the folks that buy the top-of-the-line camera buy the most expensive lenses, too?
I wonder that too. Sony could say they're artificially limiting it because they don't think third party lenses could deliver a good experience at that speed, or maybe there's a genuine incompatibility or restriction. But the bottom line is fair or not, justified or not, you WILL need a Sony lens to achieve the top speeds.
You compare the Sigma in the end with the Sony 1.8 and I wonder why not comparing it to the Zeiss 1.4 which is (although it is a bit older) the direct competitor in this price range. So a comparison would be appropriate here.
Great job Gordon, if you watch Dustin Abbott, Gerald Undone and Gordon and anyone can find detailed, relevant and accurate reviews a cup of "coffee" is in order as I considering purchasing this lens and you have saved me some time, thank you sir💖
Thanks! Yep, the 1.2 is pretty good! Do you ever experience focusing issues with it - ie not always hitting the exact spot for the sharpest result? What body do you use?
@@cameralabs I'm using the Sony Alpha R4. It worked good for me. I didn't see any focusing issues right now. I'm using the lens for a lot of video work. But I only owning this lens for 2 month. Maybe I was lucky until now.
@@rf-cinematic1576 well the R4 has even more resolution than the A1 I'm using here, so you'd know if it was off. Do try focusing on some fine detail using AF and then in MF though to see if you can beat the AF version as I could here.
Returning to this in late 2023 - I'm bummed about the wide-open performance, and I think it's a bit of a miss from Sigma on this one. If it weren't for color fringing and bokeh rings, I think the Samyang 35mm 1.4 II would be the best competitor at the price.
Got the Sony zeiss for years. Then 35 GM release and I know that is it. This new sigma no doubt is better than the old Sony zeiss. But it is still so big and heavy.
I really hope these sigma primes come to the z system seeing as nikon seem to be offering 1.2 primes as their fast option which are/will be huge and expensive.
The Sigma 1.2 appeared like the best lens of the three, hands down. But it's huge. Sigma 1.4 is the best value. Sony sits in the middle in terms of quality, but most compact of them all.
Why is the Sigma F/1.2 SO much bigger than the F/1.4, when it is just half a stop faster? It is bigger than the F/1.4 by a greater margin than it is than the F/2. Can someone explain please?
If I was to get a 35mm 1.4 I will get the very best which at the moment are the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM, if I was to get a compact 35mm, I will go for either Sony 35mm 1.8 or Tamron 35mm 2.8.
So far third-parties have zero support of AF tracking at faster than 15 FPS bursts. "Sony does not always support its fastest burst speeds with third-party lenses..." is misleading.
I take it on a case by case basis as I have achieved 30fps with some Sony lenses iN AFC that Sony themselves say will not work at that speed. Plus things can change, and we can't speak for all future lenses. So I said that you may not get the top speed with third party lenses, and in the case of the lens I reviewed here, I achieved 12-14fps with it. None of that is misleading.
Rant of the day. I would prefer it if manufacturers provide launch samples rather than giving the "pre production sample" caveat. Seems to be the norm nowadays to provide them a way out of any negatives when compared to actual "pre production/development" samples you'd get in the past. Send them when they are ready and let the reviewers (not beta testers) do their work. That aside thanks Gordon for the review.
Thanks, I think there are some products which are genuinely early samples so are more of an 'idea' of what it's like. Then there are ones that I reckon are finished, but they describe them as pre-prod to cover them against any negativity as well as to provide some feedback on last minute firmware updates.
Testing the Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG DN ART vs Sigma f1.2 vs f2 vs Sony f1.4 GM
Check prices at B&H: bhpho.to/3ey1Rbz // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3voHMLO
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
00:00 - Intro and rivals (Sigma 1.2, 2 and Sony 1.4)
02:08 - Design, controls, hoods
05:02 - Focus comparison
06:16 - Portrait comparison
08:31 - Bokeh ball comparison
10:32 - Sunstars / Diffraction spikes
10:48 - Macro comparison
12:21 - Landscape comparison
15:41 - Video samples
15:57 - Video autofocus comparison
16:24 - Focus breathing comparison
17:51 - Verdict and sample images
Great work, Gordon! 🤓👍
Thanks Gerald! There's some geezer on yours who's stealing my style! Thanks for having me on! PS - Gerald's video review, featuring your's truly at ruclips.net/video/JJl8MPb3Pr4/видео.html
3:24 I cannot say enough thank you for doing this! Love it!
You're a machine, Gordon! Love how every test is illustrated and presented rather than just asserting stuff. Your reviews have been a help to me from years ago when I started choosing systems and cameras, to now when I am buying lenses.
Thanks, I'm glad you enjoy my approach!
@19:55 Sony 35mm 1.8 G? Great and thorough review! I hope that a firmware update will fix that focusing issues seen by other reviews too. But the blurriness wide open will probably remain (considering it goes away at smaller apertures)
Keep grinding. Your content is incredible. Thanks!
Thanks!
Clear, thorough and meticulously evidenced as always! Thanks Gordon!
You're very welcome!
带字幕看完了，简直是见过得最详细的测评之一，很有帮助！
You’ve set the bar for lens comparisons very high with this one. Bravo!
thanks! I try to cover everything I'd want to see!
Great work again Gordon, this lens performs almost as exactly what I expected.
Thanks! Are you tempted?
Thank you for such a thorough review Gordon. I noticed that all the GM images seem a bit darker than the Sigma at the same settings. Is it possible that the Sigma has slightly better transmission?
It is possible since the exposures were the same.
Thanks Gordon, need this for my SL2. Wish theyd do a 50mm 1.4 DN lens...
Your best comparison review ever. You should win an Emmy for this!
thanks!
Outstanding review, thanks a lot Gordon. So I will stay with the f/2 for smaller bags and if I need to lift heavy, I'll take the f/1.2. Didn't know it's that good! Now I have even more fun with it, although on L-mount sometimes and some lenses are some different stories. Somehow...
Nice to see the 35mm F2 included. The size difference is quite apparent and for traveling, I think it's hard to beat. It's nice to see a slower F2 model as well with an aperture ring and above average OOF rendering. Up from there...and if I were looking for the speed...I'd probably just go 35mm 1.4 GM. Although, some end of year rebates on the Sigma 35mm 1.4 could make it significantly more attractive by widening the price gap over the GM.
Sooo, I'd go Sigma 35mm f2 for travel and 35mm 1.4 GM if I wanted it all...size be damned.
I ordered the gm last night 😄. I’m happy with my decision now. Even tho I already own the 1.2 sigma but I’m really getting tired of that weight
You'll love it!
BRING ON THE RF VERSION! And while you're at it Sigma, an f/1.8 variable zoom would be nice.
Sigma must have heard you. Bet you're pleased with the 28-45mm f1.8!
Thanks Gordon. That was a lot of solid work. Like your rigorous reviews.
Glad you found it useful!
Hey Gordon, thx for review it. As a new RUclipsr, I learned more from you about how to do lens review. Thx
Thanks for all the work you do! 👍
You're welcome!
Great tests thanks. Will be getting the GM. :)
Wow, was surprised to see the complex field curvature of the Sigma 35/2.0 at 11:20! Pretty sure that is field curvature rather than general softness right?
As an owner of the Sigma 85 DG DN, this time around, i will go with the Sony GM. That additional money that Sony charges for it, is well worth it, in this instance. The only challenge with the Sony is its lack of availability, despite being introduced months back.
Yeah, everything's backed up.
B&H got a shipment of the sony 35 yesterday. Just cause u need one
@@ralphtime thanks a bunch. Ordered !
Thanks a lot for the thorough review, Gordon!
Did you realise any heavy CA with the Sigma 1.4 DG DN?
Considering the even larger price difference in Germany to the Sony 1.4 GM (converted: Sigma £726 vs Sony £1450!), I heavily tend towards the new Sigma 1.4. Will likely order it later this week. Cheers
The lens is essentially the Sigma 35 Art mark ii, all the proper improvements at a great price
I agree, are you thinking it's the right one for you?
Thanks for the video Gordon! Would love Sigma to try to make their lenses a little bit smaller (without making the lens slower).
But then they'd be more expensive🤦
Fantastic! How would you compare the 35mm 1.8 sony to the 35m 1.4 sigma? Optical and rendering wise?
Sony and sigma are both really killing it lately, but having both options really helps make the sony bodies more enticing than anything in the L-mount alliance. If the panasonic S bodies were priced lower to match the sigma lenses it'd be a different story, but with all the same lenses available on sony, what do the Panasonic bodies have to offer?
They have room for your fingers between the lens and camera grip. Even the little S5 has much better ergonomics than any of the Sonys. I wish that wasn’t the case because I really wanted to buy a Sony.
For either $1700 for the Panasonic S5 or $2500 for the S1, you get a truly pro quality stills and video hybrid. If I went Sony, to get all the same features, I'd have to buy two Sony cameras. If I sold my S1, but wanted 10-bit 4K (not to mention 6K which Sony doesn't have at this level) and pro features for stills, I'd need an A7siii and an A7c or A7riii or iv. Until the A7iv comes out ones day, Panasonic really does save money, especially if you lean video centric.
You gotta wonder if there is some artificial limitation to the burst speed with third-party lenses on the A9 and A1 bodies. Is the reduced burst speed really based on a less than optimal communication or synchronisation between the body and the lens or just a few lines of code to make the folks that buy the top-of-the-line camera buy the most expensive lenses, too?
I wonder that too. Sony could say they're artificially limiting it because they don't think third party lenses could deliver a good experience at that speed, or maybe there's a genuine incompatibility or restriction. But the bottom line is fair or not, justified or not, you WILL need a Sony lens to achieve the top speeds.
good job there Gordon!
great and detailed video. Really helped me on my purchase
You're welcome!
Stirling work Gordon.
Thankyou!
Just so informative, thank you so much!!!
You're welcome!
You compare the Sigma in the end with the Sony 1.8 and I wonder why not comparing it to the Zeiss 1.4 which is (although it is a bit older) the direct competitor in this price range. So a comparison would be appropriate here.
Great job Gordon, if you watch Dustin Abbott, Gerald Undone and Gordon and anyone can find detailed, relevant and accurate reviews a cup of "coffee" is in order as I considering purchasing this lens and you have saved me some time, thank you sir💖
Thanks for the kind words and thanks also for your generous coffee donation, it really helps, cheers!
You should do a comparison of the Sigma 35 f1.2 and the Sony 50 f1.2. The 50 is not quite a 50...and the 35 is more narrow than 35.
I already comment it under Gerald Undones video... I will stay with the Sigma 35 f1.2. I love that lens. But nice review!!!
Thanks! Yep, the 1.2 is pretty good! Do you ever experience focusing issues with it - ie not always hitting the exact spot for the sharpest result? What body do you use?
@@cameralabs I'm using the Sony Alpha R4. It worked good for me. I didn't see any focusing issues right now. I'm using the lens for a lot of video work. But I only owning this lens for 2 month. Maybe I was lucky until now.
@@rf-cinematic1576 well the R4 has even more resolution than the A1 I'm using here, so you'd know if it was off. Do try focusing on some fine detail using AF and then in MF though to see if you can beat the AF version as I could here.
@@cameralabs It worked perfectly fine. I focused on a piece of dirt on a wine bottle. And the focus was exactly on that spot where my focus point was.
@@rf-cinematic1576 when you have time, could you try it on a distant subject like a building at least 50m away?
What’s the Sigma 28mm f1.4 DG HSM Art Lens - Canon EF Fit . Is there any reviews.
Yep, here you go! www.cameralabs.com/sigma-28mm-f1-4-art-review/
Returning to this in late 2023 - I'm bummed about the wide-open performance, and I think it's a bit of a miss from Sigma on this one. If it weren't for color fringing and bokeh rings, I think the Samyang 35mm 1.4 II would be the best competitor at the price.
Your Videos are the Beat 😃👍 with all my questions answered
Thanks!
Got the Sony zeiss for years. Then 35 GM release and I know that is it. This new sigma no doubt is better than the old Sony zeiss. But it is still so big and heavy.
I really hope these sigma primes come to the z system seeing as nikon seem to be offering 1.2 primes as their fast option which are/will be huge and expensive.
You are the best!! Thank you
Thanks!
The Sigma 1.2 appeared like the best lens of the three, hands down. But it's huge. Sigma 1.4 is the best value. Sony sits in the middle in terms of quality, but most compact of them all.
Hah, Gordon you are awesome. But I also like Thomas’ very detailed reviews on the camera labs website. I haven’t bought book yet but I will.
Thanks!
I actually wanted to buy the GM but then I found a used Sigma 35 DG DN for 650 dollars and this was a no brainer! So I bought it
Great job, thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Mr.Gordon Laing
Splendid!
I thank you for your review.
どうもありがとう(*^_^*)
Looks like GM is the way to go -- assuming one has the budget for it.
Why didn't you compare 100% crop examples?? This way we can't see which lens is sharper which should have been kinda a big part of this comparison.
The landscape comparison is magnified enough to reveal sharpness differences, especially when viewed in 4k on a big screen.
Good One sir..I like it..but sony lens prices are always high
Ah but the 35 1.8G is cheaper...
@@cameralabs oh that's nice
Why is the Sigma F/1.2 SO much bigger than the F/1.4, when it is just half a stop faster?
It is bigger than the F/1.4 by a greater margin than it is than the F/2.
Can someone explain please?
Check the results in my video to see - it's about more than the extra aperture.
Thanks! Please sigma give us a 135mm dgdn or 104
If I was to get a 35mm 1.4 I will get the very best which at the moment are the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM, if I was to get a compact 35mm, I will go for either Sony 35mm 1.8 or Tamron 35mm 2.8.
Solid choices.
@@cameralabs I am looking forward to see reviews of the Voigtländer 35mm 2.0 APO-Lanthar :)
So if you had a choice between the Sony and sigma, price doesn't matter, which would you get
Didn't I say at the end?
@@cameralabs at work can't currently watch 😂
@@imtjnotu ha ha! Wait till you get home then!
Undisputed heavyweight 🤣😂
Love your videos 👍
Thanks!
Hi Gordon
Hi!
the Sony 35mm F1.8 is no "G" lens
you're right, it just slipped out probably because it performs like a G!
Love
Sigma 1.2 is best
Even better than the Sony albeit slower focus and FPS
Wish somebody just make the 105 1.4 smaller lol
So far third-parties have zero support of AF tracking at faster than 15 FPS bursts. "Sony does not always support its fastest burst speeds with third-party lenses..." is misleading.
I take it on a case by case basis as I have achieved 30fps with some Sony lenses iN AFC that Sony themselves say will not work at that speed. Plus things can change, and we can't speak for all future lenses. So I said that you may not get the top speed with third party lenses, and in the case of the lens I reviewed here, I achieved 12-14fps with it. None of that is misleading.
Is Sigma 35 1.2 is the best?
You tell me based on the things I show you in the video...
sony dont have a 35mm 1.8 G... there is no G in that lens...
A slip of the tongue. When I say 35 1.8 G, I mean 35 1.8
Hello
Make a video about
Iphone 12 Pro VS
Iphone 12 Pro Max
「動画の音が良くない」、
How do you admonish badly-behaved bokeh balls?
shave 'em smooth
... and use a good after shave lotion, otherwise they could show some infected bokeh rings
@@Joamonica urgh!
Sony 35mm 1.4 is smaller
pretty sure I said that in the video
The sigma 35mm 1.2 has terrible LOCA, terrible!
Rant of the day.
I would prefer it if manufacturers provide launch samples rather than giving the "pre production sample" caveat. Seems to be the norm nowadays to provide them a way out of any negatives when compared to actual "pre production/development" samples you'd get in the past. Send them when they are ready and let the reviewers (not beta testers) do their work.
That aside thanks Gordon for the review.
Thanks, I think there are some products which are genuinely early samples so are more of an 'idea' of what it's like. Then there are ones that I reckon are finished, but they describe them as pre-prod to cover them against any negativity as well as to provide some feedback on last minute firmware updates.