This is a great example of why a camera manufacturer must open up its lens mount to third party manufacturers since you get the more unusual 65mm focal length lens and also gives you great image quality! Keep up the good work!
Replaced my 55mm with the 65mm. The 55mm always felt like it needed to be stopped down to control LoCA and claw back sharpness, whereas the 65mm is F2 and done. And the 65mm is way more fun to use.
Once I changed from 85 1.8 to 85 1.4 looking for the amazing blur background. But those 1.4 are bigger and expensive, and some times too narrow field of view. For casual use and travel I was thinking about this 65 2.0 and also the sigma 90 2.8. Both are small and comfortable. But the 85 1.4 also looks a good idea to me. And consider that I'm looking for L mount lenses for a Pana S5ii.
I think that the Sigma 65 mm f2 will be my new lens for portrait stills.. I already forgot about the Sony 85 mm 1.8 :))) Thank you so much for helping me decide wich lens is good for me.
Great perspective and insight on the lenses. However, I see this with most people that review the 55 mm Zeiss lens omit a subtle, but obvious distinction with it. The separation and pop in the subject in video and in pictures. If you shoot with the 55 mm Zeiss over regular Sony, Sigma or Tamron, you will definitely see a distancing effect in your subject bs the background. It is an amazing effect - especially in video. Your movies won’t look like the masses with this lens. Chromatic aberration, which is a real thing with the 55 Zeiss, in pictures, is easily cleared up in Lightroom. But none of these competing lenses have that distinct pop of the Zeiss. Because it’s not either noticed or appreciated, that one character attribute, the most amazing one, gets omitted, and people bypass this lens. This is not a knock on you because this is a splendid review. I just know that had I not been introduced to that aspect of the 55 I would have gone with a G Master or a Sigma with a 1.2 or 1.4 and spent way more money without understanding the true magic and savings I would lose out on by not getting the Zeiss.
Nice review. Have you compared this Sigma 65mm f/2 against the Samyang 75mm f/1.8 ? Would be interesting to see how they compare, specially the color rendition and chromatic aberrations.
On a different note the voigtlander 65 is magic. The sigma may be a hair shaper wide open corner to corner but has a flatter look compared to the voight. I think the 55 Sony still looks better overall compared to the sigma even being pretty soft wide open. Can't really put my finger on it but it has more pop. I ended up selling all my sigma glass besides my 35 after comparing them to different glass. They are super sharp but they lack character and pop in my book. Pixel peeping sharpness is something i stopped doing a long time ago lol. I still use old glass for it's unique looks. Flat clinical is not for me. I still use my 30+ year old Canon 200 prime for portraits on my Sony. No other lens looks quite like it. If I'm just casual shooting I'll use a helios or an old voightlander 35 3.5. Never understood the clinical sharp flat glass people use when doing portraits. Maybe high fashion or commercial product photography i could understand...
@@Sondercreative Yes, some time ago my local store had some used Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar 35mm 2.8 T* Lenses for US$215 (taxes included), I Bought two, one for myself and one for my Photographer friend.
I think I would like more 75/1.8 from Samyang. Yet didnt tested any of them. Had 85, 50 and 35, but also 50 at aps-c in past (which is like 70mm at FF).
The Sony 55mm was released about 10 years ago and has been a good performer with compact size even for today's use. The Sigma 65mm was only released about 2 years ago created with much later manufacturing design and production. So comparisons like these are a bit unfair. Like the current VW Golf will be much better than one 10 years ago in vast majority of cases. I still use my Sony 55mm because it's sharp enough and it has the Zeiss colour rendition I like.
The 55mm represents old technology. You can call its softness "character". Many fanatics love flare and other optical faults if the "lense" is old enough and of the right brand. It is easy to soften an image in P+P whereas sharpening can prove more problematic with artefacts etc.
@@Sondercreative I have several 50’s , voigtlanders but also old vintages adapted via techart, for me the render is important too, I keep most of them because I like how they draw…
No idea what copy of the 55 is used for the Test.The reality is very different. Using it for 6 years now. Color , contrast and sharpness are exceptional even on 61Mp. Never selling that little marvel.
Now my most used Lens are the Voigtländer Macro APO-Lanthar 65mm 2.0, it is an excellent allround Lens for many types of photography, it is rare I use my Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8, but I often use my Sony 135mm 1.8 GM. I do not like the distortion of the Sigma 65mm.
I borrowed the voight 65 and have to say I like it much more than the sigma 65 which I've used also. Such a great piece of glass. Now I have to sell something to get one for myself. I imagine it would live on my camera.
Probably the best demo of theses focal lengths that I have seen! Cheers !!
This is a great example of why a camera manufacturer must open up its lens mount to third party manufacturers since you get the more unusual 65mm focal length lens and also gives you great image quality!
Keep up the good work!
I completely agree. This is genuinely the reason I haven’t bought into the Canon mirrorless system.
I love my 65mm lens. Had the Sony 55, the Sony 50mm f2.5 g, but the Sigma is the best.
I recently sold my 55 for this 65. I wanted to shake up focal lengths and this sigma is really a hidden gem in the lineup!
Thanks bro, the best review video on youtube to compare 55mm Zeiss and 65mm Sigma lenses.
Just bought the 65 yesterday, very impressed with the AF and image quality, especially at handling backlight, the contrast, simply perfect for my use
According to LensTip review - Sigma 65 is one of the most resolving lenses for Sony E mount.
Highly impressed with the lens.
65 looks more cleaner and sharper but I kinda like the character and the flaws of the 55mm
55 is a great lens. Its been my go to for several years now.
I used the 55 for a week and sold it. It's AF sluggish and images are soft. I'd gladly pay for the Sigma 65.
How did I never know about this Sigma until today? People need to get over the whole 50/85 thing. 😂
Agree!!
replaced the 55 with the 65 to get rid of the chromas. Works.
Solid comparison, worth subscribing! Thank you
Replaced my 55mm with the 65mm. The 55mm always felt like it needed to be stopped down to control LoCA and claw back sharpness, whereas the 65mm is F2 and done. And the 65mm is way more fun to use.
Opinions on the Polaroid Now Gen 2?
Once I changed from 85 1.8 to 85 1.4 looking for the amazing blur background. But those 1.4 are bigger and expensive, and some times too narrow field of view. For casual use and travel I was thinking about this 65 2.0 and also the sigma 90 2.8. Both are small and comfortable. But the 85 1.4 also looks a good idea to me. And consider that I'm looking for L mount lenses for a Pana S5ii.
I think that the Sigma 65 mm f2 will be my new lens for portrait stills.. I already forgot about the Sony 85 mm 1.8 :))) Thank you so much for helping me decide wich lens is good for me.
Great perspective and insight on the lenses. However, I see this with most people that review the 55 mm Zeiss lens omit a subtle, but obvious distinction with it. The separation and pop in the subject in video and in pictures. If you shoot with the 55 mm Zeiss over regular Sony, Sigma or Tamron, you will definitely see a distancing effect in your subject bs the background. It is an amazing effect - especially in video. Your movies won’t look like the masses with this lens. Chromatic aberration, which is a real thing with the 55 Zeiss, in pictures, is easily cleared up in Lightroom. But none of these competing lenses have that distinct pop of the Zeiss. Because it’s not either noticed or appreciated, that one character attribute, the most amazing one, gets omitted, and people bypass this lens. This is not a knock on you because this is a splendid review. I just know that had I not been introduced to that aspect of the 55 I would have gone with a G Master or a Sigma with a 1.2 or 1.4 and spent way more money without understanding the true magic and savings I would lose out on by not getting the Zeiss.
Nice review. Have you compared this Sigma 65mm f/2 against the Samyang 75mm f/1.8 ? Would be interesting to see how they compare, specially the color rendition and chromatic aberrations.
Its definitely something I want to do.
I’ll try and get that done. Thank you for the suggestion.
@@Sondercreative Do you have any idea of when will you do it? Looking forward to it.
Had both. The Samyang is very good too. But plastic fantastic. Good glass though
On a different note the voigtlander 65 is magic. The sigma may be a hair shaper wide open corner to corner but has a flatter look compared to the voight. I think the 55 Sony still looks better overall compared to the sigma even being pretty soft wide open. Can't really put my finger on it but it has more pop. I ended up selling all my sigma glass besides my 35 after comparing them to different glass. They are super sharp but they lack character and pop in my book. Pixel peeping sharpness is something i stopped doing a long time ago lol. I still use old glass for it's unique looks. Flat clinical is not for me. I still use my 30+ year old Canon 200 prime for portraits on my Sony. No other lens looks quite like it. If I'm just casual shooting I'll use a helios or an old voightlander 35 3.5. Never understood the clinical sharp flat glass people use when doing portraits. Maybe high fashion or commercial product photography i could understand...
Less sharp always make better 3d pop.
At my local store I can get a used Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8 T* for US $293 (taxes included) which is under half the price of the Sigma.
Bargain!
@@Sondercreative Yes, some time ago my local store had some used Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar 35mm 2.8 T* Lenses for US$215 (taxes included), I Bought two, one for myself and one for my Photographer friend.
I think I would like more 75/1.8 from Samyang. Yet didnt tested any of them. Had 85, 50 and 35, but also 50 at aps-c in past (which is like 70mm at FF).
A comparison between Samsung 65mm f/2.0 and Samyang 75mm f/1.8 would be helpful
The Sony 55mm was released about 10 years ago and has been a good performer with compact size even for today's use. The Sigma 65mm was only released about 2 years ago created with much later manufacturing design and production. So comparisons like these are a bit unfair. Like the current VW Golf will be much better than one 10 years ago in vast majority of cases. I still use my Sony 55mm because it's sharp enough and it has the Zeiss colour rendition I like.
It’s unfair but useful.
@@Sondercreative Wasn't trying to be critical of the video, more along the lines of how astounding the 55mm has been even after all these years.
@@apwip I didn’t think you were I agree with you. I was adding to it. Sorry I shouldn’t have been so short in my reply.
I still drive a 96 GTI vr6 and have to say I like it better than any newer VW lol.
The 55mm represents old technology.
You can call its softness "character". Many fanatics love flare and other optical faults if the "lense" is old enough and of the right brand.
It is easy to soften an image in P+P whereas sharpening can prove more problematic with artefacts etc.
Agree
The 65 is on it way, will decide later if sell the 55 or keep it...I think a 35 mm will pair very nice with this 65mm
I kept the 55mm with the 65 but only because I need two mid focal lengths when filming.
@@Sondercreative I have several 50’s , voigtlanders but also old vintages adapted via techart, for me the render is important too, I keep most of them because I like how they draw…
so how did you decide?
No idea what copy of the 55 is used for the Test.The reality is very different. Using it for 6 years now. Color , contrast and sharpness are exceptional even on 61Mp. Never selling that little marvel.
@@emilyankov8619 it’s a brilliant lens but as with many things, there are better options.
Now my most used Lens are the Voigtländer Macro APO-Lanthar 65mm 2.0, it is an excellent allround Lens for many types of photography, it is rare I use my Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8, but I often use my Sony 135mm 1.8 GM. I do not like the distortion of the Sigma 65mm.
I borrowed the voight 65 and have to say I like it much more than the sigma 65 which I've used also. Such a great piece of glass. Now I have to sell something to get one for myself. I imagine it would live on my camera.
@@nicedward7544 The Voight 65mm are a Lens you will be very happy with for many years. I can also very highly recommend the 110mm 2.5 and the 35mm 2.0
Sorry but your 55mm had problems... mine is definitely sharp at wide open ...
It is sharp just not as sharp as the 65mm. You’re misunderstanding relative performance.