They do seem to be very very close in general... I'm guessing all in all it'll be autofocus performance and build quality that'll be the main factor when considering which of these to get
Knocking it out of the park again with another lens review. You are becoming the go to source for camera lens reviews. Thank you for sharing your time and unbiased knowledge with us. Much appreciated
Your reviews just keep getting better. This series has been so informative so far, yet I can’t wait until the next episode, which sounds to me that it will capture the most important aspects of these lenses performance. And, yes, I think that a fifth episode with the overall summaries would be the ideal starting point for viewers coming in to this series after it is complete. Keep up the great work!
Thanks man and yes, please on the mini-reviews. I am planning to pull the trigger on an 85 in the next couple of weeks as soon as the Viltrox and Samyang come to where I live. I'm considering 4 of the lenses in your test (Viltrox, Samyan, Sony 1.8 and the Batis) and also the Samyang XP 85 1.2. I may have some apples mixed with the oranges there, I realize.....
Excellent. I actually picked up the Samyang 85 1.4 because of you as i felt the bokeh of my Sony 85 1.8 was to "busy" with vegetation in the background. One new follower EARNED 👏🏻
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you - I actually just bought the Samyang 85 1.4 because of your review and the 2nd video regarding AF. Very happy with the lens :)
Dustin, relatively old review. But, in a general sense, do you find that the slight money saved by buying 3rd party lenses is really worth the general compromise is autofocus and the various potential other problems that may be encountered? After trying some 3rd party offerings in Nikon and Sony land, I'm finding myself even more strongly gravitating towards the 1st party offerings.
I won't be doing any comparisons with the 17-28. I don't have the time or resources to bring in a comparison lens right now after just doing a six lens comparison.
Thanks Sir for your detailed review. I am going to buy a lens in this week so between the 1.4 versions, which one do you suggest for portrait photography in terms of sharpness and bokeh as well as eye AF performance?
They all do fine for that, frankly. The Sigma is the sharpest in the corners at wide apertures, the GM has the best microcontrast, the Samyang has the nicest bokeh. Pick your poison ;)
Great as always. I definitely vote for the summary video as well. I've noticed on some wall images (I'm still not a big fan of brick walls but I get how they are useful tools) that the focus on the inset grout is tack sharp while the surface of the brick might not be particularly in the corners. Is this because at such wide open aperatures even the distance from the center is enough to change the depth of field in the corner?
Great review Dustin, as always. One quick question, does the Samyang 85 1.4 apply distorsion correction profiles in camera, like the Tamron 28-75 does? Thank you for amazing work.
Thank you very much for these reviews. These have helped me quite a bit over the past 2 years or so. I would definitely like to hear a mini review of each lens at the end and perhaps your personal pick between different price ranges. f1.4/1.8 is certainly useful but really, I think knowing the value proposition for each price point is more important. Also, while this is probably the last thing on your mind, I'd love to hear about your thoughts on an alternative to Sony's 70-200 f2.8 (as in maybe a tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 with a MC-11 adapter). There is unfortunately no native competition for this lens but I'm curious to know if I could get by with another offering.
I suspect that Tamron (and probably Sigma) will fill that gap in the near future, and, when that happens, I will do such a comparison. Doing a comparison with adapted lenses is tough, as those lenses aren't really designed for Sony. You couldn't get any autofocus during video, for example, with the G2/Mc-11 combo.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I'm a pure stills shooter currently but that's nice to know for the future. Fingers crossed that Tamron doesn't take too long to come out with a competitive native option. I'm still using a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS ii on my 5D mkiii of all things for telephoto work.
@@DustinAbbottTWI You surely know better than most of us plebians. All the rumors seemed to go silent about 6 months ago so I started losing hope. Then again, there are the two new Tamron-Sony 2.8 zooms.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Oh, that's sad. I thank your for your tests. But at least for me that is far more important than some minute differences in sharpness. Let's hope somebody else picks that up and compares them
I've actually tested this individually with basically all of these lenses (and it shows up in their independent reviews). I just didn't make that a facet of the 6 way comparison.
First off I find your reviews extremely useful with insightful comments but (there's always a 'but') I have big doubts about using an uneven stone wall to judge sharpness and color accuracy. I'd rather see you take a sheet of 4x8 dimensionally stable material like MDF and cover it with a piece of fabric made from fine thread glued onto it. I mention that as a subject because it was looking at clothes hanging in my closet through a (for the press copy) Contax SLR with a 85mm lens that I first noticed how well I could see the texture of the fabric compared to my Nikkor lenses. This was back in the 80's and it's how I test new lenses to this day. I also would like to see you invest in a X-Rite {MacBeth} Colorchecker which has been in use by the photo and film industry for decades as a standard in testing color. I have both the original large version and the pocketable Passport version and use them for critical work. Your stone wall isn't neutral at all with warm and cool tones all over.
I periodically get recommendations for a different approach, but I have found that my technique works well in discovering lens flaws and strengths, echoes what I see in real world shooting, and is also consistent with what those who do chart testing find. Furthermore, those variances in texture that you note allow for more real-world findings in terms of contrast, longitudinal chromatic aberrations, and microcontrast. Thanks for the input, but I've got a process that I'm confident in (and works for a wide variety of focal lengths, which isn't always the case with small, manufactured surfaces.)
I would like to see some identical portraits taken with each lens. I personally own the Sony FE 85 f1.8. i love the size and weight of it. and I am happy with the image quality, I really think that Sigma lost it's mind with the size and weight of some of there glass, you just look at all these lenses side by side and the Simga 85 art looks ridiculously big. and i could understand the size if it blew away the other smaller lenses. but it doesn't. maybe at f1.4 it has a slight edge, but nothing worth carrying around that size and weight, and i also think there 105 is crazy big and heavy, when there is a Nikon 105 that performes pretty much the same that is allot smaller and lighter, i really hope that the new Sigma glass made for mirrorless gets the size and weight under control. but judging by the new Sigma 35 f1.2. maybe not, it's bigger and heavier than there 35 f1.4 art witch was already big and heavy. I think the Samyang struck a good compromise between size and weight and performance and still being f1.4 and at a good price.
Was considering acquiring a Samyang when I buy the A7r IV (or the successor) when prices recede a bit, but by the looks of it, the Samyang fails to resolve as well as all the others, at least in closeup shots. Given the shutter speeds and the subject matter, doesn't appear to have to do with shake or focus points that don't match - just hampered optical performance wide open. Even the measly Viltrox is considerably sharper. Also, I wish they had Focus Hold buttons.
Hi Dustin. Cant wait to you reviewing the newest Canon 85 f 1.2 RF :D I am wondering how would it compare to Otus... Thanks for amazing work you are doing !
Thanks, Igor. Covering the new RF lenses is tough since I don't have an EOS R body. That means I have to get loaners of both the camera and the lens...which gets more complicated and often more expensive for me.
It's enough just to look at them together to find out which one I will not have. Sigma Art for DSLR with an in build adapter is rediculausly big and heavy.
It has great punch. Great colors. Slower aperture, obviously. Bokeh not quite as smooth as, say, the Samyang, but will deliver very different kinds of photos.
@@DustinAbbottTWI yes I figured as much (remembering your review of the loxia 85). An Interesting lens indeed if you don't have a problem with manual. I'm curious which 85 e mount would you put in your bag? Regardless of AF or manual
Your reviews are the best, but its suspicious to me that in the brick wall test the samyang was pretty sharp wide open (a lot sharper than the sony fe 1.8) and then in the second picture test (the book) the samyang is the only lens that is very soft (also a lot softer than the sony FE which was a lot softer in the previous wall test pictures). There must be some mistake i dont understand how can that happen it doesnt make sense.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i think the samyang is so soft because of the minimum focus distance, it seems like samyang struggles with sharpness at minimum focus distance, now the review makes sense to me
For portraits. Bokeh and skin/eyes comparisons at "portrait distance", with/without flash/leds (and Eye-AF) are what maters to me, not macro bible messages or stone wallings - joking. I get the usefulness and objectivity of all these tests so far and many thanks for this all inclusive approach! If You ask; so indeed to me personally only matters the portrait rendering. (As even more than one different 85mm lens could be useful depending on photographer's intentions, wile the average best could be "no good" lol...)
Well, confused.. I actually had seen part two, and doubted aubout that whith Your response here above in part III. By re- viewing part II I understand my confusion: Although interesting, this video part 2 definitally does not strike me as a tool to confidently compare the lenses for "specialized, posed portraits" (with good repeeted bokeh rendering references next to each other, and where eye sharpness and skin texture is comparable). Sorry.
You might want to warn people that when you say a particular lens renders warm or cool, that it shows up that way in Adobe Lightroom's default setting, and you should note which version of LR because Adobe does change their rendering engine on occasion. I realize you use LR because of it's popularity but lately a lot of customers have gotten fed up with Adobe's "You can rent our software but you can't own it" philosophy so are looking at alternatives I especially recommend to users the manufacturers free software that usually renders the image much better than how Adobe's rendering engine works. I speak as a Nikon and Sony user but I was a journalist for four years mostly reviewing photographic gear, hardware and software, from all the major companies and used software from Canon, Fujifilm, Capture One (they quoted me in their ads and on their website). Manufacturer's software sometimes has it's advantages over Adobe's software with features like showing focusing points used for that image. I would like to see you use the best overall rendering software, regardless of it's popularity, whether that be Adobe's product, Phase 1 Capture One's or some other. Personally I lean towards Capture One, with the added bonus for Sony and Fujifilm camera users of there being a free version for each of those cameras. Now, if we could only get Canon and Nikon on board also.
Hi Robert, I own essentially all of the major pieces of editing software and have played with rendering from all of them. Frankly I don't find much of a difference, and that is on high end, monthly color calibrated 4K displays. I use Lightroom because I like the workflow and know how to get the best out of images. I'm confident in my results.
I think the "know how to get the best out of images" is the most important part there! Using 3rd party software is a necessity, when productively using gear from different brands, I guess: it surely doesn't help the workflow to use a dozen different programs for basically the same thing, and get all confused about how to do something on THAT software. Whether Adobe is the optimal choice regarding the license is questionable at best, but if it gives you the results that you want, that's more important when it comes to your job! For me it just wouldn't matter, as I don't make my living with photography. ;-)
@RobertJensen Hello, good afternoon. When you mention "free version for each of those cameras" Are you talking about a trial version? Capture One is $300.00. I use a Sony camera. Also, if I edit a raw with Capture One could I open it in photoshop and continue editing it, like I can with Lightroom?
@@princeharbinger Go to their website Downloads page. The versions are working versions which only work with Sony or Fujichrome, separate versions for each. They are missing a few pro features but you can Upgrade and save over the regular price, which is what I did. There are 2 upgrades, full Sony version, only for Sony cameras, or the true full version which works with all supported cameras.
Thank you for the time you take to do these reviews! You are the standard when it comes to lens testing on TH-cam. Always very thorough and unbiased.
My pleasure.
unbelievable !.....this has to . be the most difficult review you ever made To date, ......kudos to you Dustin.....
They do seem to be very very close in general... I'm guessing all in all it'll be autofocus performance and build quality that'll be the main factor when considering which of these to get
Definitely 👍🏽👍🏽 on summary video with pros/cons
Thanks for the feedback.
Knocking it out of the park again with another lens review. You are becoming the go to source for camera lens reviews. Thank you for sharing your time and unbiased knowledge with us. Much appreciated
Thanks for the feedback!
Your reviews just keep getting better. This series has been so informative so far, yet I can’t wait until the next episode, which sounds to me that it will capture the most important aspects of these lenses performance. And, yes, I think that a fifth episode with the overall summaries would be the ideal starting point for viewers coming in to this series after it is complete. Keep up the great work!
Thanks, Bob.
Sony 85 mm f/1.8 is a steal and a beautiful lens to work with. Fast focusing, beautiful image quality
It's a great value lens.
Thanks man and yes, please on the mini-reviews. I am planning to pull the trigger on an 85 in the next couple of weeks as soon as the Viltrox and Samyang come to where I live. I'm considering 4 of the lenses in your test (Viltrox, Samyan, Sony 1.8 and the Batis) and also the Samyang XP 85 1.2. I may have some apples mixed with the oranges there, I realize.....
Thanks for the feedback. Seems like the extra episode is one that people want.
Excellent. I actually picked up the Samyang 85 1.4 because of you as i felt the bokeh of my Sony 85 1.8 was to "busy" with vegetation in the background. One new follower EARNED 👏🏻
The Samyang is a great value, for sure.
Thanks for putting the time into these!
You're welcome.
Hi Dustin, thanks for this. Looking forward to the next. And yes, would like to see a final recap.
Thanks for the feedback.
Looking forward to the next episode - very good work so far. +1 for the follow up episode - that would be sweet.
You're welcome...and thanks for the feedback.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you - I actually just bought the Samyang 85 1.4 because of your review and the 2nd video regarding AF. Very happy with the lens :)
Yes to recap!! Thank you!
Thanks for the feedback.
Finally here it is 😎😀! Doesn't really care for anything but IQ and size.
Really very nice test. Thanks for that. Well done.
Thank you!
Love the reviews - keep them coming.
I would only request time stamps so I can jump to the parts I want to rewatch.
I'm happy to include them if you want to source them. I've got a heavy load trying to keep up with getting this content out...plus work my real job.
Thank you Mr Abbott
You're welcome, Jim.
Dustin, relatively old review. But, in a general sense, do you find that the slight money saved by buying 3rd party lenses is really worth the general compromise is autofocus and the various potential other problems that may be encountered?
After trying some 3rd party offerings in Nikon and Sony land, I'm finding myself even more strongly gravitating towards the 1st party offerings.
It really depends on the lens. I've perfectly happy with the Samyang 85mm (that I own), but in other cases I bought first party.
Great work as always. Looking forward to the new Tamron 17-28 review, hopefully against the 16-35 GM.
I won't be doing any comparisons with the 17-28. I don't have the time or resources to bring in a comparison lens right now after just doing a six lens comparison.
@@DustinAbbottTWI That's fine. Appreicate your work.
A lot of good information that is difficult to find anywhere else, thanks!
That's the goal
Thanks Sir for your detailed review. I am going to buy a lens in this week so between the 1.4 versions, which one do you suggest for portrait photography in terms of sharpness and bokeh as well as eye AF performance?
They all do fine for that, frankly. The Sigma is the sharpest in the corners at wide apertures, the GM has the best microcontrast, the Samyang has the nicest bokeh. Pick your poison ;)
Remarkable review!
Thanks
Encore ! Encore!!
Thanks
A recap episode would be a great idea due to the volume of info you have for these lenses. Cheers Dave
Seems like the popular choice.
Another great episode!
Glad to hear it
Great as always. I definitely vote for the summary video as well. I've noticed on some wall images (I'm still not a big fan of brick walls but I get how they are useful tools) that the focus on the inset grout is tack sharp while the surface of the brick might not be particularly in the corners. Is this because at such wide open aperatures even the distance from the center is enough to change the depth of field in the corner?
The biggest reason for this variance is a lack of a flat field of focus. Some distortion can cause this, too.
Great review..... Much knowledge gained..... I would love to see a more detailed comparison between the viltrox and the samyang
You can see some of that by watching the Viltrox review.
A recap episode would be great !!
Thanks for the feedback.
Great review Dustin, as always. One quick question, does the Samyang 85 1.4 apply distorsion correction profiles in camera, like the Tamron 28-75 does? Thank you for amazing work.
I don't see the distortion corrected.
Thank you very much for these reviews. These have helped me quite a bit over the past 2 years or so. I would definitely like to hear a mini review of each lens at the end and perhaps your personal pick between different price ranges. f1.4/1.8 is certainly useful but really, I think knowing the value proposition for each price point is more important.
Also, while this is probably the last thing on your mind, I'd love to hear about your thoughts on an alternative to Sony's 70-200 f2.8 (as in maybe a tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 with a MC-11 adapter). There is unfortunately no native competition for this lens but I'm curious to know if I could get by with another offering.
I suspect that Tamron (and probably Sigma) will fill that gap in the near future, and, when that happens, I will do such a comparison. Doing a comparison with adapted lenses is tough, as those lenses aren't really designed for Sony. You couldn't get any autofocus during video, for example, with the G2/Mc-11 combo.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I'm a pure stills shooter currently but that's nice to know for the future. Fingers crossed that Tamron doesn't take too long to come out with a competitive native option. I'm still using a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS ii on my 5D mkiii of all things for telephoto work.
I've had a few hints...
@@DustinAbbottTWI You surely know better than most of us plebians. All the rumors seemed to go silent about 6 months ago so I started losing hope. Then again, there are the two new Tamron-Sony 2.8 zooms.
Could you test the contrast/ flare performance against light sources in the frame?
Thank you in advance
Hi there. I'm afraid not, as at this point most of the lenses have returned to their respective homes.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Oh, that's sad. I thank your for your tests.
But at least for me that is far more important than some minute differences in sharpness. Let's hope somebody else picks that up and compares them
I've actually tested this individually with basically all of these lenses (and it shows up in their independent reviews). I just didn't make that a facet of the 6 way comparison.
a recap video would be good as I cant remember or know where to find the info I need in your previous videos.. great stuff Dustin..
It seems like a lot of people are interested in that.
I am missing the Sony FE 90mm f2.8 G OSS, which is a real excellent portrait lens, maybe even the best.
Very nice test! Is this the start of a series with comparisons where there are overlapping lenses for E-mount? That would be nice!
I've done series like this for 50mm already.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I had missed that, thanks. Nice!
First off I find your reviews extremely useful with insightful comments but (there's always a 'but') I have big doubts about using an uneven stone wall to judge sharpness and color accuracy.
I'd rather see you take a sheet of 4x8 dimensionally stable material like MDF and cover it with a piece of fabric made from fine thread glued onto it. I mention that as a subject because it was looking at clothes hanging in my closet through a (for the press copy) Contax SLR with a 85mm lens that I first noticed how well I could see the texture of the fabric compared to my Nikkor lenses. This was back in the 80's and it's how I test new lenses to this day.
I also would like to see you invest in a X-Rite {MacBeth} Colorchecker which has been in use by the photo and film industry for decades as a standard in testing color. I have both the original large version and the pocketable Passport version and use them for critical work. Your stone wall isn't neutral at all with warm and cool tones all over.
I periodically get recommendations for a different approach, but I have found that my technique works well in discovering lens flaws and strengths, echoes what I see in real world shooting, and is also consistent with what those who do chart testing find. Furthermore, those variances in texture that you note allow for more real-world findings in terms of contrast, longitudinal chromatic aberrations, and microcontrast. Thanks for the input, but I've got a process that I'm confident in (and works for a wide variety of focal lengths, which isn't always the case with small, manufactured surfaces.)
THANK YOU!
You're welcome.
I would like to see some identical portraits taken with each lens. I personally own the Sony FE 85 f1.8. i love the size and weight of it. and I am happy with the image quality, I really think that Sigma lost it's mind with the size and weight of some of there glass, you just look at all these lenses side by side and the Simga 85 art looks ridiculously big. and i could understand the size if it blew away the other smaller lenses. but it doesn't. maybe at f1.4 it has a slight edge, but nothing worth carrying around that size and weight, and i also think there 105 is crazy big and heavy, when there is a Nikon 105 that performes pretty much the same that is allot smaller and lighter, i really hope that the new Sigma glass made for mirrorless gets the size and weight under control. but judging by the new Sigma 35 f1.2. maybe not, it's bigger and heavier than there 35 f1.4 art witch was already big and heavy. I think the Samyang struck a good compromise between size and weight and performance and still being f1.4 and at a good price.
You will see that in part 2 of the IQ results.
Was considering acquiring a Samyang when I buy the A7r IV (or the successor) when prices recede a bit, but by the looks of it, the Samyang fails to resolve as well as all the others, at least in closeup shots. Given the shutter speeds and the subject matter, doesn't appear to have to do with shake or focus points that don't match - just hampered optical performance wide open. Even the measly Viltrox is considerably sharper.
Also, I wish they had Focus Hold buttons.
I disagree. The Samyang works beautifully on the a7RIV and has the nicest bokeh and overall rendering of these lens, in my opinion.
Hi Dustin. Cant wait to you reviewing the newest Canon 85 f 1.2 RF :D I am wondering how would it compare to Otus... Thanks for amazing work you are doing !
Thanks, Igor. Covering the new RF lenses is tough since I don't have an EOS R body. That means I have to get loaners of both the camera and the lens...which gets more complicated and often more expensive for me.
Would Have Liked To Have Seen The Samyang Xeen 85mm T 1.5 Cine For Sony In Your Testing Line-Up, Keep Them Reviews Coming.
This is an AF shootout, so a manual focus cine lens would not have been a good fit.
is the basis distortion corrected in camera?
It's enough just to look at them together to find out which one I will not have. Sigma Art for DSLR with an in build adapter is rediculausly big and heavy.
That's unfortunately true.
I know the loxia 85 is a manual but how does it stack up against these in the IQ department?
It has great punch. Great colors. Slower aperture, obviously. Bokeh not quite as smooth as, say, the Samyang, but will deliver very different kinds of photos.
@@DustinAbbottTWI yes I figured as much (remembering your review of the loxia 85). An Interesting lens indeed if you don't have a problem with manual. I'm curious which 85 e mount would you put in your bag? Regardless of AF or manual
Your reviews are the best, but its suspicious to me that in the brick wall test the samyang was pretty sharp wide open (a lot sharper than the sony fe 1.8) and then in the second picture test (the book) the samyang is the only lens that is very soft (also a lot softer than the sony FE which was a lot softer in the previous wall test pictures). There must be some mistake i dont understand how can that happen it doesnt make sense.
That can do with contrast, which will show up sometimes more with three dimensional objects.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i cant decide between the sony fe 1.8 and the samyang, if you had to buy one which one would you choose for yourself?
@@DustinAbbottTWI i think the samyang is so soft because of the minimum focus distance, it seems like samyang struggles with sharpness at minimum focus distance, now the review makes sense to me
🙋🏻♂️ _aye_ for the 5th part mini review of each lens thingy
Thanks for the feedback. That seems to be the popular choice.
For portraits. Bokeh and skin/eyes comparisons at "portrait distance", with/without flash/leds (and Eye-AF) are what maters to me, not macro bible messages or stone wallings - joking. I get the usefulness and objectivity of all these tests so far and many thanks for this all inclusive approach! If You ask; so indeed to me personally only matters the portrait rendering. (As even more than one different 85mm lens could be useful depending on photographer's intentions, wile the average best could be "no good" lol...)
Portrait and bokeh are part of the second part. If I skipped covering resolution, however, people would melt down over that.
@@DustinAbbottTWI :-) oh sorry ! I'll go to part two !
Well, confused.. I actually had seen part two, and doubted aubout that whith Your response here above in part III. By re- viewing part II I understand my confusion: Although interesting, this video part 2 definitally does not strike me as a tool to confidently compare the lenses for "specialized, posed portraits" (with good repeeted bokeh rendering references next to each other, and where eye sharpness and skin texture is comparable).
Sorry.
correction: is the batis distortion corrected in camera?
I believe that it is in JPEGs
You might want to warn people that when you say a particular lens renders warm or cool, that it shows up that way in Adobe Lightroom's default setting, and you should note which version of LR because Adobe does change their rendering engine on occasion. I realize you use LR because of it's popularity but lately a lot of customers have gotten fed up with Adobe's "You can rent our software but you can't own it" philosophy so are looking at alternatives I especially recommend to users the manufacturers free software that usually renders the image much better than how Adobe's rendering engine works. I speak as a Nikon and Sony user but I was a journalist for four years mostly reviewing photographic gear, hardware and software, from all the major companies and used software from Canon, Fujifilm, Capture One (they quoted me in their ads and on their website). Manufacturer's software sometimes has it's advantages over Adobe's software with features like showing focusing points used for that image.
I would like to see you use the best overall rendering software, regardless of it's popularity, whether that be Adobe's product, Phase 1 Capture One's or some other. Personally I lean towards Capture One, with the added bonus for Sony and Fujifilm camera users of there being a free version for each of those cameras. Now, if we could only get Canon and Nikon on board also.
Hi Robert, I own essentially all of the major pieces of editing software and have played with rendering from all of them. Frankly I don't find much of a difference, and that is on high end, monthly color calibrated 4K displays. I use Lightroom because I like the workflow and know how to get the best out of images. I'm confident in my results.
I think the "know how to get the best out of images" is the most important part there!
Using 3rd party software is a necessity, when productively using gear from different brands, I guess: it surely doesn't help the workflow to use a dozen different programs for basically the same thing, and get all confused about how to do something on THAT software.
Whether Adobe is the optimal choice regarding the license is questionable at best, but if it gives you the results that you want, that's more important when it comes to your job!
For me it just wouldn't matter, as I don't make my living with photography. ;-)
@RobertJensen Hello, good afternoon. When you mention "free version for each of those cameras" Are you talking about a trial version? Capture One is $300.00. I use a Sony camera. Also, if I edit a raw with Capture One could I open it in photoshop and continue editing it, like I can with Lightroom?
@@princeharbinger Go to their website Downloads page. The versions are working versions which only work with Sony or Fujichrome, separate versions for each. They are missing a few pro features but you can Upgrade and save over the regular price, which is what I did. There are 2 upgrades, full Sony version, only for Sony cameras, or the true full version which works with all supported cameras.
@@princeharbinger search for Capture One Express Sony or Fuji.
Nice！！！
Just placed an order for viltrox
It's a lot of value for the money.
Samyang best bang for your buck, had for a month now!! Thanks again for your videos!!
I agree
Dustin Abbott y is that
im suprised how the viltrox faired well compared to sony
It's true...but it is a surprisingly strong lens all around for the money.
Both Sigma and Samyang looks wider than the GM
Wider? That's not the case with the Samyang, for sure.