Dustin, you are by far the best gear reviewer. Thanks to you, I was able to build my photography kit that best fit my budget with your informative videos as a guide.
Hi Dustin, I'm new to your reviews. I used to shoot Canon for about 30 years and 2 years ago switched to the Sony a7r2. I shoot almost exclusively with primes and have the Zeiss Batis 85, that I adore and shoot the Canon 135/2L with the Sigma MC11 adaptor. Your reviews are exceptional and exceed anything I have seen on TH-cam. Your images are also stellar. Thanks so much!
If you use back button focus and remove AF capabilities from the shutter button you can likely avoid the issue Dustin brings up at 6:00. This bypasses the necessity of locking focus before firing the shutter button, and works very well for lenses with full time manual focus (FTM). Most cameras these days can custom map buttons, making this a relatively simple procedure. Most people who shoot sports seriously will likely have experience with this method.
The samyang 135 F2 is also a sharp performant manual focusing lens and it is half the price of the canon. Mere mortals shouls also consider that. It could mean the difference between being able to afford this sec vs not at all. AF isn't everything. You could easily do a professional portrait shoot with manual focus.
I am glad I watched this review along with the Zeiss Milvus 135mm f/2 review you did. As a Nikon shooter, just confirms sticking to my choice of saving up for the Zeiss 135mm Milvus f/2. Like you said before Zeiss is really a good investment. Sigma still needs to perfect their auto focus system and address weather sealing on all the Art line series lenses; not just the most expensive ones. Their color saturation still isn't up to Zeiss standards either. Seems Sigma Art fans only want to talk about sharpness and when I hear that... I am thinking that I am listening either to either a newbie or someone who just does not understand the finer subtleties of photography.
+James R That's true to an extent, although this lens goes a long way towards adding more character than some of the earlier Art lenses that were mostly about sharpness.
Thank you Dustin for this video. Should I get the Sigma 135 1.8 or the 105 1.4? I already have the 55 1.8 Sony-Zeiss and the 90 2.8 macro Sony lens. The 90 2.8 is the sharpest lens I have ever seen, but I need something that gives better bokeh. Which one is sharper 105 or 135 and which one would you pick? Size and weight is not a problem for me as always use a roller bag. I love the fact that you can focus closer with the 135 but I already have the macro… But the 105 might be better for Indoor photography where space can be limited...Which produces better bokeh do you think with rounder bokeh balls?
@@DustinAbbottTWI Got the 105 Sigma which was on sale for 1300 USD here in Sweden, after getting the tax back (because I own a company) it ended up costing 1050 USD for me here in Sweden. i think it was worth picking it up, right? Can't wait to test it! The 105 1,4 might be very similar to my 90 2.8 macro, but I do think the bokeh will impress. Just hope the sharpness is similar to the 90 2.8 which is CRAZY sharp.
I agree 100% with most of your review, in-regard to the length or millimeters of the lens being too long for studio work, I have this very discussion with another photographer that was purchasing the 135mm and selling his 85mm and I talked him out of selling it. I have purchased the 135mm and I too had the focus issue, but I found that if I backed up just a bit it went away, because I was too close, I found the lens to be very sharp and I used my outer most focus point with no issues. This lens fits my shooting style, which is mostly outside where there's no issues with distance and I just love the bohke, my images appears to be sharp good contrast. The cost of the lens is $1300, which I did not find to be too much out of line when compared to Nikon's and Canon's, if you want professional quality you must pay for it, so I paid for it, I also purchased the Tamron 70mm-200mm f/2.8 G2 which was $1300, believe me it helps to have great credit. I am not a professional and don't earn my living as a photographer, but when I do take a job from time to time I want the best tools that I can afford. Thanks for allowing the time to voice views and here's a sample photo I took of my granddaughter's prom send off: scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/18449424_1700877823258996_4290227045031865747_o.jpg?oh=4fc79a18b4d94ff8ac0af5c0b7169a13&oe=59AB26C8
Thank you for the review, I am a High School Senior and sports shooter and i am really looking at this lens for a coiple of different applications. When you get a chance a review of the Sigma 70-200 New Sport would be amazing,
Hi mate, awesome videos. I am confused between canon 135mm f2l vs sigma 135mm f1.8. Please suggest me. My preference is sharpness and bokeh. Thanks un advance
Manny Ortiz and Robert Hall have both experienced AF issues similar to what you reported. I love the rendering from this lens but the AF issues keep me from purchasing it. Thanks to reviewers like you who save us thousands.
ah very true, just watched the robert hall video. I've noticed that on my 35 art also, but after my 3rd copy it's pretty good, stlll thinking of selling it for the 35 1.4 mk2 one day
Hi Dustin , lovely review.Thanks .For outdoor portraiture and weddings on a 5d mark 3 body would u recommend that I buy a 135 1.8 Art or the 85 1.4 Art?
I just subscribed to your channel, you really take the time to take the lenses for a run and not to focus on charts and tests, but trying to dynamically take good photos.
Just received my Sigma today, and tested my Sigma 135mm f/1.8 using the Fringer Pro ll on my Fujifilm X-T3 and was amazed by how sharp it is and the almost total lack of CA.
Thank you for the great review and the recommendation. I took your recommendation and purchased the 85mm Art since I'll be using it on my 80D for the mean time. Still waiting for it to be delivered. Love your reviews.
A very thorough series of reviews! I think autofocus issues also depend on the camera body you use with the lens. I don't have issues you mentioned with my 135Art on my Nikon D5. Anyway this lens performs well enough that makes me put down my 200mm f/2 lens most of the time since purchased.
This lens is better in terms of versatility, and offers close enough image qualities that 200mm f/2 does at the same time. It's become my favorite lens at least in the first half of 2017 (amongst the three lenses I bought Sigma 85 Art, Sigma 135 Art and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8e fl vr).
Thien Dinh I am not sure if you are a Canon or Nikon user. If you are shooting Nikon and using 70-200/2.8 VRii, you would be surprised by how close you can get to your subject and shoot. On the other hand if you are using Canon's latest 70-200/2.8, difference in minimum focusing distances is less but I'm sure you would still be able to tell difference in image quality. My major take on 135Art over 70-200/2.8 is the bokeh and shallow depth of field it produces. I personally don't think there is any problem owning 85, 135 and 70-200 at the same time as long as you use them often enough to justify their costs.
Great Review! Thanks. Would you recommend this lens for use as a lens with my D5 and D500 for lowlight dance performances in a fairly large theater? The autofocus needs to be very quick but not exceptional. Thanks.
As a lens that's largely going to be used for portraits did you find the inconsistency of outer focus points to be a potential deal breaker? With such a shallow depth of field focus and recompose isn't the best option I'd imagine, and usually for me the eye will be closer to one of those outer focus points.
It's hard to be definitive with a single copy of the lens, and, frankly, the anecdotal evidence I get back from a lot of different users varies widely. I don't want to potentially turn people off by painting in broad strokes where the truth is more nuanced. Many users report getting good autofocus accuracy.
That depends on how important size is for you. The Sigma is a pretty amazing lens, and has a much faster maximum aperture, but the Batis 135 is both a great size and has amazing IQ.
Dustin Abbott yes, actually size is not that important. I do not mind to have a heavy lens. I’m more concerned about the quality. Personally, if you had to choose between these 2 great lenses, what would you go for? Tanking into consideration the quality and features (aperture, sharpeners, Bokeh, AF, etc), regardless the size. Thanks so much, your videos are really helpful! You should do a comparison video between Batis and Sigma 135 ;)
I think I'd go for the Sigma in the FE version if size doesn't matter. It's cheaper, has a bigger maximum aperture, and you can use the IBIS to make up for the lack of OSS (which the Batis does have, BTW)
I own such a fantastic lens since yesterday and am very eager to try it out in a portrait shoot. I hope I'm gonna like it! Fantastic video though, thanks for this!
Dustin i have the canon 135 is worth to switch to sigma 135 art or as i already have a 135 just get the sigma 85mm instead? also i think canon is coming with new 85 1.4 IS
great review.. i am fan of your reviews.. after reading your reviews i bought milvus 85mm f1.4 , milvus 50mm f1.4 for my canon eos R set up.. and very much happy with my purchase.. manual focus is now enough for me.. i am now in need to buy one AF lens in between sigma art 105mm f1.4 or 135 mm f1.8.. i already used my friends canon 135mm f2 and happy with bokeh but in harsh light situations , brightness , flare and some low contrast issues set back for me.. so i finalized in between 105 or 135 mm .. my main interest is BOKEH.. not how far out of focus.. i am in favour of how smooth and rendering like milvus 85mm... sharpness is not an issue for my interest of photography.. focal length also not an issue.. i will manage with either 105 or 135 mm .. please suggest which one to buy.. thanks , suresh from india
Hello Dustin. Im a Fashion and a portrait photographer and i also do lots of beauty shoot and closeup shot. i used a 24-70 lens on my D810 and i now im hesitating about getting a Tamron 70-200mm G2 , Sigma 85mm 1.4 or the Sigma 135mm 1.8 art. What dou you advise me ? Thanks
If you are comfortable with something like a 24-70 then you might appreciate the versatility offered by the 70-200. You can do pretty much everything with that pair of lenses.
MY eleven (11) year old CARL ZEISS (SONY) 135mm f1.8 ("A" Mount) is second to none......It doesn't hunt.....Thank you very much! Since Sony ran away from A mount users i use this lens in place of the 70-200mm f2.8 lens but you are very correct when you say the prime 135mm lens has a distance disadvantage at times, I always carry a second camera so my 24-70mm f2.8 sits on that one......Seriously looking at the new ssm ll 16-35mm f2.8 A mount full frame since i can not purchase a new technology updated 24-70mm f2.8 cause Sony stopped it's production along with 3rd party lens makers playing follow the leader.....
No. I didn't have the Canon at the same time, and it isn't really in the conversation optically in a chartable way. It still is a beautiful lens in real world shooting, but doesn't hold up well in a comparison like this. The Milvus 135 destroys it.
Great job, I love your reviews. They're so in depth and so informative. I'm a Nikon shooter but your reviews always help me decide which third party lenses to purchase. Thanks a bunch!!!
Hi Dustin, Thanks for sharing your findings about the 135mmm f 1.8 Sigma Art, but having the 85 as well and using them side by side I found both to be very sharp with a neutral bokeh. It will be nice if you could perform another test wit a different 135 as your results don’t match my experience with them. In the bokeh area none of them match that ethereal quality from Carl Zeiss. There are variation in the production of the same lens mainly because centering, it can destroy the performance of a lens considerably. I have to return a 35 Art because it was unable to focus on the left side, Sigma replaced it and was very friendly, the new len is fine now. Thanks again 🙂👍
I did actually do a secondary test that you can find in the playlist with a second copy, and, while it didn't best the Milvus, it was much closer in performance.
I like the colors out of the Samyang a bit better, and sharpness is close (at least in the copy I reviewed). The Sigma is significantly bigger and heavier, but has autofocus, a larger maximum aperture, and some weather sealing.
Dustin Abbott well I just had a look today at the Samyang and manage to shoot some photos. Unfortunately I find it hard to focus so I may be getting the sigma in the end. :(
I have the 50mm but am thinking about upgrading to 85mm or 135mm Sigma's. I just can't decide which to get. I do mainly people photography. Senior pictures, headshots, family pictures, engagement sessions...things like that.
I don't have a comparison, as the difference in the focal lengths makes it hard to objectively compare them. I typically recommend pairing a 35mm with an 85mm and 50mm with a 135mm. Unless you have a TON of lenses, 50mm and 85mm are perhaps a little too close.
Hi Dustin! Great review, thanks! I would like to know your opinion about the optical quality between the sigma 135mm 1.8 vs the Samyang 135mm f2. Is it noticeable better IQ from one to another? Thank you very much! :)
I would have to agree Dustin is a great reviewer, who breaks things down into facts, more than his opinion his reviews are very informative. I like how Dustin does the initial review and the Final review after all of his test. I also think Darren Miles is also a great reviewer with some of the same talent and they both came to the same conclusion of this lens. What I like about them both is they follow up what they review with images, but Dustin is more informative, great job Dustin.
Hey Dustin, im looking for a 135 and 105 and 35 lens with a wide aperture. I heard Sigmas are amazing quality but are very poor in autofocus which is a big NO for me since i do wedding photography so i might go with the Nikon.I heard the new sigma lenses have fixed this problem, is this true and how will i know which sigma lenses wont give me trouble? i dont want to buy the wrong ones for my nikon cameras, thanks
is that with all Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art Lens Nikon Mount lenses or only the new batch ones that you have good experience with and heard from others too? is there a way to be safe when i buy the lens perhaps checking the serial number and see if its new batch or whatever? thanks. BTW i love you videos, one of the best most informed ive seen!
The 135 I tested was improved but not at the level of the 105. A new firmware update on that lens (which I think is now released) might make the difference.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks man! I heard the sigma 35mm 1.4 is giving a lot of people trouble with focussing as well. There is a nikon 35mm 1.4 and 35mm 1.8 but the 1.4 is about 3 times more expensive but i heard its a better quality. Is there a dramatic difference between the two or is it only minor? Speaking about the huge price gap not sure if its worth buying the better one. Also what do you think is better quality in the Nikom 50mm 1.4 or 1.8? Would be good to see you doing reviews about Nikon as well. Thanks!
@@DustinAbbottTWI I'm basically looking for a good depth of field lens for my Nikon D750 at a good zoom so anything above 135mm and up with reliable autofocus, good quality lens, shopping at wider aperture something like 1.8 and wider
This was an important review for me as I'm on the hunt for the ultimate portrait lens under $1500. I may just go with the sigma 85 and call it a day. Great review, very helpful. You always go the extra mile!
Hello Dustin I love the way u give detailed reviews wanted to buy a sigma 135 1.8art ( and 85 1.4 art after a while) is it worth buying instead of a 70 -200mm 2.8E Nikon For potrature work Can u Please make an image quality comparison between 70-200E lens(@ 85 and 135 ) with 85 and 135 sigma arts and add ur suggestions
Dear Dustin, Please when you post the comparison between the Zeiss and the Sigma , make a comparison at portrait distance and infinity and not only minimum focus distance where does Zeiss is clearly superior.
Great review as always! I'm now eagerly awaiting the Milvus comparison. I have one Sigma lense 18-35mm and although it was send in with the camera for calibration and I bought the USB dock for further corrections it still has bad front focus for objects under 80cm distance. I also found the problems you mentioned with off center focus points. My Milvus 50mm at the same time is just a work of art.
Optically and especially for landscapes, with focus at infinity, the Sigma is a great lense. Although, in comparison to the milvus, it also really lacks in contrast, but at least it's sharp. Let's wait and see what you have to say in the comparison video for the 135mm lenses. I cannot await it. ;)
This is exactly my experience with Zeiss lenses. You need next to no post processing and sometimes I even have to reduce the processing that is done by default in the programs because they overdo it. This is an aspect of Zeiss lenses that is nearly never mentioned in all the reviews. People always tell me that it is easy to add contrast for other lenses in post processing, but the images do not look the same as with Zeiss lenses nevertheless.
It sounds to me Sigma is really knocking it out of the park. These reviews made me go rent lens and do my own comparisons. So far i have the 50mm Art lens. I have converted my mom and dad as well, they were 100% canon only. I'm curious if Sigma will try to tackle a 16-35 2.8 lens.
I didn't have it, #1, and the Canon has been optically outclassed by the last 5 135mm lenses I've reviewed (Zeiss APO Sonnar 135mm, Samyang 135mm, Zeiss Milvus 2/135mm, Zeiss Batis 135mm f/2.8, and now this lens). It's not really an optical benchmark anymore.
Which is why, if I had my heart set on a quality 135mm Prime lens, I'd keep saving for one of the ones you mentioned above, rather than hop off the train at the $999.00 Canon 135mm F 2.0 L station:)
BTW, a friend had a struggle to wait for the Sigma to come out, or save longer for an APO Sonnar. When the Sonnar price dropped to 1449.00 to clear it from the shelves at B&H and Adorama, I gently "twisted her arm" to grab a Sonnar when the chance came up. She has no regrets for not waiting on the Sigma, and has learned to manual focus the Sonnar pretty well.
Having recently upgraded to the Zeiss MIlvus 135mm f2 from the Canon 135mm f2L, I can say after doing some of my own tests that the Canon 135 is still a superb lens in it's own right. And apart from the obvious price difference, the bokeh and colour rendering of the Canon 135 for me, is very close indeed to the Milvus 135 lens, however, when it comes to outright sharpness and micro contrast the Milvus knocks the Canon out of the park, which is really noticeable under f2.8
That's a tough call, and really depends on how important size is to you. Both lenses are optically beautiful, but the Sigma is much larger (but also much faster in its aperture). The Batis is much smaller, but also has a much smaller maximum aperture.
Thanks for getting back to me! i'm having the same problem picking between the sigma 14mm 1.8, and the batis 18mm 2.8.... lol big decisions with similar price tags
I hear a lot about the sigma 135 hunting for focus, I noticed this is only happening to those using the canon mount. I have yet to experience it myself on nikon or even see a review of the hunting issue with nikon mount.
I've not really shot with Sigma/Nikon combos, but I will say from the anecdotal evidence that comes back to me that fewer Nikon shooters complain about focus issues with Sigma lenses than Canon shooters. I would guess that Sigma had nailed Nikon's focus algorithms better than they have Canons.
Dustin I think you would love the Leica summicron and summilux lenses especially the latest ones for the SL mount and M mount. You must do a review of the SL system with the new lenses 24-90mm & 90-280mm & 50mm prime. Very very nice new lenses from Leica and of course the M mount lenses which are all very contrasty and I found have a distinctly different look to most other lenses such as Sigma, Canon, Nikon etc please do a review please. Would love to see your review on the Leica SL camera and lenses... please please
Great review but the ONLY lens I have ever had pack in was a Sigma - my Son was about to purchase a 35 Art - spoke with a professional photographer - he said he will love it but it WILL let him down brought a Zeiss instead - superb 😎😎😎
I did buy the Sigma 35 art after seeing your video on it and it now lives on my 6D 90% of the time during a wedding shoot. I only switch to my 85m 1.2 II for portraits and my zooms collect dust, it is also a matter of shooting style and I like to be close to my subjects. Note* the 35 art is also super sharp with extension tubes, a perfect combo for macro shots for wedding details.
Managing to weigh a bit more than a Zeiss lens is almost impressively heavy. My Canon 135/2.0L weighs 750g compared to the 1130g Sigma. My brain suggests getting the Sigma but my back vetoes that idea.
I have the Sigma 85mm ART. It is seriously a large lens, but I like how robust it feels. My partner has the Tamron, and with the VC turned off, it is a super sharp lens, rivaling the Sigma 85 ART. My Sigma has a slight edge on bokeh, but he gets me with consistent focus.
Same boat here; plus the Canon allows the option of working pretty well with the 1.4X extender which I already have and saving me from having to carry a 200mm f/2.8 lens which ways another 1.5 Kgr :-) I do not care much for the extra weather sealing. What I want to know is the IQ (incl. rendering, micro-contrast, etc.) so much better in the Sigma to justify the extra weight and/or can one see this extra IQ only in higher MP cameras like the SONY a7RIII or the the 5DMIV and in lower MPs (e.g. 6D, 1DxII) any IQ difference is hardly noticeable.
Today I finally had the chance to use my Sigma 135mm f/1.8 HSM ART in a photo-shoot, my cousin and I both the same lens and even before I could take my camera out and mount the lens he was saying to himself "it's hunting, dang it's hunting". And when I finally attempted to take my first shot it was hunting before it would settle down and acquire focus. The lens did this all during the shoot, but I did notice that the 85mm f/1.4 did not exhibit the hunting issue. I also notice that some of my photos were not in focus, so the lens also sometimes has an issue with acquiring accurate focus, but when it does the images are amazing, when shooting at f/1.8 the background just melts away, is it a deal breaker no, not for me or my cousin, he was shooting with the Nikon D800 and I the D610 both set to single focus point and single mode, I did not notice use the center point was any better, but I am keeping it.
Yes I checked the focus and the focus was ok, I did not see any front or back focus issues. The issue may be produced in low contrasting light conditions. When focusing on item around the house it fine, but the issue arise when shooting a dark skinned model.
Hmmm, I didn't do enough portrait sessions to actually be in that situation, but that can be an issue for some lenses and/or focus systems. Less contrast in some lighting conditions. Thanks for the feedback. I do have another copy coming in for evaluation, so I'll have to borrow someone darker skinned from my congregation and try a few quick portraits with them.
Let me set the site of the shoot, it was about 5:30 PM with rows of tree on either side, the model was standing in the middle of the two rows of trees, here's a copy: scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t35.0-12/18836291_1719006331446145_1937618625_o.jpg?oh=503bbc5cda7bb6fd6a95581d2ba85e18&oe=592E3A31 I will attempt to adjust the front/back focus again and attempt to recreate the issue.
Ok I was able to get around to performing the focus calibration, here's my results, I had to make a -15 adjustment to the back focus, here a photo: scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t35.0-12/18817370_1719260934754018_1901982433_o.png?oh=1e0fbaf9c2fa2f94dce1ba639fe4f28a&oe=592E3959 the image on the left is zero adjustments and the right image after -15 back focus. I hope this corrects the miss focus issues.
Dustin, I am relatively new subscriber to your channel. Thank you very much for your efforts in making great reviews. I am in the market for a 135mm prime and I had narrowed down to the Milvus, Canon L and now the Sigma. I tested the Canon L a couple of days ago and I can't get over the chromatic aberration. So now it is between the Milvus and Sigma. My question to you is...do you have any tricks to master manual focus?
5D Mark IV unfortunately isn't a particularly friendly body for MF glass. I do use MF glass on it because I love the IQ, but you are left either relying on Live View (which works well but a bit clunky) or relying on the focus confirmation chip. You have to learn the technique with the latter, which is mostly about selecting the AF point, holding the shutter button down halfway, and fully depressing the shutter as soon as you hear the confirmation beepl.
Excellent work as usual Dustin. I've been thinking about the focus issue that I mentioned in the other part of this series. It is possible that those of us that felt we saw some slight back focusing were fooled by something more sinister. That issue would be that you may possibly have a soft copy of the 135 (even though it looks good). I say this because every other review/comparison of similar lenses (135 vs 85) has the 135 as the sharper lens. In fact, the 135 is often the sharpest lens tested by many other reviewers. The best examples of this is at lenstip.com and DxOMark. Having said all that, I most definitely am nitpicking, as you do a masterful job with giving info and comparisons in multiple areas of the subject lens. Thank you for the outstanding review!
That's entirely possible, though I can only work with the lenses I actually have on hand. That's why I give the disclaimer that it is comparing only one copy of each lens, and they may or may not be representative of peak performance.
I'd prefer no music, as I often find background music distracting. However, if you could play music in your room while listening to the review. Then you'll get your background music, and you even get to choose what it is😊
Other reviewers have found the Sigma 135mm Art to be not only sharper than the 85, but indeed the sharpest lens they ever tested, and simply perfect. So I tend to think your test specimen must have been slightly flawed.
Looking forward to you doing a review of the Sigma 24-70 2.8 vs the Canon 24-70 2.8 ii if you can. It's being rumored Canon is going to release one with IS, which I would really like. The 24-70 2.8 ii is my main lens, however I use a 35mm F/2 IS prime for a ton of things due to the IS. The old IS in the 24-105 F/4 has issues. I really hope this Canon rumor is true.
We'll see about the IS version. I suspect it is still a ways out. I plan to compare the Sigma, Tamron G2 version, and Canon L II when everything is released.
I'm confused, really. Every other reviewers say the 135mm sharper, here it's the 85mm that is sharper. I also look at the comparison photos on 'imaging-resource.com, and what I saw in the corner when I zooming the image is that the 135mm's image was sharper.
I brought in a second copy of the lens that was sharper than the first. There is some sample variation out there, so not all reviewers might have the same experience.
i watch at least one of your videos once a day even though i dont intend to buy any sigma lens anytime soon but why is it so or maybe i conclude this that most of the sigma lenses have some issues here and there that they do not fit exactly to what you are looking for except one or two lenses that i got to know are pretty sharp. i mean there always are better options in every single case at least according to my preferences
How about comparing it to the Nikkor 135 f2. This art lens is more expensive than the Nikkor which some believe to be the best portrait lens. I give that position to the Nikkor 200 f2.
Thanks for your down to earth, comprehensive review of this lens. Until now, because of my Sigma focus experience with the 35mm ART, I had decided to totally avoid purchasing their lenses. Since you mentioned the center focus point produced more consistent results, I hope that might be a way of minimizing focus problems.
I think this 135 ART is a bigger deal for Nikon shooters, than for Canon shooters. The Nikkor 135 DC is really outdated, and has huge amount of aberrations, flare problems, not to mention that it is really soft. The Canon 135L is cheaper, and pretty good optically (Canon colors and bokeh anyone?), so it will definitely not sell as well as the Nikon ones. By the way, you might have a very good 85 copy and a weak 135 copy, because the sharpness difference is way too huge, especially in the corners. Quite weird...
oh i forgot! . . if you could pass on, us video people need to zoom in on waiste shots to to tight head shots! . . it would be great if sigma made a canon plastic usm quaitly for the 24-7O f2.8 or f2.O!!!! . . and "plasticky" 7O to 2OO f2.8 (like canon 55-250!!!!) . . both around $8OO!!!! . . we all deserve to eat!!!! :-)
it looks as if Sigma made a 135 prime that has the spirit of the Nikon 58mm f/1,4... with some poetry inside... as opposed to the clinical look of all the Art line.
i have a daughter i love sooo much!!!! and four cats!!!! (one of which needs $4OO of medical help right now . . now!), my toyota carolla got stollen, over $3500 of camera gear got stolen!! . . im trying to do about four videos for now . . i need a 6d mk ii, (already have 6d "camera a") i need a new "soprano-bright tone mic," a ribbon backup-stereo mic, i need a $125 gimbal and $99 slider some $300 worth of waves software, and i need to refret four guitars 61OO size, etc so it would be great if sigma would make a 24 mm, 35, 50 85, 100, 135mm full frame sensor primes . . usm quality mostly plastic lenses at f1.8 to 1.4 . . at the "parents-toyota owners" pricepoints of $4OO to $65O!!!! :-) because a lot of us want to finish-continue our art pieces!!!! . . i own a dg hsm 7O-2OO 2.8 . . sigma would be great for "us" to own considering to sigma "$4OO to $65O quality price point"! . . thank you!!!! :-)
Interesting viewpoint. Sigma has really abandoned that section of the market in pursuit of competing in the luxury lens field (the most recent ART releases are the most expensive). It is obviously profitable for them, though, as they seem to be putting most of their development dollars into that area.
Don't know how you can say that the sigma 85mm f1.4 art is sharper when imperical lab test evidence that I have seen on sharpness says otherwise. Perhaps you should take a look and lab tests and forget your Anecdotal on sharpness as it is inaccurate.
Ahhh, so disregard the evidence in front of me and rather accept the findings of strangers using different lenses and equipment from the ones I'm testing with no way to account for their methods or biases? Brilliant idea.
in the end its a sigma so will never be a first choice the differences will always be minimal with price often having greater leverage, its a new lens with others second hand competing favourable with 500 dollars for a good L, god knows what a zeiss is, both of these second hand have greater trust in their longevity than a sigma
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Dustin, you are by far the best gear reviewer. Thanks to you, I was able to build my photography kit that best fit my budget with your informative videos as a guide.
That's great feedback.
Agreed!
Sigma 135 1.8 Art has one of the finest and sharpest glasses I have ever used in my 10yrs photography experience. Totally recommend it.
Definitely a very sharp lens.
Hi Dustin, I'm new to your reviews. I used to shoot Canon for about 30 years and 2 years ago switched to the Sony a7r2. I shoot almost exclusively with primes and have the Zeiss Batis 85, that I adore and shoot the Canon 135/2L with the Sigma MC11 adaptor. Your reviews are exceptional and exceed anything I have seen on TH-cam. Your images are also stellar. Thanks so much!
That's great feedback, Robert. Thank you!
If you use back button focus and remove AF capabilities from the shutter button you can likely avoid the issue Dustin brings up at 6:00. This bypasses the necessity of locking focus before firing the shutter button, and works very well for lenses with full time manual focus (FTM). Most cameras these days can custom map buttons, making this a relatively simple procedure. Most people who shoot sports seriously will likely have experience with this method.
That's a good recommendation for sports shooters.
Thanks. Clearly the best, relaxed and most unbiased lens reviews on youtube. Can’t afford any of the lenses but always enjoying your videos.
Thanks for the feedback!
The samyang 135 F2 is also a sharp performant manual focusing lens and it is half the price of the canon. Mere mortals shouls also consider that. It could mean the difference between being able to afford this sec vs not at all. AF isn't everything. You could easily do a professional portrait shoot with manual focus.
Yes, though 135 is a fairly demanding focal length to MF
I am glad I watched this review along with the Zeiss Milvus 135mm f/2 review you did. As a Nikon shooter, just confirms sticking to my choice of saving up for the Zeiss 135mm Milvus f/2. Like you said before Zeiss is really a good investment. Sigma still needs to perfect their auto focus system and address weather sealing on all the Art line series lenses; not just the most expensive ones. Their color saturation still isn't up to Zeiss standards either. Seems Sigma Art fans only want to talk about sharpness and when I hear that... I am thinking that I am listening either to either a newbie or someone who just does not understand the finer subtleties of photography.
+James R That's true to an extent, although this lens goes a long way towards adding more character than some of the earlier Art lenses that were mostly about sharpness.
Thank you Dustin for this video. Should I get the Sigma 135 1.8 or the 105 1.4? I already have the 55 1.8 Sony-Zeiss and the 90 2.8 macro Sony lens. The 90 2.8 is the sharpest lens I have ever seen, but I need something that gives better bokeh. Which one is sharper 105 or 135 and which one would you pick? Size and weight is not a problem for me as always use a roller bag. I love the fact that you can focus closer with the 135 but I already have the macro… But the 105 might be better for Indoor photography where space can be limited...Which produces better bokeh do you think with rounder bokeh balls?
In your case I would probably recommend the 135 just because it is a more diverse focal length from your other lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Got the 105 Sigma which was on sale for 1300 USD here in Sweden, after getting the tax back (because I own a company) it ended up costing 1050 USD for me here in Sweden. i think it was worth picking it up, right? Can't wait to test it! The 105 1,4 might be very similar to my 90 2.8 macro, but I do think the bokeh will impress. Just hope the sharpness is similar to the 90 2.8 which is CRAZY sharp.
I agree 100% with most of your review, in-regard to the length or millimeters of the lens being too long for studio work, I have this very discussion with another photographer that was purchasing the 135mm and selling his 85mm and I talked him out of selling it. I have purchased the 135mm and I too had the focus issue, but I found that if I backed up just a bit it went away, because I was too close, I found the lens to be very sharp and I used my outer most focus point with no issues. This lens fits my shooting style, which is mostly outside where there's no issues with distance and I just love the bohke, my images appears to be sharp good contrast. The cost of the lens is $1300, which I did not find to be too much out of line when compared to Nikon's and Canon's, if you want professional quality you must pay for it, so I paid for it, I also purchased the Tamron 70mm-200mm f/2.8 G2 which was $1300, believe me it helps to have great credit. I am not a professional and don't earn my living as a photographer, but when I do take a job from time to time I want the best tools that I can afford. Thanks for allowing the time to voice views and here's a sample photo I took of my granddaughter's prom send off: scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/18449424_1700877823258996_4290227045031865747_o.jpg?oh=4fc79a18b4d94ff8ac0af5c0b7169a13&oe=59AB26C8
That's a lovely shot.
Lovely shot…
Thank you for the review, I am a High School Senior and sports shooter and i am really looking at this lens for a coiple of different applications.
When you get a chance a review of the Sigma 70-200 New Sport would be amazing,
That's on the schedule, for sure.
Hi mate, awesome videos. I am confused between canon 135mm f2l vs sigma 135mm f1.8. Please suggest me. My preference is sharpness and bokeh. Thanks un advance
The quality of the bokeh is fairly similar (though there will be some fringing with the Canon). The Sigma is definitely sharper.
Manny Ortiz and Robert Hall have both experienced AF issues similar to what you reported. I love the rendering from this lens but the AF issues keep me from purchasing it. Thanks to reviewers like you who save us thousands.
Interesting. I think that many people will have no problem with their focus results, but some will.
Samad Khan manny Ortiz was using an adapter on his Sony not on a native canon body
Yes but Robert Hall and Dustin weren't using adapters.
ah very true, just watched the robert hall video. I've noticed that on my 35 art also, but after my 3rd copy it's pretty good, stlll thinking of selling it for the 35 1.4 mk2 one day
The 35L II is expensive, but what an amazing lens! I love it.
If you are keeping them would you consider putting it against the samyang if it happens to fall in you lap?
If those stars ever align, perhaps, but pretty much everything does go back unless I buy a copy for my own kit.
Hi Dustin , lovely review.Thanks .For outdoor portraiture and weddings on a 5d mark 3 body would u recommend that I buy a 135 1.8 Art or the 85 1.4 Art?
I like the rendering better from the 135, myself.
I just subscribed to your channel, you really take the time to take the lenses for a run and not to focus on charts and tests, but trying to dynamically take good photos.
That's definitely my goal. How a lens does in a lab is often less than the whole story.
Just received my Sigma today, and tested my Sigma 135mm f/1.8 using the Fringer Pro ll on my Fujifilm X-T3 and was amazed by how sharp it is and the almost total lack of CA.
Interesting. I wasn't aware of a Fuji adapter.
@@DustinAbbottTWI www.fringeradapter.com/#for-x-mount
Really enjoy your thorough and informative reviews, thanks Dustin 😃
+dunnymonster My pleasure. Thanks for commenting
what do you think about the sigma 85mm 1.4 for nikon autofocus? is it the same performance as the 105? im looking to buy the 85mm
I don't shoot Nikon, so I can't comment.
Thank you for the great review and the recommendation. I took your recommendation and purchased the 85mm Art since I'll be using it on my 80D for the mean time. Still waiting for it to be delivered. Love your reviews.
Enjoy.
A very thorough series of reviews! I think autofocus issues also depend on the camera body you use with the lens. I don't have issues you mentioned with my 135Art on my Nikon D5. Anyway this lens performs well enough that makes me put down my 200mm f/2 lens most of the time since purchased.
+Steven Lui If you are putting down a 2/200mm in favor of this lens that is very high praise indeed!
This lens is better in terms of versatility, and offers close enough image qualities that 200mm f/2 does at the same time. It's become my favorite lens at least in the first half of 2017 (amongst the three lenses I bought Sigma 85 Art, Sigma 135 Art and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8e fl vr).
Steven Lui I have 70-200 II 2.8, Sigma 85 1.4 Art, and thinking of getting 135 1.8 as a cheap man version of 200 f2. Is the 135 redundant?
Thien Dinh I am not sure if you are a Canon or Nikon user. If you are shooting Nikon and using 70-200/2.8 VRii, you would be surprised by how close you can get to your subject and shoot. On the other hand if you are using Canon's latest 70-200/2.8, difference in minimum focusing distances is less but I'm sure you would still be able to tell difference in image quality. My major take on 135Art over 70-200/2.8 is the bokeh and shallow depth of field it produces. I personally don't think there is any problem owning 85, 135 and 70-200 at the same time as long as you use them often enough to justify their costs.
Steven Lui I have the Canon 70-200 II. Thank you for your input.
Great Review! Thanks. Would you recommend this lens for use as a lens with my D5 and D500 for lowlight dance performances in a fairly large theater? The autofocus needs to be very quick but not exceptional. Thanks.
I would say it should be a nice choice.
Thanks!
As a lens that's largely going to be used for portraits did you find the inconsistency of outer focus points to be a potential deal breaker? With such a shallow depth of field focus and recompose isn't the best option I'd imagine, and usually for me the eye will be closer to one of those outer focus points.
It's hard to be definitive with a single copy of the lens, and, frankly, the anecdotal evidence I get back from a lot of different users varies widely. I don't want to potentially turn people off by painting in broad strokes where the truth is more nuanced. Many users report getting good autofocus accuracy.
Good to hear, thanks! I'll have to try and get my hands on it
Between this Lens and the Batis 135 f2.8, which one could you recommend? I own a Sony a7R 3. Thanks so much
That depends on how important size is for you. The Sigma is a pretty amazing lens, and has a much faster maximum aperture, but the Batis 135 is both a great size and has amazing IQ.
Dustin Abbott yes, actually size is not that important. I do not mind to have a heavy lens. I’m more concerned about the quality. Personally, if you had to choose between these 2 great lenses, what would you go for? Tanking into consideration the quality and features (aperture, sharpeners, Bokeh, AF, etc), regardless the size.
Thanks so much, your videos are really helpful! You should do a comparison video between Batis and Sigma 135 ;)
I think I'd go for the Sigma in the FE version if size doesn't matter. It's cheaper, has a bigger maximum aperture, and you can use the IBIS to make up for the lack of OSS (which the Batis does have, BTW)
Dustin Abbott Thanks so much, I really appreciate your suggestions!
Thank you for advise to buy sigma 135 art lens
You' welcome.
I own such a fantastic lens since yesterday and am very eager to try it out in a portrait shoot. I hope I'm gonna like it! Fantastic video though, thanks for this!
Enjoy; it’s an excellent lens.
Dustin i have the canon 135 is worth to switch to sigma 135 art or as i already have a 135 just get the sigma 85mm instead? also i think canon is coming with new 85 1.4 IS
Are you dissatisfied with the Canon?
Dustin Abbott no no I love the canon 135 I just want to get a 85mm with decent price so I'll be set for portrait
I have canon's 50 1.2 and 135 2.0
+Rody Myself then get the 85 and keep your 135.
great review.. i am fan of your reviews.. after reading your reviews i bought milvus 85mm f1.4 , milvus 50mm f1.4 for my canon eos R set up.. and very much happy with my purchase.. manual focus is now enough for me.. i am now in need to buy one AF lens in between sigma art 105mm f1.4 or 135 mm f1.8.. i already used my friends canon 135mm f2 and happy with bokeh but in harsh light situations , brightness , flare and some low contrast issues set back for me.. so i finalized in between 105 or 135 mm .. my main interest is BOKEH.. not how far out of focus.. i am in favour of how smooth and rendering like milvus 85mm... sharpness is not an issue for my interest of photography.. focal length also not an issue.. i will manage with either 105 or 135 mm .. please suggest which one to buy.. thanks , suresh from india
Both of those Sigma lenses are excellent for that. I'd probably lean towards the 135mm if you already have an 85mm.
As usual,very informative and insightful.Thank you Dustin for providing that much details.
My pleasure.
Hello Dustin. Im a Fashion and a portrait photographer and i also do lots of beauty shoot and closeup shot. i used a 24-70 lens on my D810 and i now im hesitating about getting a Tamron 70-200mm G2 , Sigma 85mm 1.4 or the Sigma 135mm 1.8 art. What dou you advise me ? Thanks
If you are comfortable with something like a 24-70 then you might appreciate the versatility offered by the 70-200. You can do pretty much everything with that pair of lenses.
You are at least the third reviewer I saw who stressed out the AF hunting of this lens. This could be a show stopper in some cases.
It was only in a very rare situation
Great review Dustin as always!
Thanks
MY eleven (11) year old CARL ZEISS (SONY) 135mm f1.8 ("A" Mount) is second to none......It doesn't hunt.....Thank you very much! Since Sony ran away from A mount users i use this lens in place of the 70-200mm f2.8 lens but you are very correct when you say the prime 135mm lens has a distance disadvantage at times, I always carry a second camera so my 24-70mm f2.8 sits on that one......Seriously looking at the new ssm ll 16-35mm f2.8 A mount full frame since i can not purchase a new technology updated 24-70mm f2.8 cause Sony stopped it's production along with 3rd party lens makers playing follow the leader.....
Nice review Dustin, i might of missed it, but were you able to compare this lens to the Canon 135 f/2?
No. I didn't have the Canon at the same time, and it isn't really in the conversation optically in a chartable way. It still is a beautiful lens in real world shooting, but doesn't hold up well in a comparison like this. The Milvus 135 destroys it.
Dustin Abbott are you saying the Sigma is better than the Canon?
+justin holding in most ways it is, yes
Thank you for the video review Dustin! Awesome like always!
My pleasure
Thank you! Great review and comparison!
Thanks, Rob.
Great job, I love your reviews. They're so in depth and so informative. I'm a Nikon shooter but your reviews always help me decide which third party lenses to purchase. Thanks a bunch!!!
+Tou Yang That's great to hear. I'm glad they help
Hi Dustin, Thanks for sharing your findings about the 135mmm f 1.8 Sigma Art, but having the 85 as well and using them side by side I found both to be very sharp with a neutral bokeh. It will be nice if you could perform another test wit a different 135 as your results don’t match my experience with them. In the bokeh area none of them match that ethereal quality from Carl Zeiss. There are variation in the production of the same lens mainly because centering, it can destroy the performance of a lens considerably. I have to return a 35 Art because it was unable to focus on the left side, Sigma replaced it and was very friendly, the new len is fine now.
Thanks again 🙂👍
I did actually do a secondary test that you can find in the playlist with a second copy, and, while it didn't best the Milvus, it was much closer in performance.
Dustin Abbott
Thanks Dustin, I will watch the second review. 😉
Thank you for yr videos. A quick question : how does it compared with the Samyang 135 f2? Any idea? Thanx
I like the colors out of the Samyang a bit better, and sharpness is close (at least in the copy I reviewed). The Sigma is significantly bigger and heavier, but has autofocus, a larger maximum aperture, and some weather sealing.
Dustin Abbott well I just had a look today at the Samyang and manage to shoot some photos. Unfortunately I find it hard to focus so I may be getting the sigma in the end. :(
That is the great challenge with this focal length and a MF lens.
Dustin Abbott thank you for yr replies :)
Great in depth review as ever Dustin, as others have said, eagerly awaiting the Milvus/Sigma shoot out!
+Chris Rout I'm sure you will find it interesting.
Ha, oh I don't doubt that for one minute! ;)
Yet again, a great review! Thanks Dustin!
Thanks!
Do you have a review comparing the Sigma 50MM 1.4 art lens (which I have) to the Sigma 85mm 1.8 art lens?
I have the 50mm but am thinking about upgrading to 85mm or 135mm Sigma's. I just can't decide which to get. I do mainly people photography. Senior pictures, headshots, family pictures, engagement sessions...things like that.
I don't have a comparison, as the difference in the focal lengths makes it hard to objectively compare them. I typically recommend pairing a 35mm with an 85mm and 50mm with a 135mm. Unless you have a TON of lenses, 50mm and 85mm are perhaps a little too close.
Hi Dustin! Great review, thanks! I would like to know your opinion about the optical quality between the sigma 135mm 1.8 vs the Samyang 135mm f2. Is it noticeable better IQ from one to another? Thank you very much! :)
There's not a major difference. On DSLRs, though, the Samyang is pretty hard to nail focus with, so the Sigma is more practical.
I would have to agree Dustin is a great reviewer, who breaks things down into facts, more than his opinion his reviews are very informative. I like how Dustin does the initial review and the Final review after all of his test. I also think Darren Miles is also a great reviewer with some of the same talent and they both came to the same conclusion of this lens. What I like about them both is they follow up what they review with images, but Dustin is more informative, great job Dustin.
+sid vicious thank you for the kind feedback
Hey Dustin, im looking for a 135 and 105 and 35 lens with a wide aperture. I heard Sigmas are amazing quality but are very poor in autofocus which is a big NO for me since i do wedding photography so i might go with the Nikon.I heard the new sigma lenses have fixed this problem, is this true and how will i know which sigma lenses wont give me trouble? i dont want to buy the wrong ones for my nikon cameras, thanks
The new 105mm gave me excellent focus results on Canon, and I've had some Nikon users say the same.
is that with all Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art Lens Nikon Mount lenses or only the new batch ones that you have good experience with and heard from others too? is there a way to be safe when i buy the lens perhaps checking the serial number and see if its new batch or whatever? thanks. BTW i love you videos, one of the best most informed ive seen!
The 135 I tested was improved but not at the level of the 105. A new firmware update on that lens (which I think is now released) might make the difference.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks man! I heard the sigma 35mm 1.4 is giving a lot of people trouble with focussing as well. There is a nikon 35mm 1.4 and 35mm 1.8 but the 1.4 is about 3 times more expensive but i heard its a better quality. Is there a dramatic difference between the two or is it only minor? Speaking about the huge price gap not sure if its worth buying the better one.
Also what do you think is better quality in the Nikom 50mm 1.4 or 1.8?
Would be good to see you doing reviews about Nikon as well. Thanks!
@@DustinAbbottTWI I'm basically looking for a good depth of field lens for my Nikon D750 at a good zoom so anything above 135mm and up with reliable autofocus, good quality lens, shopping at wider aperture something like 1.8 and wider
This was an important review for me as I'm on the hunt for the ultimate portrait lens under $1500. I may just go with the sigma 85 and call it a day. Great review, very helpful. You always go the extra mile!
+John Koster Thank you. I'm glad that it helped.
Hello Dustin I love the way u give detailed reviews
wanted to buy a sigma 135 1.8art ( and 85 1.4 art after a while) is it worth buying instead of a 70 -200mm 2.8E Nikon
For potrature work
Can u Please make an image quality comparison between 70-200E lens(@ 85 and 135 ) with 85 and 135 sigma arts and add ur suggestions
I'm afraid I don't shoot Nikon.
Dustin Abbott afraid? Haha..
Dear Dustin,
Please when you post the comparison between the Zeiss and the Sigma , make a comparison at portrait distance and infinity and not only minimum focus distance where does Zeiss is clearly superior.
Portrait distance is a part of it, but not infinity. It's already been shot, and the Sigma has already been returned.
Dustin Abbott Thank you for the fast answer!
Another great review! Keep up the good work!
Thanks. Will do!
Great review as always! I'm now eagerly awaiting the Milvus comparison. I have one Sigma lense 18-35mm and although it was send in with the camera for calibration and I bought the USB dock for further corrections it still has bad front focus for objects under 80cm distance. I also found the problems you mentioned with off center focus points. My Milvus 50mm at the same time is just a work of art.
+Joh Kem The good news is that the 18-35 ART was the worst offender I've used from the ART series in terms of autofocus. Optically beautiful, though.
Optically and especially for landscapes, with focus at infinity, the Sigma is a great lense. Although, in comparison to the milvus, it also really lacks in contrast, but at least it's sharp. Let's wait and see what you have to say in the comparison video for the 135mm lenses. I cannot await it. ;)
Zeiss lenses really excel at contrast and micro-contrast. Images from a Zeiss almost always need less post processing to make them look special
This is exactly my experience with Zeiss lenses. You need next to no post processing and sometimes I even have to reduce the processing that is done by default in the programs because they overdo it. This is an aspect of Zeiss lenses that is nearly never mentioned in all the reviews. People always tell me that it is easy to add contrast for other lenses in post processing, but the images do not look the same as with Zeiss lenses nevertheless.
That's true. There is something unique about Zeiss rendering.
It sounds to me Sigma is really knocking it out of the park. These reviews made me go rent lens and do my own comparisons. So far i have the 50mm Art lens. I have converted my mom and dad as well, they were 100% canon only. I'm curious if Sigma will try to tackle a 16-35 2.8 lens.
I kind of doubt it, considering that they just released the 12-24 f/4 ART.
Dang. That bubble front element is a huge pain, thats what I like about the 16-35 series from canon. The f/4 and 2.8
Thank you Dustin, your review has helped a lot to me, as soon as I got the money, I'll go for it.
Glad to help out!
Excellent advice and review!!
Thank you.
Thanks for this series, although am unclear why you did not include the Canon 135 L as a baseline?
I didn't have it, #1, and the Canon has been optically outclassed by the last 5 135mm lenses I've reviewed (Zeiss APO Sonnar 135mm, Samyang 135mm, Zeiss Milvus 2/135mm, Zeiss Batis 135mm f/2.8, and now this lens). It's not really an optical benchmark anymore.
Which is why, if I had my heart set on a quality 135mm Prime lens, I'd keep saving for one of the ones you mentioned above, rather than hop off the train at the $999.00 Canon 135mm F 2.0 L station:)
BTW, a friend had a struggle to wait for the Sigma to come out, or save longer for an APO Sonnar. When the Sonnar price dropped to 1449.00 to clear it from the shelves at B&H and Adorama, I gently "twisted her arm" to grab a Sonnar when the chance came up. She has no regrets for not waiting on the Sigma, and has learned to manual focus the Sonnar pretty well.
I thought you still owned it, based on our previous chats and images - thanks for the response.
Having recently upgraded to the Zeiss MIlvus 135mm f2 from the Canon 135mm f2L, I can say after doing some of my own tests that the Canon 135 is still a superb lens in it's own right. And apart from the obvious price difference, the bokeh and colour rendering of the Canon 135 for me, is very close indeed to the Milvus 135 lens, however, when it comes to outright sharpness and micro contrast the Milvus knocks the Canon out of the park, which is really noticeable under f2.8
sigma 135mm 1.8 or zeiss batis 135mm 2.8 for sony emount? im stuck
That's a tough call, and really depends on how important size is to you. Both lenses are optically beautiful, but the Sigma is much larger (but also much faster in its aperture). The Batis is much smaller, but also has a much smaller maximum aperture.
Thanks for getting back to me! i'm having the same problem picking between the sigma 14mm 1.8, and the batis 18mm 2.8.... lol big decisions with similar price tags
I hear a lot about the sigma 135 hunting for focus, I noticed this is only happening to those using the canon mount. I have yet to experience it myself on nikon or even see a review of the hunting issue with nikon mount.
I've not really shot with Sigma/Nikon combos, but I will say from the anecdotal evidence that comes back to me that fewer Nikon shooters complain about focus issues with Sigma lenses than Canon shooters. I would guess that Sigma had nailed Nikon's focus algorithms better than they have Canons.
Dustin I think you would love the Leica summicron and summilux lenses especially the latest ones for the SL mount and M mount. You must do a review of the SL system with the new lenses 24-90mm & 90-280mm & 50mm prime. Very very nice new lenses from Leica and of course the M mount lenses which are all very contrasty and I found have a distinctly different look to most other lenses such as Sigma, Canon, Nikon etc please do a review please. Would love to see your review on the Leica SL camera and lenses... please please
+damianc80 I'm afraid that's not in the cards right now. I am overwhelmed just trying to keep up with the gear I do review.
Another great review Dustin. Thank you.
+Cactus Tweeter Thank you
Great review but the ONLY lens I have ever had pack in was a Sigma - my Son was about to purchase a 35 Art - spoke with a professional photographer - he said he will love it but it WILL
let him down brought a Zeiss instead - superb 😎😎😎
That does happen, though I also know people who own the Sigma ART lenses and love them.
A fair point.
I did buy the Sigma 35 art after seeing your video on it and it now lives on my 6D 90% of the time during a wedding shoot. I only switch to my 85m 1.2 II for portraits and my zooms collect dust, it is also a matter of shooting style and I like to be close to my subjects. Note* the 35 art is also super sharp with extension tubes, a perfect combo for macro shots for wedding details.
Managing to weigh a bit more than a Zeiss lens is almost impressively heavy.
My Canon 135/2.0L weighs 750g compared to the 1130g Sigma. My brain suggests getting the Sigma but my back vetoes that idea.
That's a serious concern, and one of the main reasons I've got the Tamron 85 VC in my kit instead of one of the other 85mm f/1.4 options.
I have the Sigma 85mm ART. It is seriously a large lens, but I like how robust it feels. My partner has the Tamron, and with the VC turned off, it is a super sharp lens, rivaling the Sigma 85 ART. My Sigma has a slight edge on bokeh, but he gets me with consistent focus.
Same boat here; plus the Canon allows the option of working pretty well with the 1.4X extender which I already have and saving me from having to carry a 200mm f/2.8 lens which ways another 1.5 Kgr :-) I do not care much for the extra weather sealing. What I want to know is the IQ (incl. rendering, micro-contrast, etc.) so much better in the Sigma to justify the extra weight and/or can one see this extra IQ only in higher MP cameras like the SONY a7RIII or the the 5DMIV and in lower MPs (e.g. 6D, 1DxII) any IQ difference is hardly noticeable.
Today I finally had the chance to use my Sigma 135mm f/1.8 HSM ART in a photo-shoot, my cousin and I both the same lens and even before I could take my camera out and mount the lens he was saying to himself "it's hunting, dang it's hunting". And when I finally attempted to take my first shot it was hunting before it would settle down and acquire focus. The lens did this all during the shoot, but I did notice that the 85mm f/1.4 did not exhibit the hunting issue. I also notice that some of my photos were not in focus, so the lens also sometimes has an issue with acquiring accurate focus, but when it does the images are amazing, when shooting at f/1.8 the background just melts away, is it a deal breaker no, not for me or my cousin, he was shooting with the Nikon D800 and I the D610 both set to single focus point and single mode, I did not notice use the center point was any better, but I am keeping it.
Have you done any focus calibration? The hunting issue with a DSLR and easy subjects doesn't sound normal.
Yes I checked the focus and the focus was ok, I did not see any front or back focus issues. The issue may be produced in low contrasting light conditions. When focusing on item around the house it fine, but the issue arise when shooting a dark skinned model.
Hmmm, I didn't do enough portrait sessions to actually be in that situation, but that can be an issue for some lenses and/or focus systems. Less contrast in some lighting conditions. Thanks for the feedback. I do have another copy coming in for evaluation, so I'll have to borrow someone darker skinned from my congregation and try a few quick portraits with them.
Let me set the site of the shoot, it was about 5:30 PM with rows of tree on either side, the model was standing in the middle of the two rows of trees, here's a copy: scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t35.0-12/18836291_1719006331446145_1937618625_o.jpg?oh=503bbc5cda7bb6fd6a95581d2ba85e18&oe=592E3A31 I will attempt to adjust the front/back focus again and attempt to recreate the issue.
Ok I was able to get around to performing the focus calibration, here's my results, I had to make a -15 adjustment to the back focus, here a photo: scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t35.0-12/18817370_1719260934754018_1901982433_o.png?oh=1e0fbaf9c2fa2f94dce1ba639fe4f28a&oe=592E3959 the image on the left is zero adjustments and the right image after -15 back focus. I hope this corrects the miss focus issues.
Thanks, Dustin!
Dustin, I am relatively new subscriber to your channel. Thank you very much for your efforts in making great reviews. I am in the market for a 135mm prime and I had narrowed down to the Milvus, Canon L and now the Sigma. I tested the Canon L a couple of days ago and I can't get over the chromatic aberration. So now it is between the Milvus and Sigma.
My question to you is...do you have any tricks to master manual focus?
What camera body will you be using?
Canon 5D Mark IV
5D Mark IV unfortunately isn't a particularly friendly body for MF glass. I do use MF glass on it because I love the IQ, but you are left either relying on Live View (which works well but a bit clunky) or relying on the focus confirmation chip. You have to learn the technique with the latter, which is mostly about selecting the AF point, holding the shutter button down halfway, and fully depressing the shutter as soon as you hear the confirmation beepl.
Dustin Abbott Thanks Dustin. I may try it first on my other lenses. If not, I'll just order the Sigma.
Excellent work as usual Dustin. I've been thinking about the focus issue that I mentioned in the other part of this series. It is possible that those of us that felt we saw some slight back focusing were fooled by something more sinister. That issue would be that you may possibly have a soft copy of the 135 (even though it looks good). I say this because every other review/comparison of similar lenses (135 vs 85) has the 135 as the sharper lens. In fact, the 135 is often the sharpest lens tested by many other reviewers. The best examples of this is at lenstip.com and DxOMark. Having said all that, I most definitely am nitpicking, as you do a masterful job with giving info and comparisons in multiple areas of the subject lens. Thank you for the outstanding review!
That's entirely possible, though I can only work with the lenses I actually have on hand. That's why I give the disclaimer that it is comparing only one copy of each lens, and they may or may not be representative of peak performance.
Agreed, you give great reviews, but are dry and quite monotone to me. Background music would help.
He reviews gear, objectively - he’s not into making music videos.
I'd prefer no music, as I often find background music distracting. However, if you could play music in your room while listening to the review. Then you'll get your background music, and you even get to choose what it is😊
Great review, as always! It's a little out of my price range. Maybe one day I'll end up getting one! :)
Thanks, James
I was wondering if the sigma dock could be of help regarding the "unsharpness" of the 135mm. It seems to miss the focus
Not for these tests - I used 10x Live View focus, 2 second delay, and a very high end tripod. It's not a focus issue.
new tamron 24-70 coming out soon , wish to see your impressions
I've already had that conversation, and should see it early on.
Other reviewers have found the Sigma 135mm Art to be not only sharper than the 85, but indeed the sharpest lens they ever tested, and simply perfect. So I tend to think your test specimen must have been slightly flawed.
I've reviewed multiple copies, and I do think the second was sharper than the first.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I just got one yesterday, so I hope it’ll turn out to be super!
Looking forward to you doing a review of the Sigma 24-70 2.8 vs the Canon 24-70 2.8 ii if you can. It's being rumored Canon is going to release one with IS, which I would really like. The 24-70 2.8 ii is my main lens, however I use a 35mm F/2 IS prime for a ton of things due to the IS. The old IS in the 24-105 F/4 has issues. I really hope this Canon rumor is true.
We'll see about the IS version. I suspect it is still a ways out. I plan to compare the Sigma, Tamron G2 version, and Canon L II when everything is released.
I'm hoping the Tamron 24-70 G2 is released soon!
I'm confused, really. Every other reviewers say the 135mm sharper, here it's the 85mm that is sharper. I also look at the comparison photos on 'imaging-resource.com, and what I saw in the corner when I zooming the image is that the 135mm's image was sharper.
I brought in a second copy of the lens that was sharper than the first. There is some sample variation out there, so not all reviewers might have the same experience.
Thanks for excellent review and comparison! I would to see same kind of review of Sigma 14/1.8 and comparison for Samyang 1/2.4 XP :)
Thanks!
I will cover the 14 ART, though I've got a ton of other lenses to cover at the moment.
where does the rokinon 135mm f2 match up with these lenses...
+pkilla617 Optically it is very good. Mechanically it isn't quite as good, and it is a difficult lens to consistently nail focus with.
i watch at least one of your videos once a day even though i dont intend to buy any sigma lens anytime soon but why is it so or maybe i conclude this that most of the sigma lenses have some issues here and there that they do not fit exactly to what you are looking for except one or two lenses that i got to know are pretty sharp. i mean there always are better options in every single case at least according to my preferences
I think the newer Sigma lenses have fewer compromises.
How about comparing it to the Nikkor 135 f2. This art lens is more expensive than the Nikkor which some believe to be the best portrait lens. I give that position to the Nikkor 200 f2.
I'm afraid I'm not a Nikon shooter.
Dustin Abbott I'm sorry I assumed you just review everything.good video series though
Thanks for your down to earth, comprehensive review of this lens. Until now, because of my Sigma focus experience with the 35mm ART, I had decided to totally avoid purchasing their lenses. Since you mentioned the center focus point produced more consistent results, I hope that might be a way of minimizing focus problems.
I've seen a huge improvement since the 35 ART in the series.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks to your reviews, I bought a used copy for $770 and as you stated, it nails focus without any adjustments.
I think this 135 ART is a bigger deal for Nikon shooters, than for Canon shooters. The Nikkor 135 DC is really outdated, and has huge amount of aberrations, flare problems, not to mention that it is really soft. The Canon 135L is cheaper, and pretty good optically (Canon colors and bokeh anyone?), so it will definitely not sell as well as the Nikon ones.
By the way, you might have a very good 85 copy and a weak 135 copy, because the sharpness difference is way too huge, especially in the corners. Quite weird...
That's entirely possible, which I alluded to in the review.
They need a sigma 200 1.4
That would be a massive lens!
9:50 greater christmas?
LOL. I listened and I think I was trying to say "greater crispness", but it does sound a lot like Christmas :)
Great review! Good information. Show more images, it's boring looking at you for 15 minutes.
Lmfao
oh i forgot! . . if you could pass on, us video people need to zoom in on waiste shots to to tight head shots! . . it would be great if sigma made a canon plastic usm quaitly for the 24-7O f2.8 or f2.O!!!! . .
and "plasticky" 7O to 2OO f2.8 (like canon 55-250!!!!) . . both around $8OO!!!! . . we all deserve to eat!!!! :-)
it looks as if Sigma made a 135 prime that has the spirit of the Nikon 58mm f/1,4... with some poetry inside... as opposed to the clinical look of all the Art line.
I do think it is one of their nicer lens optically
i have a daughter i love sooo much!!!! and four cats!!!! (one of which needs $4OO of medical help right now . . now!), my toyota carolla got stollen, over $3500 of camera gear got stolen!! . .
im trying to do about four videos for now . . i need a 6d mk ii, (already have 6d "camera a") i need a new "soprano-bright tone mic," a ribbon backup-stereo mic, i need a $125 gimbal and $99 slider some $300 worth of waves software, and i need to refret four guitars 61OO size, etc
so it would be great if sigma would make a 24 mm, 35, 50 85, 100, 135mm full frame sensor primes . . usm quality mostly plastic lenses at f1.8 to 1.4 . . at the "parents-toyota owners" pricepoints of $4OO to $65O!!!! :-)
because a lot of us want to finish-continue our art pieces!!!! . . i own a dg hsm 7O-2OO 2.8 . . sigma would be great for "us" to own considering to sigma "$4OO to $65O quality price point"! . . thank you!!!! :-)
Interesting viewpoint. Sigma has really abandoned that section of the market in pursuit of competing in the luxury lens field (the most recent ART releases are the most expensive). It is obviously profitable for them, though, as they seem to be putting most of their development dollars into that area.
Don't know how you can say that the sigma 85mm f1.4 art is sharper when imperical lab test evidence that I have seen on sharpness says otherwise. Perhaps you should take a look and lab tests and forget your Anecdotal on sharpness as it is inaccurate.
Ahhh, so disregard the evidence in front of me and rather accept the findings of strangers using different lenses and equipment from the ones I'm testing with no way to account for their methods or biases? Brilliant idea.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Strangers?? What nonsense! Try lenstip.com for one.
You have a personal relationship with them? I don't
@@DustinAbbottTWI Need more help?? Try photozone.de, dxomark, all suggest the same thing. You need to rethink your approach.
Take a look at what you are recommending: www.dxomark.com/category/lens-reviews/. Look at the top of the list.
in the end its a sigma so will never be a first choice the differences will always be minimal with price often having greater leverage, its a new lens with others second hand competing favourable with 500 dollars for a good L, god knows what a zeiss is, both of these second hand have greater trust in their longevity than a sigma
Sigma Fart?
Great review as ever Dustin. Thanks
Thank you