simga was just 339 the other day on adorama! just received it in the mail and i was damn impressed with the sharpness, WELL worth even double the price
I would go with the sigma 56, aside from sharpness, the extra reach gives a bit more compression giving it that 85mm FF look, I probably wouldnt use it much for video but if i did i would use a gimbal, great comparison btw
It's nice when some youtubers care about APS-C too, and not only full frame. I sold my Sony 50 1,8 last year and bought the Sigma 56 1,4. But 99% of my pictures are taken with zooms.
I just bought my zoom lens sigma 28-70mm f2.8, and I had a 50mm on my DSLR which I adored. so I was thinking of buying the sigma 50mm Art but your comment made me hesitate now XD, are the zooms as good for portraits as the primes? is there a reason why you use zoom more than prime?
@@Ran.94 I use zooms because they are more versatile and because I seldom need bigger aperture that 2.8. F1.4 primes are better for portraits. I shoot landscape and birds. With a 600 mm you get shallow depth of field even at f6.3.
Got my Sony 50mm F1.8 used for $212 a couple of years back. Been ever so happy with it. No complaints, and therefore no need to contemplate upgrading for to make my discontinued A6300 even better :)
I know it's in a completely different price bracket, but it would be interesting to see how much 'better' the Sony 55mm f1.8 is compared to the Sigma. Some people might save a ton of money choosing the Sigma over the Sony. What is your opinion on such a comparison?
I wish the Sigma 56 has Image stabilization because I really love this lens and would like to have it. But if you don't compare the Sony directly with the Sigma, it's really not bad. Even because of the lower price and the oss which I will need for my Sony A6300 its really worth the price. Too that the better AF is good to have when you wanna do some sports with this lens.
At first my dream 2 lenses for my apsc body is sigma 16mm f1.4 and sigma 56mm f1.4 but later I ended up to get sigma 16mm f1.4 and a Sony 50mm f1.8 OSS. On the 50mm up range, OSS is such a blessing 🙏
16mm 1.4 is kinda a must have for many sony crop users lol. I have sigma 16 and sony 35, and ordered sigma 56 - I am not sure whether I’ll stick with 35mm or move on to 56.
@@copperstatestudiosPhxAZ you mean the FF 50mm f1.8? Im still haven decide to get the 50mm f1.8 oss or sigma 56mm f1.4 , planning to decide and get it by next week
@@JeremyCWW I got the sigma 56mm 1.4 its amazing for my A6400. Tons of reviews on TH-cam man, you'll like it. Shop the price around, got mine at Focus camera it was cheaper then Amazon
The warping is very noticeable in hallways, on the sigma. Annoying to correct all the time. Sony has unnoticeable warping, if any at all. Shooting on apsc. Needs a lens correction profile. Definitely sharper, almost too sharp.
Thank you for including the A6600 sample! Now I know it'll be a perfect pair with myA6600 because of the IBIS. Oh, and the Sigma 56mm is weatherproof, neat!
I got Sony 85mm f1.8 so I think it’s super sharp so I am good with that photography and for videos got Sony 50mm oss one! I think it’s over all good deal both used ones from Best Buy :)
I think Sony have terrible quality control on some of their lenses. Christopher Frost got a really good copy of the 50mm f1.8, so if you watch his review, you might think that the Sony is about on par with the Sigma but then, I've seen other review/comparison video (such as your) where the 50mm is noticeably worse than the Sigma.
Great review. I have the Sony (a very useful lens and great value) and finally acquired the Sigma a week ago on a super-sale. I didn't buy it so much to replace the Sony as much as to be a more versatile lens for low light event and sports shooting like stage and gymnasiums or practice fields over the newish Samyang 75 1.8 for full frame that I was seriously considering for my a6500. Reviews show the Samyang isn't too sharp in the corners when used on aps-c until 5.6. So it was important to me that the lens be very sharp at 1.4 to keep the ISO down and also it needed to be very sharp in the corners for like a group of singers on dim-ish stage with everybody sharp. Furthermore that super sharpness isn't just for pixel peeping; it means the 56 can easily be cropped to the equivalent of the 75 for more reach when needed.
Hello guys, i purchased my first dream DSLR Sony a6400. I am thinking to buy Sigma 56 1.4? Some reviewer says that this lens is not good without tripod or gimble. ? can Anyone clear it?. Can I capture sharp photos with Sigma 56 1.4 without tripod or gimble?
Have you looked at the Tamron 70-180? It doesn’t get to 200, but it’s an F2.8 lens. A cheap apsc option is the Sony 55-250. Quality isn’t great, but if your on a budget it’s a cheaper option
How did you know? I have had the 50mm SEL for several years and it has gotten me wonderful results and it is doing great on the A6400. Ever since the Sigma came out I have been wondering if it was worth it. 50mm versus 56mm, 1.8 versus 1.4, OSS Versus not.
You managed to make me laugh by explaining that a lens designed for APS-c cameras is not good for use on an FF sensor camera (as if that is normal to do, but in this case it is not a good solution). OK.
The Sigma has an unreasonable amount of distortion and it's not corrected by the body. Shooting anything with straight lines is very obvious. The bokeh is nice but the 56 starts to make some people's head shape look overly 'fat' and flat. For the price, weight and lack of distortion, the Sony is the winner.
You can typically get these lenses 2nd hand $180-200 for the sony 50mm and $360 for the sigma 56mm. I would say the price difference is almost double.
simga was just 339 the other day on adorama! just received it in the mail and i was damn impressed with the sharpness, WELL worth even double the price
I just got the Sigma new for 339 from adorama Deal of the Day like Stan! BUT, I bought the Sony new on sale for $249 at Best Buy four years ago.
@@markfleming9253 Hi Mark! If you could go back would you still buy the Sony 50mm, over the Sigma 56mm?
I would go with the sigma 56, aside from sharpness, the extra reach gives a bit more compression giving it that 85mm FF look, I probably wouldnt use it much for video but if i did i would use a gimbal, great comparison btw
Seems like you've found your rythym with making videos again dude 👏🏿👏🏿
Trying to
It's nice when some youtubers care about APS-C too, and not only full frame. I sold my Sony 50 1,8 last year and bought the Sigma 56 1,4. But 99% of my pictures are taken with zooms.
I just bought my zoom lens sigma 28-70mm f2.8, and I had a 50mm on my DSLR which I adored. so I was thinking of buying the sigma 50mm Art but your comment made me hesitate now XD, are the zooms as good for portraits as the primes? is there a reason why you use zoom more than prime?
@@Ran.94 I use zooms because they are more versatile and because I seldom need bigger aperture that 2.8.
F1.4 primes are better for portraits. I shoot landscape and birds. With a 600 mm you get shallow depth of field even at f6.3.
Got my Sony 50mm F1.8 used for $212 a couple of years back. Been ever so happy with it. No complaints, and therefore no need to contemplate upgrading for to make my discontinued A6300 even better :)
The Sigma all day for me! Gives a FF equivalent of 85 with a F2 ish....that's the same look as many FF 85mm lenses which cost more. (ie new RF 85 F2)
I know it's in a completely different price bracket, but it would be interesting to see how much 'better' the Sony 55mm f1.8 is compared to the Sigma. Some people might save a ton of money choosing the Sigma over the Sony. What is your opinion on such a comparison?
I wish the Sigma 56 has Image stabilization because I really love this lens and would like to have it. But if you don't compare the Sony directly with the Sigma, it's really not bad. Even because of the lower price and the oss which I will need for my Sony A6300 its really worth the price. Too that the better AF is good to have when you wanna do some sports with this lens.
At first my dream 2 lenses for my apsc body is sigma 16mm f1.4 and sigma 56mm f1.4 but later I ended up to get sigma 16mm f1.4 and a Sony 50mm f1.8 OSS. On the 50mm up range, OSS is such a blessing 🙏
Just the same!
Shall I go for Sony or sigma, still confused.
@@diwakarkumargupta1550 if you have ibis go to sigma
16mm 1.4 is kinda a must have for many sony crop users lol. I have sigma 16 and sony 35, and ordered sigma 56 - I am not sure whether I’ll stick with 35mm or move on to 56.
Just got it 2 weeks ago, the 56 1.4 and I like it. Picked it up on ebay for 265 used. Like it a lot
I actually have both of them, even the Sony's 35mm and Sigma's 30mm.
They are all good & I just cant pick one of them.
Was the "Stretching" of the Sigma because "In-Camera Correction" was turned on?
Or was it actual pincushion of the lens?
Stuck between these 2 lens both have own advantages,arhh, so hard to choose , I got the sigma 16mm f1.4, really love it
I got the sony non OSS version, saved 200.
@@copperstatestudiosPhxAZ you mean the FF 50mm f1.8? Im still haven decide to get the 50mm f1.8 oss or sigma 56mm f1.4 , planning to decide and get it by next week
@@JeremyCWW I got the sigma 56mm 1.4 its amazing for my A6400. Tons of reviews on TH-cam man, you'll like it. Shop the price around, got mine at Focus camera it was cheaper then Amazon
@@copperstatestudiosPhxAZ I just got it already, ahahah , can't wait, ahahah
@@JeremyCWW I got that also, you will love it!!
Great videos.. I m beginning in this hobbies and I m looking between Sony 50 mm and sigma 56mm.. this video help me alot
Did you enable in-camera corrections for both? I didn't hear you mention it
hearing your review I feel it is honest. I have seen comparison videos from others but they never considered casual shooter personas.
Like your new format😉Not a Sony shooter but enjoyed watching your review 👍🏼
Thank for the vids! Welcome back!!
Thanks!
Thank you for another great, informational vid. Thank you for sharing.
The warping is very noticeable in hallways, on the sigma. Annoying to correct all the time. Sony has unnoticeable warping, if any at all. Shooting on apsc. Needs a lens correction profile. Definitely sharper, almost too sharp.
Thank you for including the A6600 sample! Now I know it'll be a perfect pair with myA6600 because of the IBIS.
Oh, and the Sigma 56mm is weatherproof, neat!
Thanks for this video...!!! I have a Sony a6000. Do you recommend the Sony 50mm f1.8 OSS or the Sony 50mm f1.8 FE.? I want to change my kit lens!
Amazing, I think you were supposed to do this review at the end of 2018 or early 2019. Wonder what else is in your backlog waiting to get released.
You’re not wrong, I was suppose to do this some time ago.
@@that1cameraguy JV did his in Dec of 2018, back then you guys were only a few days apart to release similar videos.
I got
Sony 85mm f1.8 so I think it’s super sharp so I am good with that photography and for videos got Sony 50mm oss one! I think it’s over all good deal both used ones from Best Buy :)
I think Sony have terrible quality control on some of their lenses. Christopher Frost got a really good copy of the 50mm f1.8, so if you watch his review, you might think that the Sony is about on par with the Sigma but then, I've seen other review/comparison video (such as your) where the 50mm is noticeably worse than the Sigma.
Have you noticed how the sigma lens captured darker images? Thats a deal breaker for me considering its a 1.4 lens without oss.
Sony 50mm F1.8 😍
Actually im laughing when vong portrait came out XD
Does the sharpness only apply to photo? Did you film video on both and zoom in to see if video sharpness was different on both?
I have sigma 56 but still watching to feel good about it XD
can you test LOW LIGHT with this lenses ?
I know it says "retail $479" but over past two years, Ive never seen it more than $429 so the price difference for new isnt too bad!
do you guys think sony 35 mm 1.8 performs better than 50 mm in terms of sharpness and other stuff? or is it completely same except focal length?
I'm just curious why did you take picture with full frame camera? Both of these are simply APS-C lenses not made for full frame
Which is better for low light
Aren't the full frame Better for low light even if it's 1.8
Great review. I have the Sony (a very useful lens and great value) and finally acquired the Sigma a week ago on a super-sale. I didn't buy it so much to replace the Sony as much as to be a more versatile lens for low light event and sports shooting like stage and gymnasiums or practice fields over the newish Samyang 75 1.8 for full frame that I was seriously considering for my a6500. Reviews show the Samyang isn't too sharp in the corners when used on aps-c until 5.6. So it was important to me that the lens be very sharp at 1.4 to keep the ISO down and also it needed to be very sharp in the corners for like a group of singers on dim-ish stage with everybody sharp. Furthermore that super sharpness isn't just for pixel peeping; it means the 56 can easily be cropped to the equivalent of the 75 for more reach when needed.
Those 4am uploads are back!
hi have you tried the sigma 56mm 1.4 e mount with catalyst browse
do 50mm oss has silent focusing on recording ??
Hello guys, i purchased my first dream DSLR Sony a6400. I am thinking to buy Sigma 56 1.4? Some reviewer says that this lens is not good without tripod or gimble. ? can Anyone clear it?. Can I capture sharp photos with Sigma 56 1.4 without tripod or gimble?
Hi I have Sony A6600
I need lens for video and portrait picture
Which one do you recommend ?
I’d love to see a comparison of those 2 against the Sirui 50mm f1.8 Anamorphic lens! Thank you so much for this video!
You should have did the test with a micro 4 3 camera instead of a full frame.
what is a good telphoto 200mm zoom lense for my sonya6300 that is budget friendly
Have you looked at the Tamron 70-180? It doesn’t get to 200, but it’s an F2.8 lens. A cheap apsc option is the Sony 55-250. Quality isn’t great, but if your on a budget it’s a cheaper option
Who is the model in all white?
Thank you
Man of course you wouldn't recommend using it on FF.. its not made for ff bodies but apsc lol
The rolling shutter in the video examples is horrendous. I mean geez!!
Does A6400 have built in body picture stability?
No
Bella recensione
where did u get that cap?! I want one xD
turning off OSS in sony lenses make them sharper at faster shutter speed
How did you know? I have had the 50mm SEL for several years and it has gotten me wonderful results and it is doing great on the A6400.
Ever since the Sigma came out I have been wondering if it was worth it. 50mm versus 56mm, 1.8 versus 1.4, OSS Versus not.
You managed to make me laugh by explaining that a lens designed for APS-c cameras is not good for use on an FF sensor camera (as if that is normal to do, but in this case it is not a good solution). OK.
The Sigma has an unreasonable amount of distortion and it's not corrected by the body. Shooting anything with straight lines is very obvious. The bokeh is nice but the 56 starts to make some people's head shape look overly 'fat' and flat. For the price, weight and lack of distortion, the Sony is the winner.
What about the Youngnu 50mm 1.8?
I ordered one yesterday. Not sure when it will come in but I will compare it.
2:48 is that jason?
nice reviwe
Sony cause oss
Without OSS Sigma suppose to be cheaper. Overpriced.
how could you judge these lens properly when you are using an APS-C camera...the focal lengths change, vignetting changes, autofocus is peh...
they are APSC lenses
what are you talking about? those two lenses are made for APS-C cameras, so the only proper use scenario for them is on APS-C camera.
Those are full frame lens brother
@@anandmohan100 No, they are not.
Anand Mohan Mylavarapu im sorry for u man, but its both is aps-c camera
Vong portrait along with all these other beautiful female models lmao.
no reason to buy the Sony
Sony or sigma glass????? (Spits my coffee) is this a joke? Canon glass all the way.