very true. im blown away at his reviews. amazing, puts some other very well known youtubers to shame. but those more popular youtubers all have some personality / character that i suppose appeal more to the younger crowd
I dont mean to be off topic but does anyone know a way to get back into an instagram account..? I somehow forgot my account password. I love any tips you can offer me!
I loved taking the quiz. Only got 2 out of 10 right - so about random odds of just guessing. The size, weight and focus speed are probably the items of most significance in swaying my thoughts on which one to get. Thanks for putting all the details together in your video.
Thanks Matthew. An excellent really in-depth review. It's clear that all the lenses in your quiz were pretty good and 'get the job done' to echo your words. I didn't do that well in your Quiz, which is evidence enough that in IQ terms any would suffice (notwithstanding the curious f4 Sigma anomaly). I bought the Sony and I'm delighted with it's performance. Possibly the sharpest lens I own - yet oddly, in casual (ill considered) usage, it's quite easy to make images look soft on account of the exceptionally narrow f1.8 DOF (circa 2cm at 2m, 5cm at 3m). If shooting wide open and fairly close, then best approach IMO is to have a model with a good eye focus lock and a background (preferably not too bright, cluttered or jagged) set well back from plane of main subject. Also best to direct a subject (where poss) such that arms, legs, other important or relevant objects etc don't fall too far from plane of focus where they could make up a significant portion of the image frame. If face or eyes are too small in frame, then it can superficially just look like a soft or badly focused lens, because near objects aren't sufficiently distant from plane of focus to appear like a pleasing bokeh from which the subject pops - just more like a soft or badly focused composition. A little pre-shoot compositional thought about how to leverage a really narrow DOF will help improve the end result IMO. I have also used for sports and can vouch for the fast accurate focusing.
Stumbled on this WAAAY too late. Great comparison. Just picked up the Sony 135 and love it. It hasn't left my a7RIV since I got it. I'm curious if the Sigma f/4 problem has continued with the DG DN lenses. I have the 24-70 and 14-24 DG DN's and I'm going to test them as soon as I can get a chance to.
Understood, but... the problem with publishing in 4K is that for people who are watching on 1080p screens (which is still most people), then the detail is reduced dramatically in size, so they actually get much less information out of the videos. So, it makes more sense to either publish a 4K and a 1080p version (which is too much work :-) ), or for people who have 4K monitors to watch these videos at smaller than full-screen.
@@MatthewGore What are you talking about? On a 2k screen, you can tell the difference between a video uploaded in 4k vs 2k? How could that be possible?
@@aliendroneservices6621 I'm talking about looking at 100% crops from a 42 megapixel image. If it's not clear from my explanation above, take a look at this diagram : www.lightandmatter.org/wp-content/download/4K-Crop-Example.jpg
Excellent review! Both going into the fine details, but not being too long or chaotic - being well structured and interesting. I'm really interested to see a comparison between the Sigma 24-70/2.8Art for Sony vs the Sony own 24-70/2.8GM , I hear the Sigma is actually both better, cheaper of course, and what was really surprising - slightly more compact :) And also between the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens for Sony vs ... not sure what exactly as 40mm is a bit unorthodox focal length, but perhaps with good 35mm lens? Thanks!
My primary set of lenses is now Sony 24mm 1.4 GM, Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8 and Sony 135mm 1.8 GM, exellennt set of lenses, highly recommended ! Although I will like to see a better new version of the 55mm, a 60mm allround macro lens will be very nice !
Yay got 80% waiting for my sigma 135 to come in this week. Already having 50 1.4 85 1.4 105 2.8 im hoping to enjoy this new short telephoto range prime.
Nice! The average score on that quiz is still pretty close to 40% :-) That Sigma is definitely a beautiful lens, especially for the price (if you don't mind the weight).
The quiz was fun, and tricky! i felt it once i hit that 85 1.4 curveball. But if it wasn’t for your fixed WB settings and some luck idk how frequently i could identify the sony vs sigma 135!
I want the lighter weight and faster focusing of the Sony, but I like the look of the Sigma blur more, and since I would be buying this lens for portraits I like the look of the Sigma more. so it is a little of a bummer that the Sony doesn't have as nice of blur. I think if I buy either of them I will look for a 2nd hand lens. but what I might do is just wait until Sigma updates there 135 and hopefully it will be a lighter and smaller lens like what they did with there 85 art cutting the weight almost in half with equal image quality. but who knows when Sigma will make it. and how much smaller it might be.
True. I'll try to keep that in mind next time I shoot with lenses like these. FWIW, I did shoot in some pretty low light with these (not horribly dark, but even the basketball pics were in moderately low light) and they were still about the same as in brighter light.
I think the extra contrast of Sony lenses do well in lower contrast lighting, such as the girl with the umbrella, so low light, the Eont May pop more. To me though, I don’t like the slightly exaggerated whites and blacks. And they are a bit cool looking and the colours are a bit fake. I prefer the rendering of the Sigmas, especially for filming. And their darker look suits the somewhat brighter emphasis of Sony sensors. I find it gives weight to Sony images.
Hey Matt. Nice comparison. Did you shoot the test shots with the A7R4? I think if not, you might want to do it with the R4 cos 61 MP will be very demanding. One important point in lens buying is that it needs to be suitable for future cameras. If the 61MP shows limitations in the Sigma and not the Sony then the latter might be better in that regard.
Thanks :-) No, I shot this with the A7RIII. The IV had been announced but had not yet started shipping while I was making this video (and I still haven't purchased one). For me, the A7RIII is a better balance of resolution and event/action capabilities, so I'm not planning on getting the IV anytime soon, but I agree... it would be interesting to see how the two lenses look at 60megapixels
@@MatthewGore I had the A7 Original one month after it was released and about a month ago purchased the A7R4. Oh what a jump. Its got at least 2 stops better signal to noise ratio that the A7. A few days after that I purchased the 24mm GM. Before that my Sony Zeiss 55 f1.8 was the sharpest lens I have. But testing that on the R4 showed limitations. The 24mm GM was actually resolving more than the Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8 while taking landscape. And I didn't move from my shot position! The 61 MP was certainly pushing the 55mm Zeiss beyond its limits while the 24mm still had resolving power to spare. I think the 135mm GM will be the same. The Sigma might start to run out of steam at that point.
Fred Miranda did a test very controlled and the Sigma proved to have slightly higher contrast and smoother bokeh while the Sony has a sharper center of the image.
Actually a little question, apperantly the sigma 135mm 1.8 had a firmware update that fixes the lowlight/hunting on the AF. Was the lens used in the review updated at all since purchase?
The lens firmware in the sigma was up to date when Sigma sent it to me. I always check for updates when I'm reviewing. However, I don't have records of which firmware version it was on (I don't think it's in the RAW metadata), so I don't know exactly which firmware version I used.
Yeah... I think that's sorta true. Actually, with the Tamron, it was a slightly different issue. With the Tamron, the image at f/4 was actually sharper in the center on the Tamron than at f/2.8, it was just that away from the center, it was a little off. With the Sigma, it's across the whole frame (like the IBIS jitters a little... that couldn't be true with the Tamron). But of course, it never happens with Sony lenses. So, if it is a problem with my camera, it's only a problem with my camera and 3rd party lenses. It seems just as possible that 3rd party lenses are having trouble with something in the firmware at f/4. If it were a hardware problem, I don't see why I wouldn't also have problems with the Sony lenses. If it's a firmware problem.... well, I'm using the same firmware as thousands of other people.
@@MatthewGore : Yes, I agree that the software from third party could be the problem. So we may avoid using f4 for these lenses ...by the way, I do not have any issue with my Tamron 28-75mm and my Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art at f4 at all with my Sony 7Rii . Thank you
Nice review as always....I use a Canon mount, but always find your reviews well done so always worth watching. I do own a sigma 50mm 1.4 ART, so glad no issues (hopefully) with that lens. Thanks..............................................Philip
Thanks! With all of the Sigma lenses that I've tested for Canon mount, I've never had any weird focus issues like I have with the Sony. I love the ART series for Canon.
Sounds good. For what it's worth, I haven't found any f/4 issues with the last couple of Sigma lenses I've tested for Sony E... or the Simga 70mm Macro, which I haven't reviewed on YT, but I have used for a year or so now.
Yes, it's possible. Tamron did offer to send me the new 35mm f/1.4, and it looks like a great lens, so I'm interested in seeing how it compares to the Canon II in real world use.
@@MatthewGore well, it's just a matter of being found. Which can be tricky if RU-vid is pushing the flexing videos thinking it's a hot item while the majority of us is tired and annoyed by it. Keep going, RU-vid bots will catch on eventually and you be here offering these videos.
No; I requested a press pass for the band "Covet", and the pr woman told me I was good to pick it up at the show... but when I got there, they had never heard of me. Then I had to send the Sony lens back. It was a mess :-)
Hmm... that would be a tricky one. Differences in focal length, differences in aperture... but same general purpose, maybe. I actually think that a Canon 24-105 f/4 might make more sense. But both would be interesting.
I'm sure you're asking rhetorically, but the prices changed as I was finishing the video, so I went back in and re-rendered the video with the current prices (which is why it says $700 at the end of the video... 16:57 ) but I didn't re-record the voice-over.
I have spent enough money and owned enough Sigma art lenses (12-24mm; 18-35; 35mm, 50-100; 85mm; 150-600...) to figured this out : To save time, frustration and headache due to Sigma unreliable auto focus and crappy customer services... STAY AWAY FROM ALL SIGMA LENSES.
I also have owned my fair share of Sigma lenses (for Canon mount), and I've been really happy with all of them. It does seem like some people tend to have AF issues with them, which makes me wonder whether its only particular lens/camera combos that are problematic, or whether I've just been lucky.
@@shaolin95 Are you talking about focus problems in general, or the f/4 problem specifically? I also haven't had general AF problems with Sigma lenses, only the very minor issue at f/4. It's weird, and it's subtle (it requires a tripod and pixel-level comparison)... I can only imagine that it has something to do with the lens' interaction with the IBIS at that aperture. I'm willing to believe that it's only on my camera, but it's certainly specific to Sigma lenses.
I understand, but there's a good reason to do them at 1080p rather than 4k: for people who don't have 4K monitors yet (or are watching at work or on a phone, etc) and are watching at 1080p, the detail from 100% zooms would be reduced to 1/4 size from a 4K video, making it very hard to make out any differences. And most people are still not watching on 4K, according to my viewer statistics. Of course, I could make a 4K version and a 1080p version, but it already takes me too damn long to make these videos :-)
