The main reason to use this lens for me is that close headshots look most natural at 105mm. 85mm looks a bit unnaturally close and 135 already a bit flat. But that is a matter of taste. If you mainly shoot outddoor protraits the 135 is a fantastic alternative. The tiny differences in optical quality are hard to notice on real life photos.
I am intrigued by this lens and had my focus with the 85 lens as a portrait lens. Thanks for your insight, all info regarding this is great for making my choice lens between the 85 and the 135 lens.
There are type of face shapes that will look more flattering on the 135 and vice versa, you will get better results with 135 on a thinner diamond shaped face...on rounded faces, I wouldn't use the 135....I own the 135 1.8 and have shot with the 105 extensively. Neither one is better than the other
IMO, it's the best lens period. Not found a better one yet for my style, that's for sure. Definitely prefer it to the 135mm (which happens to be my 2nd favourite).
Great video! I have had the Sigma 105mm for 3 years now and it is my favorite lens! I am using it for weddings and portraits. It has a very strong character and it is very hard to shoot in some conditions like a light going straight through the lens with back lid lighting like in this video. But there is no other lens like the Sigma 105! Love it!
"Hey everyone" makes me sit up like class is about to start and Miss Julia just walked in and everyone got to be on best behaviour😀 I'm always a sucker for a long lens for portraiture.. Nice one JT👍
I‘m using this lens for all my weddings, on some days up to 10hours. I absolutely love the look of this lens, it‘s outstanding even if it‘s heavy, it‘s definitely worth it. 🧡💫 (English isn’t my narrative language, apologize the grammar 🌿)
If you are strong enough, this lens would be absolutely amazing for weddings! Personally I have done my time with heavy gear for weddings haha so for me weight is super important now. And your English is great 😊
That lens is an amazing combination of beauty and beast! I use it sparingly but the results it gets are just something else, where it manages to be soft and sharp like nothing else. Definitely not one for all day wedding shoots, although the 12 photos you'd manage before your arm fell off would be worth it! The portraits you got are stunning, great video
Julia, I hope you show more of this deamy kind of shoot... with a 105mm! Lovely. I think this is one lens that can do many more better portraits than an 85mm.
Hi, I have a question 😅why do you still use ISO when there is enough light? For example, instead of 1/3200 and ISO 400, don't you use 1/1000 and ISO 100? I love your presets👌😍
The longer the lens, the more chance there is of motion blur (especially because it's super heavy, I didn't want my shaky hands by some chance to produce blurry photos the entire shoot lol) and Berry is amazing and moves around a lot - so to be safe I want my shutter to be as fast as possible. Raising the ISO a little helps me achieve that, and on a camera body like the A7IV you won't see much/any noise at an ISO like that.
I own this lens and i have a love /hate relationship with it. Gorgeous image quality at the price of it being a tank. Honestly it should come with wheels and a leash. The fact that its so huge , I have to choose between bringing it or my 70-200 2.8. Filter size is 105mm so you can easily spend $400 on a filter. When I do bring it, a monopod helps managing the weight for a 12hr day. Maybe I'll sell it when Sony releases that elusive 85mm 1.2 . All that being said, I really do love the images it produces, hence my dilemma.
Hi! I own a Sigma 50mm f1.4 art and a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 art and are incredible!! And the thing is... the day I found out that Sigma only produces lenses and cameras in a single location worldwide, Aizu, Japan. This just blown me away! They have such a good reputation. And I thing the lens that you used in this session is great too. But you have to train yourself, and it wont be heavy as you feel it now! :)))
The 105 1.4 is a beast. I love to use it when there's lights in the background as opposed to the sun. The bokeh is unmatched. The images also have a 3D pop to them. It's a heavy lens but you have to be a gangsta to use it, it's not for cry babies.
What a cool lens! It's a chonky boy, but the IQ is really nice. Worth the sore arm hah. That ghosting is very appealing, I agree. Iirc, the Zeiss 55 1.8 has some pretty strong ghosting effects as well, but I really love it for strong backlit situations. Helps combat the sharpness to get a dreamier look without the need for a diffusion filter or anything. It's a great characteristic to have that I feel a lot of modern lenses lack. One could call it character hah. Anyway, all your shots were bangers, as usual. Your editing and retouching are always great. I keep going back and forth about getting a long prime like this or the 135, but my 85 already sits in my bag all the time with the 70-200 just conveniently sitting on my second body. Perhaps I shouldn't be so lazy hah #doitforthebokeh
I had this lens a year or two ago. Love the rendering and look the lens could produce. But I ended up selling it for the 135 GM mainly for the size and autofocus.
I was considering doing the opposite because nearly every comparison video I've seen gives the nod to the 105 for the bokeh quality...which is the main reason I bought the 135 GM.
@@LtDeadeye I think the 105 has more unique rendering and bokeh. For outdoor portraits I think I’d prefer it’s final images over the 135 very slightly. But the thing weighs significantly more than a 70-200 and the design is extremely clunky. The autofocus is also no where close to any of the new GM lenses. The 135 is my main sports/action lens and is more versatile for me. I also prefer it for studio work and headshots. Just depends what your use case is and what you value.
The 105 is my go-to on my R6, I bought the R6 around this lens. I added the 40mm ART as well for the low end. Only issue is the overall size trying to place in a camera bag.
I love and use the 105, and not yet purchased but considering my next purchase, I think we are thinking on the same lines with the 40mm, nice between 35 and the 50. How is the Sigma 40 Art going? The supplier told me its not "popular", but I am after the image.
@@automationintothings the 40mm is dead on accurate, I use it for weddings. Like the 105, the 40mm is a heavy beast!! My travel bag is those two and a G2 70-200, like a workout lifting that bag!
Sigh, was going btw this and the 135mm this past weekend. Ended up going with the 135 since it’s lighter… I already have the 70-200 and it’s killer on my wrists. The 135 is currently in transit, can’t wait to test it out and hoping I made the right choice.
Any chance of a comparison with the 105 2.8? The 1.4 seems to be an adapted HSM lens from the DSLR day and I'd be interested in a native mirrorless lens even at the higher aperture.
Julia, thanks for the amazing video and beautiful model you brought. I realized you often don't use EVF, if I'm right, what is your experience in this regard?
So cooool! Love 100mm focal range (Canon 100/2, 100l ef, maybe change for rf macro) It will be amazing, if Sigma make 105 dg dn - light weight like 85 1.4
Curious: why are you at 200 ISO when shooting 1/2000? Would shooting at 50 ISO and 1/1000ish of a second not give you cleaner files with greater dynamic range?
Honestly I can't see any noise at ISO 200, so I don't mind not shooting at base ISO all the time on the A7IV. Since this is a long and heavy lens I also want to make sure my shutter speed is fast enough - which yes, 1/1000 would have been fine too to avoid motion blur. When I am making a RU-vid video I have my mind in a lot of places so sometimes I don't pay a lot of attention to my camera settings. Keeping a slightly higher ISO means I also won't accidentally put my shutter speed too low without realising.
Julia as always is fantastic content creator, to be honest I don’t like boke, and the pic look a bit cheap, but I know that a lot photographers will not agree with me, I M not professional)
nice shooting. How did you manage focus ? single point you located to the top of screen and try to move camera until it touches the detetct square of the face or activate eye detetc custom button which overrides your single point wherever it is located ?
Yeah the performance is great with this lens. Don't forget there is also the Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG DN lens now which feels just like a native Sony lens :)
I'm afraid it's not for me. I use 85mm 1.8 on a daily basis and I think the bokeh is nicer (less blurry, but gives nicer circles)... and I also have 300mm 2.8 which gives better separation of the background in the case of the so-called full portrait. it's hard not to get a nice blur in a regular portrait. I'm waiting for a face to face comparison with the Nikon 200mm 2.0 or 300mm 2.8.
I don't use actual reflectors, I make use of natural reflectors in my location which I have talked about in both my "backlight tips" videos I have made in the past! The whole point of a behind the scenes video is to show you how I am taking photos, so there is no reason for me to hide any reflectors or lighting if I did use them ;)
I somehow feel this is not going to happen (- but for shure I dont know). When this one came out it was "touted" to be the proud resoults of two years of special loving developpement (sharpness for astro?) and came out with Sigma themselfs(!) naming it the Bokeh master (or the llike). So making one that is like Nikkor proved to be possible in size - would kill the precious narrative of this one (and the lens as is excellent). Rather, I would have advised Sony to prove it can make it no less good and smaller. As with their stellar f1.2 50mm (that even is "the best 50mm" at f1.4 etc.)
I'm going to post a shorts/reel/tiktok about this soon! As soon as I get home from overseas because I forgot the video file I recorded on my desktop haha oops.
Great Video, im thinking so long to buy this lense for my Canon R6 but as you can see, you geht a white haze when you shooting against the sun even with the sunblend on. what do you think about it ?
Thanks! I personally love the ghosting from shooting backlit with this lens, but it's not for everyone. That's why I wanted to mention that even with the lens hood you might still gets lots of flare depending on the lighting.
Love your images! I'd recommend to stop down just a little bit to f1.6 or f1.8. Then the bokeh circles are prefectly wound also in the corners and the look is imho even better.
I don't need high resolution files, I do wedding photography so even the A7III file size was enough. I would need way too many NAS/HDs if I shot weddings on an A7R4 😭
Beautiful photos as usual! I really want that lens, but it's a little too close to my Canon 85mm F1.2 to justify the cost😄 I've been hearing rumours about a Canon 135mm F1.8...
The exclusively back-lit photos do un-justice to this lens as people ignoring this lens will feel it alway does these alround milky rendering - wich is wrong. It is also contrasty and rich in colors as any top of the top. Bokeh (smoothness of the out of focus) is certainly special on this one, but that is not particularely exploited nor visible here at all.
If you think this lens is dreamy, then you really, really need to try any or all of the following: - Carl Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 135mm f2 - Hasselblad Carl Zeiss Planar T* CF 80mm f2.8 - Leica APO Summicron M 90mm f2 ASPH - Carl Zeiss Otus APO Planar T* 85mm F1.4 - Voigtlander 90mm f3.5 APO-Lanthar SL II - Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E AF-S - Carl Zeiss Otus Distagon T* 55mm f1.4 The Zeiss APO Sonnar T* 135mm f2, Hasselblad Zeiss Planar T* CF 80mm f2.8 and the Leica APO Summicron-M 90mm f2 ASPH are the best three lenses ever made. Legendary saturation, contrast, micro contrast and tonality! Simply legendary lenses in their own league! While I'm doing studio work, the Hasselblad Zeiss 80mm f2.8 is on my camera 80% of the time, followed by the Zeiss Otus 55mm. When we're out, I basically have either the Nikkor 105mm f1.4 or the Leica 90mm f2 on one camera and the Zeiss Otus 55mm permanently mounted on my other camera, I don't use any other lenses when I'm doing outdoor shoots. I would 100% recommend you the Nikkor 105mm f/1.4E AF-S, it's incomparably better than the Sigmas 105mm, even when used with the Sony/Canon/Nikon adapters and that's not to mention the ''3D pop'' that you get with it, which is what you can usually only get on Zeiss and Hasselblad lenses (and on some Nikon and Leica lenses!) Sigma lenses lack this ability, entirely. So far, Sigma has not yet released a lens with good micro contrast and tonality, these characteristics are non existent in Sigma lenses.
