Man, when I start searching for a lens review, if I can't find your video, no matter which lens for Sony it is, I start to feel anxiety... I mean, I watch a lot of other reviews too, but your format is the benchmark for all out there!
Hi, Christopher Frost! Thank you for always posting good lens reviews. I always get a lot of help with my purchases. I'm a crew member who boarded PKM-299 on a Korean naval warship in the center left of 4:25 of the video. It's a great pleasure to see a ship that was on board 9 years ago in today's review. Especially, it's nice to see Yokjido Island after a long time. Is there a site where the original photo was uploaded? I want to see a bigger picture.😃
I sold all of my full frame gear and am now 100% Fujifilm and am loving it. I have no reason to watch these full frame e-mount reviews Chris, but I wanted to share that I watch these reviews on your channel to keep up with what’s happening in the world of photography. I know exactly what I am going to get with all of your videos, and that consistency really makes a difference for those looking for back-to-back details on the sheer number of lenses there are to choose from. Thanks for your good work mate. Keep at it!
@@WetDoggo XT5 (x2 bodies) 18-55mm, 18mm f1.4, 33mm f1.4, and 56mm f1.2 for my commercial. For me, X-Pro3 with the Voigtländer 21mm f1.4, 28mm f2, 35mm f1.5, and 50mm f1.5. All manual focus and I am absolutely loving it! ✌️
did you feel a significant different using apsc fuji sensor vs sony full frame? in low light condition, such dark room in restaurant or party and night street.
I have all the lenses that you mentioned in addition I also have the 16-55, 90mm, 50-140 etc, their pro glass is top notch but their AF is probably the worst of any system. I didn't realize this until I started shooting with my new body and new glass. The thing overheated in 81 degree weather shooting photos. In addition, I got several AF confirmations that my subject was in focus but when I went to check the image it was way out of focus. The bad AF stories are true and I guess I'll have to wait for the next model because I cannot trust Fuji cameras to get the shot.
Shows equal progress or more so compared to the 35/1.4 DG DN vs the 35/1.4 HSM in terms of size and weight. Not sure what you were expecting there. Anyway, better AF and less purple fringing seem to be good reasons : )
@@Vantrakter What he was expecting was a smaller lens. I hear what you're saying, but your comment comes off as condescending. Just because Sigma made a minor upgrade in the past, doesnt mean we should expect and accept minor upgrades that arent worth it to many, in the future.
I-series accommodates those seeking smaller lenses. The 65mmF2 being very sharp, the 45mmF2.8 being very compact and light for an all-metal FF lens at 215g. No doubt there will be a 50mmF2 I-series eventually, and probably a more hulking 50mmF1.2 ART-series for the best-at-any-size photographers. The old 50mm may be better for some videographers since it has low-distortion and mechanically-coupled focus (though newer DNs like this should have good linear emulation with choice of rotation scale by now - on L-mount cameras.)
Why these new lenses are so big ???? the cameras go smaller and lenses bigger… if it s just to justify the regular increase of price it s just non sense.
Thanks for the review! I was surprised by the complain about the lense’s weight and size… do You know any f1.4 50mm AF lens for SONY E-Mount which is noticeably lighter and smaller? I have the Zeiss and it is also large and relatively heavy… the Samyang is also very similar. Maybe the new Sony f/1.2? I know that MF lenses are smaller and lighter, but usually exhibit more optical flaws than the larger lenses, which are bulky because of optical parts that correct such flaws.
"You can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something---your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life." ---Steve Jobs
I so want the RF version😢😢😢 unfair!! The rf 50 1.2 is extremely good but chunky and pricey. I can afford it, but i can say that because i always ask myself „do i WANT to afford it“ so ill stick with the 50 1.8 for now
You have spoken my mind. Ya, I felt so unfair too. While I can also afford the Canon RF 50 f1.2 the size and weight is a real turn off. I'm in the never ending quest to find the best 50mm among the old EF mount versions (both Sigma and Canon version) but none are giving me satisfactory results either in weight or IQ. So, like you I will have to settle for 50 1.8 for now. Good thing 50mm is not a FL I used as much as the 85mm. As for the 85mm f1.4, I've managed to secure a copy of the Samyang RF mount from ebay recently. Can't wait for it to arrive.
Bout time! Was waiting 2 years to get my hands on this. 🥳 Edit: After seeing the review I'm a bit disappointed by the IQ at f/1.4 as the other Sigma DG DN lenses are killers right from widest aperture.
For me the Samyang 50 1.4 II, having maybe slightly inferior build quality, and perhaps image quality, but being cheaper, lighter and smaller makes a better option.
@@AAJJ007 Hmm I don't know, the Samyang is only 200$CAD less in Canada, at regular price and the Sigma tends to be always about 250-300$CAD on sale around the end of the year. I just bought 3 Sigma lens (85mm F1.4, 24-70mm, 100-400mm) for my new A7IV so I did some major savings and I like the 7 years warranty vs 1, and much better and closer customer service if I need repair or anything. The Samyang would need to be much less to be worth it as it's definitely not a better lens.
As always, great review! May I please suggest two camera/lens tests that I'd love to see on your charts: First the Ricoh GRIII or GRIIIx with its built in lens, and second would be the iPhone 14 Pro (since it allows to shoot in RAW without added sharpening). I would be very curious just to see how they stack up.
Very good lens, but not a great lens like the 85mm 1.4, or any of the other DG DN Art lenses. I expected less CA, no distortion, and a slightly lower price. I think $700 for this lens is more reasonable.
I think that there is a two-tier ART strategy for these moderate classic angles -- there's a 35mmF1.2 which took the pressure off the 35mmF1.4 for instance.
I don't get how this lens came out after the 85mm F1.4 version, with a supposely improved AF system with a "Linear Motor" instead of "Stepping Motor" they say, so why is it the same price of the 85mm but worse then?!
I've seen well over 100 of your videos (and love them), but I think this one is a bit of an outlier. I think you've gone a little easier on this lens than you have on others. Given the cost and the so-so center + corner image quality at f/1.4, I expected it ~might~ come recommended, but certainly not ~highly~ recommended. In any case, thank you for all your work!
Hi Chris, I currently have a Nikon D5600 and the 18-55mm and a 70-200mm f4 for my aviation photography. I am unsure what to do if to upgrade to a better more capable camera or get a 24-120mm. My budget is tight for both a new camera and small versatile lens.
Do you know if there's a 50mm Sony full frame lens (or somewhere between 45 and 55) that doesn't focus breathe? It looks like all of them suffer from it.
@@anadichakraborty273 if so, it is a great 50mm, I own it, however I'd rather have the 85mm. And honestly it's on par with every other Brand 50mm 1.8. $600 new though when this 1.4 is $850, I might sell mine soon! Lol
Comparing to my Canon F1 50 mm lens it is way to big and bulky and really, how much do you really need a 50mm lens vs 85mm for portrait users or 35mm for those who do landscape or maybe the best compromise is the 18-50mm APC lens, just too bad it isn't for full frame in the same size.
I dont think CA correction is possible for video in real time. Software wise I cant imagine 30 fps being processed in a way that'd work for that. For still photos detecting edges and color variance makes sense, but with motion blur and constantly changing colors in a dynamic video, seems impossible.
@@adamg.manning6088 Nikon is opening mount, Sony has opened mount... then I think that Canon will finally be forced to open the mount.... otherwise people will leave RF. It's the matter to make it profitable for Canon and 3rd party manufacturers.
I really hope this heavy pincushion distortion isn't the new path Sigma plan on taking with their primes. I don't much care if it _can_ be corrected in post, I don't want to _have_ to because of how noticeable it is.
It is their path - they optimise for everything that can't be corrected in post, and fix the distortion in camera and jpeg, and (automatic) in for RAW in post... It's why the lenses can be so much smaller with even higher quality. Don't like it, buy the old big heavy lenses.
@@TheKimNeeper But then that doesn't explain why other companies can make much smaller lenses, with similar performance or better. For example Sony's 50mm F1.4, and even Samyang has a 50mm that is as sharp as Sigma, and again, much smaller with less distortion. We're giving Sigma too much credit. No lens before them was as big and bulky as their old art lenses. They invented the huge bulk style, so they shouldnt get credit and leeway when scaling back down to traditional size.
A great and interesting video as always, thank you. I always wonder what I "loose" if I use full frame lenses in apsc cameras. Appart from getting a crop, is there an actual downside to this mix? I always wonder this and I struggle to find a definite answer.
Well main downsides will be size and weight vs native APSC lenses. Also, if you're into interesting lens characteristics, these are usually most prominent in the corners of lenses, which won't really be visible on a sensor smaller than what the lens was designed for
The downside will only occur if you use lower quality lenses. Apsc sensors are much denser in resolution, (26mp = 61mp FF) so you would need extremely sharp lenses. Budget FF options often aren’t made to render such sensors. Sigma and Tamron should be fine I think. Think about it this way, you are “zooming” into what the lens resolves, so the flaws or lack of resolution will be more apparent.
Love your content! Been watching it for years! Could you do a comparison of this lens and the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art? They are a similar price and focal length. The 40mm was my favorite lens on canon. I've switch to Sony recently and wondering which prime to get and if this is better the the beautiful behemoth 40mm!
from what I've seen, the quality on the 40mm is notably better. I've seen a video by an Asian channel (not in english) that compared the old 50mm to the 40mm, and the 40mm destroyed it in chromatic abboration. And now, Ive seen some videos compare the old 50 to the new 50, and there is no improvement in CA, if anything it's slightly worse now. The size and AF are much better, but it seems clear to me that the 40 has a unique lane still. I own it as well, and it's a struggle to decide too since the 50 is so much smaller.
Clearly not available for Canon RF due to closed system. Is there any reason why its not available for Nikon?. This is not relevant to me as I shoot Canon and continue to wait for the system to open up!!
I don't think that will happen any time soon. Nikon has forbidden third party lens manufacturers to produce lenses for the Z mount that would compete with their own Z lenses. So no high quality f2.8 zooms and f1 8, f1.4 or f1.2 primes any time soon. They practically said if you want high quality zooms and primes, the Z lenses are your only options, excluding the F mount options. So we won't be seeing any bright aperture sigma Z lenses any time soon, sadly. But it is still better than canon do. We can still see those laowa ultra macro lenses and ultra wide lenses, I hope.
The problem is... That won't happen. Nikon won't allow any lens that compete against their native lens. For example if Nikon makes a 50mm f1.4 lens, other brands won't able to make the same spec lens.
@@hoatd1993 I don't think they need a f1.4 lens to not allow sigma to make this lens for the Z mount. A 50mm f1.4 art would obviously compete with the nikon 50mm f1.8 Z, both in price and in specifications. So I wouldn't see anybody buy a nikon f1.8 lens, if they can get the sigma f1.4 art for about the same price. The same story for the 85 f1.4.
@@andreigheorghe2709 Z50mm 1.8 performance is way above this new one from Sigma. As a pro, I've been able to try differences in low light condition between Sigma Art 50 1.4 and Z50mm 1.8. To get detail close (but not much) the Z at 1.8, the Sigma needs to close up to F5.6. Don't see much difference with new one, and as a landscape photographer, that focus breathing is too much
Dunno if this is worth replacing the Zeiss. They fast af and weather seeking is nice. But pretty sure the Zeiss is still sharper. I wonder how they compare in size
Decent? Lol this is more than decent. I bought my first ever prime for my Nikon Z, a 1.8, and Honestly I only use 1.8 in low light. Otherwise I'm always shooting 2.8+. That being said a 1.4 at $850, that's nice. I don't really enjoy 50mm shots. I'd prefer 85mm+ but at the time I could only afford the Z 50mm. Honestly I would keep the 24-70mm, unless you do a lot of low light, or magazine photos where the 1.4 is eyelash only 😂 I would honestly dish out my 50mm and grab a Zoom 2.8. Just more versatile imo
An excellent review as ever. I like what I hear and see about this lens but it is certainly expensive. On balance my Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 is much smaller, lighter, paid for and I'm well satisfied with its outputs.
Honestly, it’s big and heavy, has quite high distortion, fringing, doesn’t really focus close and it’s not sharp when it does. For video users it breathes a lot. I’m not really seeing the value proposition, compared to other good options around that focal length. I expected more.
Which lens then would you suggest for Sony as all I can see otherwise is the (Samyang 50mm F1.4) which seems to be inferior, or the super cheap (Sony FE 50mm F1.8) :/
@@PanzerIV88 well, I already have the 55 f1.8 which is excellent, and the Voigtlander 40 f1.2, which has some flaws - but is very interesting and creative. Both are much cheaper than this.
The fact that Chris tested AF on an a7 IV, resolution on an a7r III, and APS-C on an a5100 shows how much he cares, thank you Chris, but why not just trade these in for an a7r IV or V, you'll get everything for the price of one.
A7R4 or 5 are overkill for many lenses and users, plus they have worse high ISO perfotmance. I am glad Chris continues to test the lenses on the 42MP A7R3.
Canon must be deranged if they think excluding Sigma from their platform is a good business decision, Tamron too. Dadcam'ers who think they'll ever have full frame aspirations won't do 5 min of research without settling on Sony.
This is sadly continuing the trend of otherwise excellent lenses having a ton of distortion when corrections are turned off. Then again since it also is happening to most first-party lenses these days as well, I guess we can't be picky about that anymore. One day when Canon lets 3rd party manufacturers use the RF mount then I'll be on a bit of a lens shopping spree. Or at least an imaginary lens shopping spree 🤣
I'm realizing I might just not be a Sigma person. Their desire to not correct distortion, vignette, or CA very much because they assume you'll do it in post really just bugs me. It always leads to extra noise that I just can't stand.
What's the issue with this? I mean EVERYONE shoots Raw so you're gonna import it in Adobe ANYWAY and then automaticaly have these flaws correctly instantly before you export even if you don't do any further post-process. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see the issue there.
@@PanzerIV88 Well, I know everyone goes on and on about how good modern sensors are in low-light, but honestly, for my work, I haven't necessarily found that to be true. I get serious chroma noise that I can't get rid of as early as ISO 800 on my Sony A7IV. So if I'm shooting wide open at ISO 1600, and I accidentally underexpose by 0.5 stops, by the time I correct exposure, vignette, and distortion, I can end up with photos that are almost unusably noisy. The same thing happened with the Sony 24mm 2.8 lens that I bought a few months ago, and I had to sell it. There was just SO MUCH auto-correcting happening that I was getting really low quality photos by ISO 800. That's all ignoring CA, which is only kind of fixable, and can become a genuine pain in the neck to remove when the bride's lipstick is close to the color of the magenta fringing. So, for the general population, I suppose these issues might be knit-picky, but they make an incredible amount of difference for me when I'm shooting in a huge range of scenarios, and I spend every waking hour editing photos. Lenses that make better images and save me time and hassle are very preferable.
Oh crap, I've got the same same camera! Is that mostly the fault of the lens or that same exact lens could be better with no "chroma noise starting at ISO 800" if I had a different camera like the Canon R6 I just sold? I didn't know that these auto corrections in Adobe would reduce the quality of the image, then I wonder if it's only visible for a trained eye like us photographers while also using a calibrated 4K monitor, and 95% of the population would never notice or look at the picture at 100% full resolution. So you'd say the Sony A7IV is better when lowering a overexposed picture than the opposite, or is it just as bad? I've heard in the past that it was easier on most cams to recover the highlights rather than shadows, so to expose for the highlights in priority if you must make a choice.
@@PanzerIV88 I think it's an issue for video shooters. I'm not entirely sure if the camera corrects Chromatic Aberrations internally when the corrections are On.
you claim to be independent, but after this review, I do not need to handle this lens to know its proper garbage and you are part of the marketing machinery.
Man, when I start searching for a lens review, if I can't find your video, no matter which lens for Sony it is, I start to feel anxiety... I mean, I watch a lot of other reviews too, but your format is the benchmark for all out there!
Hi, Christopher Frost! Thank you for always posting good lens reviews. I always get a lot of help with my purchases.
I'm a crew member who boarded PKM-299 on a Korean naval warship in the center left of 4:25 of the video. It's a great pleasure to see a ship that was on board 9 years ago in today's review. Especially, it's nice to see Yokjido Island after a long time. Is there a site where the original photo was uploaded? I want to see a bigger picture.😃
I sold all of my full frame gear and am now 100% Fujifilm and am loving it. I have no reason to watch these full frame e-mount reviews Chris, but I wanted to share that I watch these reviews on your channel to keep up with what’s happening in the world of photography. I know exactly what I am going to get with all of your videos, and that consistency really makes a difference for those looking for back-to-back details on the sheer number of lenses there are to choose from. Thanks for your good work mate. Keep at it!
what's your fuji setup?
@@WetDoggo XT5 (x2 bodies) 18-55mm, 18mm f1.4, 33mm f1.4, and 56mm f1.2 for my commercial. For me, X-Pro3 with the Voigtländer 21mm f1.4, 28mm f2, 35mm f1.5, and 50mm f1.5. All manual focus and I am absolutely loving it! ✌️
The funny thing is that my XF glass is better in terms of low CA and almost no existing fringing
did you feel a significant different using apsc fuji sensor vs sony full frame? in low light condition, such dark room in restaurant or party and night street.
I have all the lenses that you mentioned in addition I also have the 16-55, 90mm, 50-140 etc, their pro glass is top notch but their AF is probably the worst of any system. I didn't realize this until I started shooting with my new body and new glass. The thing overheated in 81 degree weather shooting photos. In addition, I got several AF confirmations that my subject was in focus but when I went to check the image it was way out of focus. The bad AF stories are true and I guess I'll have to wait for the next model because I cannot trust Fuji cameras to get the shot.
Love your test videos but the "moderate" focus breathing was quite an understatement
I'm surprised it wasn't smaller and lighter. Not sure if worth swapping out the old sigma 50mm 1.4
Shows equal progress or more so compared to the 35/1.4 DG DN vs the 35/1.4 HSM in terms of size and weight. Not sure what you were expecting there. Anyway, better AF and less purple fringing seem to be good reasons : )
@@Vantrakter What he was expecting was a smaller lens. I hear what you're saying, but your comment comes off as condescending. Just because Sigma made a minor upgrade in the past, doesnt mean we should expect and accept minor upgrades that arent worth it to many, in the future.
I-series accommodates those seeking smaller lenses.
The 65mmF2 being very sharp, the 45mmF2.8 being very compact and light for an all-metal FF lens at 215g.
No doubt there will be a 50mmF2 I-series eventually, and probably a more hulking 50mmF1.2 ART-series for the best-at-any-size photographers.
The old 50mm may be better for some videographers since it has low-distortion and mechanically-coupled focus (though newer DNs like this should have good linear emulation with choice of rotation scale by now - on L-mount cameras.)
Samyang 50 1.4 ii is the answer.
Why these new lenses are so big ???? the cameras go smaller and lenses bigger… if it s just to justify the regular increase of price it s just non sense.
Thanks for the review! I was surprised by the complain about the lense’s weight and size… do You know any f1.4 50mm AF lens for SONY E-Mount which is noticeably lighter and smaller? I have the Zeiss and it is also large and relatively heavy… the Samyang is also very similar. Maybe the new Sony f/1.2? I know that MF lenses are smaller and lighter, but usually exhibit more optical flaws than the larger lenses, which are bulky because of optical parts that correct such flaws.
"You can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something---your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life." ---Steve Jobs
Not bad lens, but honestly with all that hype, I am not sure if that lens is worth it over the cheaper and smaller Samyang 50mm f1.4
I sold the older 50mm a few weeks ago so nice timing! Not going to buy this one but at least I got more money before the price dropped.
Thanks for all of your videos Chris.
Thanks for pointing out that in some regions price already includes VAT! Makes it more useful to compare prices.
I so want the RF version😢😢😢 unfair!!
The rf 50 1.2 is extremely good but chunky and pricey. I can afford it, but i can say that because i always ask myself „do i WANT to afford it“ so ill stick with the 50 1.8 for now
You have spoken my mind. Ya, I felt so unfair too. While I can also afford the Canon RF 50 f1.2 the size and weight is a real turn off. I'm in the never ending quest to find the best 50mm among the old EF mount versions (both Sigma and Canon version) but none are giving me satisfactory results either in weight or IQ. So, like you I will have to settle for 50 1.8 for now. Good thing 50mm is not a FL I used as much as the 85mm. As for the 85mm f1.4, I've managed to secure a copy of the Samyang RF mount from ebay recently. Can't wait for it to arrive.
Bout time! Was waiting 2 years to get my hands on this. 🥳
Edit: After seeing the review I'm a bit disappointed by the IQ at f/1.4 as the other Sigma DG DN lenses are killers right from widest aperture.
For me the Samyang 50 1.4 II, having maybe slightly inferior build quality, and perhaps image quality, but being cheaper, lighter and smaller makes a better option.
@@AAJJ007 Hmm I don't know, the Samyang is only 200$CAD less in Canada, at regular price and the Sigma tends to be always about 250-300$CAD on sale around the end of the year. I just bought 3 Sigma lens (85mm F1.4, 24-70mm, 100-400mm) for my new A7IV so I did some major savings and I like the 7 years warranty vs 1, and much better and closer customer service if I need repair or anything. The Samyang would need to be much less to be worth it as it's definitely not a better lens.
@@AAJJ007 Mine needed an update and then it was great. Unfortunately does require buying an update dock. I bought it 2nd hand, very doable then.
As always, great review! May I please suggest two camera/lens tests that I'd love to see on your charts: First the Ricoh GRIII or GRIIIx with its built in lens, and second would be the iPhone 14 Pro (since it allows to shoot in RAW without added sharpening). I would be very curious just to see how they stack up.
James Popsys viwer?
Are you able to compare two sigma lens. (new) 50mm art f1.4 VS 56mm f1.4
Very good lens, but not a great lens like the 85mm 1.4, or any of the other DG DN Art lenses.
I expected less CA, no distortion, and a slightly lower price. I think $700 for this lens is more reasonable.
I think that there is a two-tier ART strategy for these moderate classic angles -- there's a 35mmF1.2 which took the pressure off the 35mmF1.4 for instance.
I don't get how this lens came out after the 85mm F1.4 version, with a supposely improved AF system with a "Linear Motor" instead of "Stepping Motor" they say, so why is it the same price of the 85mm but worse then?!
I've seen well over 100 of your videos (and love them), but I think this one is a bit of an outlier. I think you've gone a little easier on this lens than you have on others. Given the cost and the so-so center + corner image quality at f/1.4, I expected it ~might~ come recommended, but certainly not ~highly~ recommended. In any case, thank you for all your work!
The center and corner image quality is out of this world at f/1.4...even better than their original 50mm Art lens...
Hi Christopher, is Sigma full time manual lens? I couldn't find it anywhere.
Hi Chris, I currently have a Nikon D5600 and the 18-55mm and a 70-200mm f4 for my aviation photography. I am unsure what to do if to upgrade to a better more capable camera or get a 24-120mm. My budget is tight for both a new camera and small versatile lens.
Do you know if there's a 50mm Sony full frame lens (or somewhere between 45 and 55) that doesn't focus breathe? It looks like all of them suffer from it.
Hi, can you review the Laowa 14mm f/4 Zero-D DSLR ?
Hey, great video After I saw these lens, I think buy zeiss 55mm f 1.8 U$$ 730! What do you think of it, a bad or good idea ?
Brilliant review as always. Thanks!
Hey Chris, I genuinely request to make a video on.. 50mm 1.4GM vs Zeiss 55mm 1.8 .
Every new 50mm shows how awesome Z50mm 1.8 and 1.2 are, more the 1.8. Thanks Chris for your time
@@daniellehotsky1776 Nikon Z50mm 1.8S
@@daniellehotsky1776 Ziess? But that's a 1.4 right?
I'm assuming the Nikkor Z 50mm f/1.8 S is being talked about.
@@anadichakraborty273 if so, it is a great 50mm, I own it, however I'd rather have the 85mm. And honestly it's on par with every other Brand 50mm 1.8. $600 new though when this 1.4 is $850, I might sell mine soon! Lol
Comparing to my Canon F1 50 mm lens it is way to big and bulky and really, how much do you really need a 50mm lens vs 85mm for portrait users or 35mm for those who do landscape or maybe the best compromise is the 18-50mm APC lens, just too bad it isn't for full frame in the same size.
Hi Chris... Do you think that at any time in the future you will also cover exclusive L mount lenses? Stuff by Lumix and Leica primarily. Thanks.
I wonder whether the camera corrects Chromatic Aberrations when shooting video. The lens has some CA issues that make me doubt getting it so far.
I dont think CA correction is possible for video in real time. Software wise I cant imagine 30 fps being processed in a way that'd work for that. For still photos detecting edges and color variance makes sense, but with motion blur and constantly changing colors in a dynamic video, seems impossible.
I just bought a copy. Just waiting to arrive
Whoa…Sigma made my decision more difficult, but I’m going to continue to save up for the Sony 50mm f/1.2 - that lens is ridiculously amazing.
that's quite an effort
@@fuadsyawal7461 😊
Great test... great lens... but I want it on RF mount 😢
Lol.
You’ll never get anything for RF.
@@adamg.manning6088 Hope that at least Nikon is going to open up the mount...
@@benni1015
I think Tamron are finally dropping some Z Mount.
@@adamg.manning6088 Nikon is opening mount, Sony has opened mount... then I think that Canon will finally be forced to open the mount.... otherwise people will leave RF. It's the matter to make it profitable for Canon and 3rd party manufacturers.
@@petercarpowitz7007
They’ll do it when it’s too late.
People will have already bought into other systems. I have.
Boy! Chris just doesn't create enough content for me!
does it have mount for rear filter?
best reviews on you tube! peace be with you
I really hope this heavy pincushion distortion isn't the new path Sigma plan on taking with their primes. I don't much care if it _can_ be corrected in post, I don't want to _have_ to because of how noticeable it is.
It is their path - they optimise for everything that can't be corrected in post, and fix the distortion in camera and jpeg, and (automatic) in for RAW in post... It's why the lenses can be so much smaller with even higher quality. Don't like it, buy the old big heavy lenses.
@@TheKimNeeper But then that doesn't explain why other companies can make much smaller lenses, with similar performance or better. For example Sony's 50mm F1.4, and even Samyang has a 50mm that is as sharp as Sigma, and again, much smaller with less distortion. We're giving Sigma too much credit. No lens before them was as big and bulky as their old art lenses. They invented the huge bulk style, so they shouldnt get credit and leeway when scaling back down to traditional size.
I agree. Plus, you lose sharpness when it's corrected.
A great and interesting video as always, thank you. I always wonder what I "loose" if I use full frame lenses in apsc cameras. Appart from getting a crop, is there an actual downside to this mix? I always wonder this and I struggle to find a definite answer.
Well main downsides will be size and weight vs native APSC lenses. Also, if you're into interesting lens characteristics, these are usually most prominent in the corners of lenses, which won't really be visible on a sensor smaller than what the lens was designed for
The downside will only occur if you use lower quality lenses. Apsc sensors are much denser in resolution, (26mp = 61mp FF) so you would need extremely sharp lenses. Budget FF options often aren’t made to render such sensors. Sigma and Tamron should be fine I think. Think about it this way, you are “zooming” into what the lens resolves, so the flaws or lack of resolution will be more apparent.
I have finished the sigma stream and I have come directly here jajajaj thx for all from ibiza
The joke was that you reviewed an 85mm lens a few days before Sigma launched their 85mm DG DN Chris 😛.
Love your content! Been watching it for years! Could you do a comparison of this lens and the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art? They are a similar price and focal length. The 40mm was my favorite lens on canon. I've switch to Sony recently and wondering which prime to get and if this is better the the beautiful behemoth 40mm!
from what I've seen, the quality on the 40mm is notably better. I've seen a video by an Asian channel (not in english) that compared the old 50mm to the 40mm, and the 40mm destroyed it in chromatic abboration. And now, Ive seen some videos compare the old 50 to the new 50, and there is no improvement in CA, if anything it's slightly worse now. The size and AF are much better, but it seems clear to me that the 40 has a unique lane still. I own it as well, and it's a struggle to decide too since the 50 is so much smaller.
Clearly not available for Canon RF due to closed system. Is there any reason why its not available for Nikon?. This is not relevant to me as I shoot Canon and continue to wait for the system to open up!!
thanks Mr. Christopher
Very good review 👍
congrats to the camera-upgrade. ;)
Wonder how it stack up against Sony 50mm f1.2?
Not in the same league
good value for money, but still gets surpassed by GM.(wandering whether the review for nikkor 85 1.2 will be coming soon)
It probably boils simply down to the glass in use, and also why Sigma can get cheaper.
Im exited to see these Sigma DG DN Art Lenses on Nikon Z mount.
I don't think that will happen any time soon. Nikon has forbidden third party lens manufacturers to produce lenses for the Z mount that would compete with their own Z lenses. So no high quality f2.8 zooms and f1 8, f1.4 or f1.2 primes any time soon. They practically said if you want high quality zooms and primes, the Z lenses are your only options, excluding the F mount options. So we won't be seeing any bright aperture sigma Z lenses any time soon, sadly. But it is still better than canon do. We can still see those laowa ultra macro lenses and ultra wide lenses, I hope.
The problem is... That won't happen. Nikon won't allow any lens that compete against their native lens. For example if Nikon makes a 50mm f1.4 lens, other brands won't able to make the same spec lens.
@@hoatd1993 I don't think they need a f1.4 lens to not allow sigma to make this lens for the Z mount. A 50mm f1.4 art would obviously compete with the nikon 50mm f1.8 Z, both in price and in specifications. So I wouldn't see anybody buy a nikon f1.8 lens, if they can get the sigma f1.4 art for about the same price. The same story for the 85 f1.4.
@@andreigheorghe2709 Z50mm 1.8 performance is way above this new one from Sigma. As a pro, I've been able to try differences in low light condition between Sigma Art 50 1.4 and Z50mm 1.8. To get detail close (but not much) the Z at 1.8, the Sigma needs to close up to F5.6. Don't see much difference with new one, and as a landscape photographer, that focus breathing is too much
@@hoatd1993 Im still hoping though.
amazing glass
Dunno if this is worth replacing the Zeiss. They fast af and weather seeking is nice. But pretty sure the Zeiss is still sharper. I wonder how they compare in size
They leaked the price for the Sony 50 1.4 and it’s $1500… yea I’ll stick with this one
thank you love you from nepal ❤
I’ve been waiting for a decent 50mm that is affordable. This will be a good reason to get rid of my sigma 24-70 art.
Decent? Lol this is more than decent.
I bought my first ever prime for my Nikon Z, a 1.8, and Honestly I only use 1.8 in low light. Otherwise I'm always shooting 2.8+. That being said a 1.4 at $850, that's nice. I don't really enjoy 50mm shots. I'd prefer 85mm+ but at the time I could only afford the Z 50mm.
Honestly I would keep the 24-70mm, unless you do a lot of low light, or magazine photos where the 1.4 is eyelash only 😂
I would honestly dish out my 50mm and grab a Zoom 2.8. Just more versatile imo
I got rid of my Sigma 50mm 1.4 because I bought the Sigma 24-70 art lol. 50mm focal range kinda sucks
An excellent review as ever. I like what I hear and see about this lens but it is certainly expensive. On balance my Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 is much smaller, lighter, paid for and I'm well satisfied with its outputs.
Honestly, it’s big and heavy, has quite high distortion, fringing, doesn’t really focus close and it’s not sharp when it does. For video users it breathes a lot.
I’m not really seeing the value proposition, compared to other good options around that focal length. I expected more.
Which lens then would you suggest for Sony as all I can see otherwise is the (Samyang 50mm F1.4) which seems to be inferior, or the super cheap (Sony FE 50mm F1.8) :/
@@PanzerIV88 well, I already have the 55 f1.8 which is excellent, and the Voigtlander 40 f1.2, which has some flaws - but is very interesting and creative. Both are much cheaper than this.
The fact that Chris tested AF on an a7 IV, resolution on an a7r III, and APS-C on an a5100 shows how much he cares, thank you Chris, but why not just trade these in for an a7r IV or V, you'll get everything for the price of one.
A7R4 or 5 are overkill for many lenses and users, plus they have worse high ISO perfotmance. I am glad Chris continues to test the lenses on the 42MP A7R3.
always warm sigma
great sharing 😍😍
are you a guy speak native english? is this what you mean moderate breathing?
3:12 Christ new Camera: Sony A7R Mark v(61 MP)
The camera is A7 iv?
You sure meant "Christ" ? :)
At least nobody will be able to say its too small lol.
Sorry Christopher, Jordan and Chris just pipped you to the post by about a second.
Canon must be deranged if they think excluding Sigma from their platform is a good business decision, Tamron too. Dadcam'ers who think they'll ever have full frame aspirations won't do 5 min of research without settling on Sony.
Can Beat Sony?
It's small compared to the 50 1.2's
The SONY 50mm 1.2 GM is a very compact masterpiece, probably comparable in size to this SIGMA.
Please review the new z 26mm pancake! :)
This is sadly continuing the trend of otherwise excellent lenses having a ton of distortion when corrections are turned off. Then again since it also is happening to most first-party lenses these days as well, I guess we can't be picky about that anymore.
One day when Canon lets 3rd party manufacturers use the RF mount then I'll be on a bit of a lens shopping spree. Or at least an imaginary lens shopping spree 🤣
I'm realizing I might just not be a Sigma person. Their desire to not correct distortion, vignette, or CA very much because they assume you'll do it in post really just bugs me. It always leads to extra noise that I just can't stand.
What's the issue with this? I mean EVERYONE shoots Raw so you're gonna import it in Adobe ANYWAY and then automaticaly have these flaws correctly instantly before you export even if you don't do any further post-process. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see the issue there.
@@PanzerIV88 Well, I know everyone goes on and on about how good modern sensors are in low-light, but honestly, for my work, I haven't necessarily found that to be true. I get serious chroma noise that I can't get rid of as early as ISO 800 on my Sony A7IV.
So if I'm shooting wide open at ISO 1600, and I accidentally underexpose by 0.5 stops, by the time I correct exposure, vignette, and distortion, I can end up with photos that are almost unusably noisy. The same thing happened with the Sony 24mm 2.8 lens that I bought a few months ago, and I had to sell it. There was just SO MUCH auto-correcting happening that I was getting really low quality photos by ISO 800.
That's all ignoring CA, which is only kind of fixable, and can become a genuine pain in the neck to remove when the bride's lipstick is close to the color of the magenta fringing.
So, for the general population, I suppose these issues might be knit-picky, but they make an incredible amount of difference for me when I'm shooting in a huge range of scenarios, and I spend every waking hour editing photos. Lenses that make better images and save me time and hassle are very preferable.
Oh crap, I've got the same same camera! Is that mostly the fault of the lens or that same exact lens could be better with no "chroma noise starting at ISO 800" if I had a different camera like the Canon R6 I just sold?
I didn't know that these auto corrections in Adobe would reduce the quality of the image, then I wonder if it's only visible for a trained eye like us photographers while also using a calibrated 4K monitor, and 95% of the population would never notice or look at the picture at 100% full resolution.
So you'd say the Sony A7IV is better when lowering a overexposed picture than the opposite, or is it just as bad? I've heard in the past that it was easier on most cams to recover the highlights rather than shadows, so to expose for the highlights in priority if you must make a choice.
@@PanzerIV88 I think it's an issue for video shooters. I'm not entirely sure if the camera corrects Chromatic Aberrations internally when the corrections are On.
Im losing hope on canon. We need 3rd party lenses💔
Imo this is purely photo only lens. No fb correction, no build in fb correction, meh
The pincushion distortion on all the Sigma DG DN lenses are atrocious.
850$ for this? ridiculous.
Wdym ridiculous
stop being poor😂
Actually a really good price.
Way too much LOCA
you claim to be independent, but after this review, I do not need to handle this lens to know its proper garbage and you are part of the marketing machinery.
Care to explain why?