Sigma Art 105mm 1.4 Vs Nikon 105mm 1.4e Lens Shootout!!! 

Sarvesh Parakh Thank you so much for the kind words!!! I think you will be extremely happy with the Nikon 105! It really is perhaps their finest lens to date!

@@SNAPAVELI I will be looking forward to my purchase in the coming month. Hopefully, I get a really good copy. Thanks again for the video.

I don't know man. The fro has some ridiculous nice pics. Not heavily stylized like these but impressive for sure

Thank you!! Yes people have strong opinions about this stuff for some reason but really great images have so little to do with great glass and more to do with great imagination. I know ppl killing it with a crop canon rebel and kit lens! Everyones opinion is valid

@@SNAPAVELI I completely agree my brotha, you couldn't have said it better

Thank you so much Michael!! Yes I really don’t enjoy doing RU-vid but I’ll will continue soon as long as I can share my work and not have to always make it a review!

Twilson Thank you! This lens is the only reason I can’t get away from Nikon.... not everyone feels that way but. I just don’t think the sigma has the same magic, and I like most sigma lenses.

bngr bngr Thank you! I do agree, I’ve seen other people say that the Sigma May be a touch longer than 105mm.

bngr bngr from the tests I’ve seen it is not as long of a focal lenght . And many of the art series lenses are not quite the actual focal lenght. Just a touch shorter. This is probably closer to 100mm or even a touch less 98-99 mm ?

Sarah Kane Thank you so much!!! 😊

Yes I very much agree with that. If on mirrorless it evens out a bit, but focus issues were there for all my sigma lenses on DSLR.

silvere36 Thank you so much! Yes over sharp lenses aren’t always friendly to skin either. I think the Nikon wins this one.

Gary Marshall Thank you! If you don’t mind buying used the Nikon 105 is pretty much the same as sigma 105 new.

Carlz Photography Yes all these lenses perform much better on mirrorless. No mirror to get in the way

I have heard the same, Nikon's AF (contrast detect) works poorly with the Art lenses and the AF on the Sony (phase detect) works fine with the Art lenses. Simply said, use it with a phase detect camera (it may have been made for the future mirror-less cameras).

Yes! Totally changed my stance on sigma with mirrorless

Me and my Nikon D500 , yes you can on the z7 at least,but it’s artificial sharpness. Just like in Lightroom. It won’t help with a soft lens on portraits

@@SNAPAVELI Thanks for clearing that up.I own the Nikon D500 and I was wondering since that lens does not have VR there is a myth that you don't need VR when shooting 1/500-through 1/1000 shutter speed what is your take on that?

Me and my Nikon D500 Well yes I do believe that holds some truth but I don’t know that it takes into account sensor megapixel count. These almost 50 months sensors show every little shake. I’ll take all the vr I can get. I’m not the most steady though

Marc Wilkins Thank you Marc!! Really appreciate that! Working on them right now!

Wayne Fleshman Hey Wayne! Just to update this, I’ve shot with my friends sigma a few more times since then. It’s definitely as sharp ( now on mirrorless z7, no more af fine tuning) on d850 the sigmas were just never consistent to me. Even my 35 sig, the I love, wasn’t good unless in live view. It’s working fine on z7. Honestly I think the sigma 105 is a terrific lens. 99% of us , including me wouldn’t be able to tell what shot was from nikon or sig on these 105s , unless the background bokeh was a bit swirly 😊, that’s a dead giveaway for Nikon. The sigma is just incredibly heavy , too much so for me.

i can dig it. fyi in the near future i'm gonna buy your lightroom presets...still trying to understand ps actions, i'm into photoshop but nowhere the master level you live at. not sure where you at saw your video in VA i grew up in DC if you ever in SoCAL holla back i can line up some LA girls if you into shooting for fun. 'til Stay true to you . MUCH RESPECT Young Blood! "Flesh"

Alireza Pix Hey!! Sure, well my copy wasn’t as accurate on the d850 as the Nikon 105 was. On Mirrorless I think it’s fine. For the price used , you could get the Nikon though

I think we all just see better differently. I’ve shot both of these a lot more since this review. They are both great, I really can’t tell the difference sometimes unless it’s a close up. You really can’t lose either way. The sigma is just so heavy

@@SNAPAVELI I have to agree that the Sigma has a tiny edge and the "less organic" feel is due to it being higher resolving. But in post, I'd rather start off with a sharper image. My Sigma 135 even replaced my Zeiss 130 APO. On the other hand...LORD the Sigma is BIG! Size matters in some situations. But if I'm in a studio and looking for the best, the Sigma wins. If I'm running around a wedding...I'll look like a terrorist with the giant Sigma!

Robert Brody lol yes I understand! Sometimes I feel like someone will shoot me when I’m using the 200f2! Looks like a war machine

I pretty much agree with that now that I’ve used them for longer periods! Sigma is just fine on Mirrorless.

Tom Bird Thank you!! You are welcome!

I think it’s pretty much wash at this point if you are on mirrorless

@@SNAPAVELI I using nikon D780 body

@@bhushugamer1988 oh then Nikon all the way…. Sigma lenses do funky stuff on dslr , the need constant calibration, Nikon lenses usually only need calibration once

@@SNAPAVELI nikon 1.4 is best for nikon D780 body

@@bhushugamer1988 well 1.4 is going to give you great separation but both lenses do that. The Nikon version however will be far more accurate

Don Mcphee well I just meant in it’s rendering. It’s very hard to describe, I think most art lenses have that too sharp clinical look, I actually like it on my art 35, but not on the portrait lenses. The best way to describe it to me is when you watch a show on certain super high def TVs and it looks like your watching a play, law and order looks like your in the room and all the polish is gone. Kind of like that.

But the stated issue with ergonomics, and the difficulty of finding 11-stop VariND for 105mm filter size, or having to buy a set of beauty filters just to soften up the clinical digital look, it is just a bit try hard. Go with the Nikkor and relax. Also, while post processing guys love every extra detail you can give them, creative directors, even for big name products, don't need their products to have absolute razor-sharp details. A lot of contrast and sharpness can be faked by something choosing your composition lighting and contrasting elements well. Great creative post processing artists can also dodge and burn until the final image is nuclear sharp. So you don't NEED that extra 10% of sharpness out of a Sigma.

Sharpness is NOT everything, especially when shooting portraits.

PwnedByyaMar Thank you!! Yes the weight for a day of wedding photography would be too much for me...

Seriously though, why would you buy both of them?

what is your body ? did you have focus issue with sigma ?

Nikolaj Freiesleben Thank you!!! Glad that you could make it through the entire video lol!

ALEXANDER GOMES Thank you so much Alexander!! Appreciate that!!

agnor guevara I kept my Nikon 105. Way lighter and better skin rendering to me.

du tran I agree, if sigma could just get the focusing down... my art 35 is accurately focusing on my z7 though , no mirror to worry about

J. Marcus maybe the mirror might contributed to the missed focus. but i believe that 35mm is harder to missed focus than the 50mm because it is kinda wide. i think that the greater the focal the more it shows how well bit well the lens perform. i have 24mm 1.4 35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 105mm fc dc, 135mm f2 dc and 200mm f2 vr2 from nikon. they are truly gems. i might get the 105mm 1.4 for the size and convenience because sometime the fatboy 200mm is too much sometime. i algree with you about the image sharpness and rendering between the sigma and nikon. nikon is more smooth on the skin. more realistic to look at than the sharper sigma result. btw, you work is very nice. i do very similar works like you :) thank you for sharing;)

du tran Thank you so much!! I really appreciate your comments!!

Comalv hey! Yes it’s preference. With AF-F and face detect on , it’s always tracking and frames the face instead of me having to touch screen on a eye and then do that over again 100 times. It actually always nails the eyes even at 1.4. I’ve been very impressed. If live view was faster( like mirrorless) this would be the ultimate camera for me.

So you shoot from the back screen??

Don Mcphee yes I do , it’s slow but very accurate for non moving subjects, if I need to track something I just use 3d in the viewfinder

Thank you so much!! I really appreciate that!!

thomas diefenbach oh ok cool! Yea it was a rental so that wasn’t included

Well mirrorless is superior to DSLR in terms of autofocus

Dee1Tv Thank you bro!!!

Clinton Spindley well said!

Jack Willson Thank you!!

Ben Williams Thank you!!

@@generalrandomassortment You just convinced me that my choice to choose the Nikon 105 was the right choice. I was about to wonder if I should return my Nikon and get the Sigma.

@@thingsdemystified There are other things to consider also that people often overlook. If you choose to sell your 105 f1.4 in 5 years, I can guarantee you that your Nikon will hold its value much better than the Sigma will.

@@uxo2255 I bought both of them, shot with both of them and sent the Nikon back. The Sigma is that much better. It is sharper in the center, sharper in the corners, better bokeh with much less football/cat's eye bokeh balls towards the edges. The Nikon is only better by being smaller/lighter. I don't care what I get if for some reason I sell it someday. I already saved $600 over the Nikon.

@@thingsdemystified as long as you like it I'm happy for you. I like the Nikon better.

@@uxo2255 Why do you like the Nikon better? I'm just curious.

Michael Jandavs Thank you so much!! Check out my site if you get a chance www.prophotoedits.com I’m recording some edits with my action set now

Samad Khan I’m not sure... if you have the extra money, but I still use my 85 1.4g a ton, the 105 can get tight is some indoor areas. But outside it’s a real beast , I’d rent it

J. Marcus thanks a bunch.

What you think about 200mm? I want that

Arthur Lima well honestly there is nothing like the 200f2 , it’s heavy and you need a bunch of space to frame with it correctly, but it’s in a league of it own , I’ll have a video with it up soon

paweL Pawlowski yes!! I’ve done it countless times! You do need to be careful with posing people and keeping them on the same line of focus, especially when you are closer. I stop it down a bit on a few just to be sure though. Like 2.8

J. Marcus Photography I will probably have 2 rows of people. Max 10 people. Two umbrella lights, and I would probably close down the aperture to f4. Never done it with this lens and this time I am kinda forced to do it.

paweL Pawlowski oh! Yes I try to avoid shooting in rows at all costs! It’s very tricky, but yes stop down to f4 and zoom in on the lcd after the test shot to see if you need to stop down further!

J. Marcus Photography thank you brother ✌🏻

paweL Pawlowski no problem!! Wish you the best!

Tyrell Parenteau my latest 2 videos are 1080. I had an issue with exporting originally with the screen recording, they will all be 1080 from here on out though!

stephen polwart Thank you so much!!

Aniruddha Kulkarni There are a few in there from the exact same distance, sometimes the model shifts a bit while I’m changing lenses

Aniruddha Kulkarni also you will find sometimes with lenses from different manufacturers, that they are not exactly the mm the suggest. One may be 107mm in reality and the other a 103mm

J. Marcus 3:05 this isn’t the difference of 1 or 2mm. You can use tripod or u can mark your position and then change the lenses

KarinaGlamorous I did calibrate it before taking it out. Just like all my others

Joey Lozano Thank you!

Ok .. I found the rendering of the focus area, to out of focus, better in sigma ..

Abid Dyer I’m using a D850 as well. You just go to live view, turn on AF-F then set it to the picture of the face and it will track faces.

and much larger and heavier.

So?

Ara Kouftaian I don’t know how you can find a correlation between being a fan boy and personal taste. It’s just my opinion. I like the sigma 35 way more than the Nikon 35. Same for the art 50, much better than the Nikon. 85 art I don’t like as much as the 85 1.4g , don’t like the 105 art as much as the Nikon. It’s not bad but for me lacks character. I also have an A7riii, love the camera but it produces far more clinical images than my Nikon. I’m not selling these lenses, doesn’t matter to me what you buy.

@@SNAPAVELI because he is seen facts and not accepting it. Or giving excuses. That been a fanboy nothing to do with preferences. Preference will be if one lens does better in auto focus and smaller and the other is sharper better bokeh but bigger and he or you prefer the auto focus over little more sharpness. Then that will be a preference. But in this case he know one lense is better in all or most fields and he is not accepting it and trying to excuse the other lens flaws. Just pointing that out. We all been fanboys of things teams etc we all have the same stupid attitude.. not saying we are all stupid or bad because of it. I'm just noticing it on him and pointing it out. Its up to his ego to take it personal and get upset at me because i am saying the truth or be open and realizing that what i am saying is affecting him. His perception. This is more of a ego issue. If the lens he has is not better than the one he Barrow he is defending it to protect himself and it shouldn't be like that. Noting wrong with his lens been little worse. Its still a beast. But its clearly the other one is a step ahead comparing it next to eachother. He did a great comparison but his ego put him spending more time not accepting reality instead of talking about what he saw and not what i thinks

Robert Brody Hey! Yes the art is a great lens for sure. It’s rendering for me is a bit clinical but I’m not a fan of overly sharp lenses for my style of portraits. I think over time the weight would really get to me though. Maybe I’m unlucky, I’ve owned 5 art copies over the years and none of them were accurate all the time. I did a calibration on the 105 art before taking it out. It only needed a minor adjustment. Once I calibrated my 85 1.4g , 105 1.4e , 200f2 on my D850 , I almost never miss a shot with them so it could just be that the art copy I had was a faulty one. Anything is possible!

Take a look at the Lenstip review of the Sigma 105. It's among the best lenses EVER tested. Both the 105 and 135 beat Nikon. I finally tested the Zeiss Milvus 135 against the Sigma ART 135 and bought the Sigma. Those who want the better optics, it's the ART. Here's a detailed review. www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=535

Robert Brody I’m not disagreeing with you about the optic quality at all! It’s sharper than the Nikon , I could see that without zooming in. Just comes down to preference I guess. , there are certain lenses that are very soft, mitakon 50 0.95 , my Nikon 85 1.4g is softer wide open than even the 1.8g but it also in my opinion can’t hold a candle to my 85, 1.4g for the way I shoot. I just want organic drawing. My friend swears by his 135 art , and he is incredible, so great images can be taken by most lenses imho

Okay...I do think that the biggest difference isn't price or optical qualities as both are great and pretty expensive. The biggest difference is the SIZE. My Sigma 135 ART is pushing things for size and weight, but the 105 is crazy big!

Robert Brody Totally agree!! I was really shocked how heavy it was. It would wreck my arm for a full day shoot , and just having that much more weight in my bag is a no go for my back!

Chris Miller not really, I own several sigma art lenses. I do prefer nikons offerings of 85 and 105 though.

THEJEDEYEMASTER I would say thats a fair assessment. Except for the weight. You really have to lug it around for a day before you make your decision.Im no fanboy , I skipped the Nikon 35 for the sigma art, sigmas 50 is also better than nikons by a wide margin. I legitimately like the way the the 105 renders better, some don’t see a difference. Also I never use my art lenses while tracking movement. If someone is booking me for a shoot I can’t say “ I can only shoot you standing still, or it may take 20 try’s” Again , a used nikon 105 is almost the same price. That’s makes this a much harder decision for most people. I really don’t care what people choose. You can make a great picture with a $200 lens....

You call it fan "boyism" we call it being smart. Sure, the sigma is a hair sharper, and 600 dollars cheaper new( you can get a used nikon 105 for about 1600 now) but what the 105art and not a single one of the arts will ever give you is confidence in the af. Its not reliable, denying it only proves who the real fan boy is here.

RayValdezPhotography I just started my channel. I’ve got editing video recorded and bts footage, just finishing my site to host the downloads, I’m working on it all though 😉