Such a great and snappy presentation of 4 lenses, this should be the goto formula for these kinds of videos. Told me everything I needed to know in a shorter amount of time than most lens reviews, and I learned about 4 lenses, not 1. Cheers mate.
This was a really great comparison video - thanks for putting the time and work in creating it! Never would have considered the zeiss as a viable option, but alas the sigma is truly something else for aps-c users
hey my friend. thanks for the review. CAn i have your advice? i bought a xs20 and a sigma 18-50 2.8. Now i want to take only one prime, because of budget. I do a lot of portraits. I work of fashion industry as a model and want to shoot models as well. I was thinking about getting 33 1.4 (50) or a 56 1.4 (75). The 56 is to tight for some situations. Do you think i can achieve nice portraits with the 33 (50) as well?
Hey! Yep a 30mm or 33mm is also a great choice. Here's a review video that might help: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Zt0QZva-L20.html
Most of the autofocus tests are only a far away subject moving closer and closer in a steady pace...But I usually use this focal lenght for closeup b-rolls of lifestyle food reels etc. So I move between subjects to subject, from a closeup plate to a far away person so and so forth....do you have any conclusions as to how smooth the autofocus "pull" is among these lenses? Which one is the smoothest? I have the 55 zeiss among these and its a mixed bag, sometimes its smooth sometimes it jumps..
Thanks for comparison! I'm already happy user of Sigma, but nice to see it anyway. Would be interesting to see how the old Sony 50f1.8 OSS would compete against others (I liked that lens, but it's no match for Sigma).
Hi 👋 loved your honest reviews and amazing way of explaining. Question, I am new to fujifilm please advise which lens would be better performer overall TOKINA 23mm OR VILTROX 23mm. Thanks alot
Quick and concise video, thanks! How fair is it to compare a full frame lens to aps-c, though? As far as I heard, it is much harder to make the bigger lenses produce good sharpness and contrast in the edges. Just curious about your take on that.
This may be true but using a full frame lens on APSC format gives the full frame lens an advantage because the corners of the frame are still within the sweet spot of the lens.
@@BennoSattler I see what you mean. Fair question. This may not be an issue anymore but when I first started using APSC in 2004, I had no issues but as resolution increased from the 6mp I started with to 12, I found the lenses were limiting detail significantly. Moving up to full frame, I was able to use junk lenses and get great results because the pixel density wasn't as demanding of the lenses on full frame. I guess all I'm trying to say is that there are advantages and disadvantages to using a full frame lens on APSC and I don't disagree with you that it's not a fair comparison. It was probably done only because there was no other option in this case so you have to take it for what it's worth.
This review was super interesting thanks for doing it. I felt like Tokina actually took the most beautiful and sharpest images (when it got it right) but the Sigma seems so much easier to use and the silent motor sold it for me. IF Tokina was like $200 less it is an AMAZING option and maybe the best if you do manual focus.
@@princeharbinger In this case, Tokina used Viltrox optics... ultimately producing worse lenses (weaker, noisy AF and no USB port to upload the latest software). 27 and 75 are the new PRO line, extremely successful lenses. There is a review on YT from, among others, Christopher Frost, where you can see that they are optically excellent.
@LukaszKlim-ge9xx Really, they did. Wow, that surprises me. I did notice that at least with the 56mm F/1.4 that the Tokina had slightly less green fringing around the points of highlight of the boke. The Viltrox was more pronounced looking. But I'm going to stick with my Sigma 56mm. I thought these lenses would have surpassed it in many aspects, but I don't see any reason to replace it. I would grab the Sigma 30mm since I saw it was a better performer than the 33mm, but the Viltrox 27mm seems a bit close to the 30mm, and it is a far better lens overall. I'll also skip the 16mm F/1.4 for the Sony 15mm F/1.4 G, and I guess that'll be it for my APS-C kit. What are you happy using so far?
@@princeharbinger I have a Sony 11/1.8, Zeiss 24/1.8 and the most expensive Voigtlander 65/2 Apo Macro. Generally, I was thinking about buying 16-55/2.8G, but the cost is also colossal. Among the cheap lenses I also have a Meike 50/0.95, although it is a very nice lens, I use it only occasionally.
@LukaszKlim-ge9xx Sounds like a good kit. The 11mm sounds like fun. I've heard that the Zeiss 24mm F/1.8 is one of their best lenses on APS-C. I might be interested in it one day. The CV 65mm APO is a great lens that I would also like to pick up eventually for my FF along with their 35mm APO. I'll likely skip the 50mm APO since I already have the 50 F/1.2 GM, which has given me just as amazing photos in landscapes as it does in portraits. But I'm sure I would like the sunstars on the APO better. It's a shame they haven't designed any new lenses lately. I wonder if their partnership has ended. I've also been considering their 21mm F/1.4. It's a bit of a pain dealing with Loxia 21. Since I have to focus before infinity. I like lenses that focus on infinity when it hits the hard stop. The 16-55 sounds like a good Zoom range. The new Viltrox 16mm F/1.8 prime looks really good. I've been thinking about picking it up. But than came along the 14mm Pergear MKII that also looks promising. As for the 50mm F/0.95, it sounds like a fun lens. I once had a 7 Artisans 35mm F/0.95. I liked it but had to return it when I saw the optics were dirty within the elements inside.
Thank you for the comparison! Anyway, I'd appreciate (as thousands of non-native english speakers will) if you could speak a bit slower next videos! Thanks a lot!
