What a great combo! Mitch and Julia in the same video. I’m surprised you didn’t have the r6, but the eos r is great too since that’s what I’m currently shooting with. Thanks for the video!
I think this is the first comparison video that really shows the feelings you get with these two different focal length. Because most of the videos talk about technical stuff which is nice but what makes you choose a lens is what you want to share with the audience or yourself
It makes me really happy seeing that you were both shooting a lot in live view. I've always felt so self conscience shooting in live view instead of with the view finder when doing portraits! Sometimes it really helps making your composition
Yeah I get some negative comments sometimes about how I shoot in live view, but honestly it doesn’t matter! I always recommend for you to just shoot in whatever way makes you comfortable and gets you the shots you want 😊 I also really love live view as I feel more open to talking to and directing my subjects rather than having my face buried behind my camera the entire time haha
Honestly, you were the one who convince me to move to prime lenses since my d750. And now I brought the lens over to the mirrorless world. You're an inspiration.
Omg yessss! My trio of primes is usually 35, 50 and 85 but now moving to Sony and having that beautiful GM 135 I think this will replace my 50 as 3rd favourite 😅
This is perfect! I have a 35 and don’t have an 85mm yet but it’s hard to figure out the difference without side by side shots. This video provided those side by side shots! Very nice! Thank you!
It's just a pleasant experience to watch your videos. So Calm. By the way... for portraits, 85mm give the best output everyway. 35mm feels much like Point and Shoot Camera. But for me 50mm is One solution to All situation
I talked with a friend the other week about lenses and he said he is going to buy a 24-70, so I told him I'd rather buy a 35+85 combo. Glad I'm not the only one who thinks it's the best combo lol.
Before I got to this video , I thought of that too hahah , so here I am buying the SP 35mm 1.4 first (pretty broke rn , just a student) specially here in the Philippines where gear is much expensive. Also for the reason I have a dx at the moment haha
Nice Video! Great Images! Love the Poses! You and Mitch were Fantastic, but major props go to Liliana and Jarrod! Models in NYC would hate sitting on the ground especially in nice light color jeans. 😉
I’ve been trying to do 1 lens challenges on photo shoots lately, these are definitely my go to lengths. I think I really like the 85 for fewer background distractions. Also, I’ve been stitching 85 photos for a “wide” look - it’s been interesting.
I love limiting myself to only using one lens sometimes too, it can help with some creativity 😄 and ooh the stitching sounds great! I used to do that with my 50mm shots until I got a 35 hehe
I really dig the idea of stitching together frames for a panoramic image. May I ask which software you’re using to do this? Back before digital (dating myself here, I know) I used to shoot 6x6 and then crop heavily to get a panorama effect. I would cut down 20x24 paper into 3 strips and I got some pretty decent results printing 8x20 images from medium format negs. I miss the days when NYC had rental darkrooms where you could easily print 20x24.
That was fun. I love the houses that you both chose to shoot in front of. I also enjoyed each one of your style of shooting and angles. Julia you definitely love the Sony lol. It was good seeing Mitch again.
Love this comparison! I started with just a 50mm and then went mirrorless and now I have only a 35mm while I save for an 85mm. Everyone says start with a 50mm but I kind of wish I had just started 35mm like I first considered. I'm so eager to get that 85mm though! Like Mitch said at the end, it just has a magic that I can't get with only the 35mm!
both are great lenses. i prefer 50mm to 35, because don't need to get as close to the models, also more background separation, and less need for a good background, instead focus more on the model. in fact if could only use 1, i think 50mm is my choice. since just move a little closer for 85mm like shots.
I tought it's your beauty and knowledge that keeps me watching your videos but i've realized it is YOUR VOICE hahah Keep it up, greetings all the way from Croatia ^^
@@mohammedmalik9311 not really. That’s a big misconception you often hear on the internet. (You may know but I post this as a general info for others, as many mistake it on the internet) On crop, a 50 still is a 50. you will get the same perspective, bokeh and compression. The only difference is that the image is basically cropped. It’s like taking an image with a 50 in a full frame and cropping it later. It doesn’t change anything you are just „loosing“ the outer parts of the image. So what actually changes is that on a crop camera, you are forced to step back to get the same content on the image. Stepping back in turn will have an effect on the background blur/bokeh (it gets less) and on the depth of field. The reason why photographers choose specific lenses is usually because for the above effects. That’s why people should be aware of this when thinking that getting a 50 for their crop camera will give them a 85.
Superb comparison You know what? I’ve been a 85mm kinda portrait guy for years and the more it goes and the wider I tend to try. Thanks to your videos I feel confident in going that way. Recently I got my hands on the Nikon 58mm f/1.4 and the Tamron 35mm 1.4 is coming soon. And it’s due to my discover of the 28mm in the Leica Q. So I progressively try wider and wider! But still love the 105 1.4 of course. Nice work!
I'm just starting with photography and I bought the 14mm and 24-70mm until I figure out where I am shooting most of the time and it turns out that I almost never use the 14mm but when I am using my 24-70, I am almost always either somewhere around 30mm or on 70mm and even find myself wanting more range, so in my conclusion, after I sell the 14mm and 24-70, I will be getting a 35mm and 85mm as my TRUE first lenses!
Great vid! Love my 35 1.4 I use it for street and ports quite regularly. But if I want some compression and bokeh then my 50mm 1.2. Obviously the style of 35, 50, and 85 is subjective, but ultimatley it's what works for you in those situations. If I have more space I use my 135 f2, that's a magical lens. ❤✌
I love my 85 mm for portraits. I hardly ever touch my 35 mm except for weddings. I use my 85 mm or my 70-200 at 200 mm for portraits. I use my 85 mm about 90% of the time and 200 mm the other 10% and I’ve had great success with that
Same as me. I can get tempted by wide for certain scenarios but by wide i mean at least 16mm. Then there's 400 or 600mm but i don't shoot enough wildlife to justify that. Zero interest in the 24-70 range.
@@fredriksvard2603 It’s funny after I read your reply I read my post/comment and that was over a year ago. I don’t even touch my 70-200 for over six months now. If I do portraits I have three lenses for my Sony a7riv and A9. I use the Sony 135mm f1.8 GM if I have enough room, or I go to the sigma 105mm f1.4 art, and if it’s closer I will break out the new sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN. They are the only 3 lenses I use for portraits. I do have a 24-70 but I only use it for weddings or video work I do with my A7iv. It’s funny how I went from using the 70-200 to just primes. I have a 35 f1.4, 50 f1.4, 90mm f2.8 G, and my 70-200 just collecting dust. Now I am kind of sick to my stomach after typing all those lenses out how much money is just sitting there doing nothing. Camera gear fever I just had to have it all. But you can only use one lens at a time
@@LMActionsports Those are world class lenses, maybe there are exotic hasselblad, zeiss, leica etc lenses out there that i'm not familiar with that can provide a different look but that's probably a matter of preference. I can see how you don't touch the 70-200. Those zooms though, sometimes you don't have time to change lenses. I can see how concert photographers who get to shoot the first 3 songs may want to carry one camera with 16-35 and one with 70-200. I still just use one camera, 85mm for small staged and 100-400 for big ones where i don't have pit access.
@@fredriksvard2603 wow I would love to have the opportunity to shoot a concert like you have. I was going to get the 100-400 Sony lens but I picked up the 200-600 Sony. The only bad thing about it is you need a lot of light or you have to jack up your ISO and I hate doing that. But I have heard great things about the 100-400. My dream lens to own is the 200mm f2. Maybe if I sell all my lenses I don’t use I can get one. It sucks that Sony don’t make a 200 f2 but I would get the canon version and adapt it. It just has that 3d pop. I have the poor man’s version with the Sigma 105 that produces the look sort of. Do you mind if I ask how you got into doing concerts and the steps of how I could go about it. I would love to have something like that in my portfolio.
@@LMActionsports I guess it depends on where you live. Here we have small and big gigs every day basically, some are open air with no restrictions on cameras. Also i just asked some venues if i could shoot there in exchange for photos they could use, they were happy with the results and asked me to shoot some bigger bands and so on. It's much easier than you'd think, i guess unless we're talking really big artists. Try it out, really small artists are probably just happy that someone's interested and happy to get quality photos. I'm not sure bigger is better. With smaller artists you can easily get shots from behind the stage, shots from soundcheck or just lounging around. With big artists, you're typically in front of the stage and can only shoot for 10-15 mins. In that situation you won't experiment as much. That said, one of my favourite shots is of James Hetfield, i brought a compact ricoh to show and shot basically from his lower leg up towards the guitar and face. The tricky bit with small clubs is the light, both the amount and the quality of it. With productions you can pretty much get away with f4, or aps-c. 100-400 is a useful range. I have some photos of grets van fleet and the hives taken with it. I'm probably more of a 70-200 person though, or better yet 135mm prime. I rarely feel a need to go wider than 85 or longer than 200. It also depends on what perspectives you like. I like the short-medium tele compression, and strongly dislike wide concert photos unless it's something pretty creative with a 15-16mm or so. For filmmaking, i can see why they shoot so much in the 24-35 range. It's a different ballgame. I actually have the sony 200-600 next to me as we speak, it's not mine though. Great, but cumbersome. No offense but i kinda get the sense that you're a bit caught up in the gear thing. Reality is, people do mediocre stuff with expensive gear and vice versa. You probably have all you need to shoot cool stuff. Then again maybe you have a very clear idea about what types of photos you want to take with that 200mm that you can't take today. In general, i think it's easy to get caught up in sharpness, resolution, autofocus speed etc. I also see a lot of people chasing the entire range from 16mm to 600mm just to be covered. To do that with quality glass you'd have to spend a fortune, and you'd suffer from option paralysis since you'll only want a few lenses in your bag and can only have one on a camera at once. I saw a video with peter hurley the other day, he talks about his 24-105 f4 and his 100mm macro and nothing else - he knows exactly what he needs. I have a few pro photographers/filmmaker friends who are the same, they don't talk or think much about new gear at all really. At the venues here, there are a few photographers i see all the time. One with a sony and a few primes, one with two canon r bodies with rf 2.8 zooms, a few with generic 70-200 lenses, a few hipsters with something like 50mm 1.8 or all in one compacts. I can't say i see a correlation between gear and quality output. Maybe in the sense that experienced photographers with pro gear consistently get the editorial stock photo look. They're on assignment and they deliver. The photos are boring to me though, technically good but predictable and generic. That's the 24-70/70-200 3 song limit look, you'll get something different if you can hang around a whole day. If a 50mm 1.8 makes you fly under the radar a bit more, maybe that will let you take more interesting photos. One of the reasons i prefer my 85mm prime to a big white 70-200 2.8.
Yes definitely! Since I shoot so much on a 35, I naturally know the angles and distance to be standing to get the results I want. Put me on a 135 though and I really have to think and play around with my framing a lot more haha
Both are nice lenses, it all matters in your perspective. I have a 70-200 that is a real pig to tote around, but in places like narrow streets with cars parked on both sides, that narrow field of view can get the shots without all the clutter. But I have to admit, I would be more luckily to use the two you showed far more often.
Sigma 35mm 1.2 DG DN, Sony Zeiss 50mm 1.4, Sony 85mm 1.4 GM, Sony 135mm 1.8 GM... absolutely stunning lenses. Also rock a vintage custom made Helios 44-2 58mm 16-blade aperture for a unique look.
Love this video because you are thinking out loud while you shoot. That is so helpful for someone like me who is just learning. As an amateur I really could not afford a FF body like the A7III or IV. I found a barely used XT-3. I am not in the process of shopping for a lens primarily for portrait shooting but also want to shoot some outdoor sports. I rented the Fuji 56 f1.2 and it was amazing. But, it's a bit expensive for me. I do think I like that longer focal length though. Anyway, thanks for a helpful video!!
Amazing jobs for both I just don't know which one to chose, 35mm seems more cinematic I guess in some way and it's really great cause we can see more context more environment around the subject whereas the 85mm doing an excellent job centering and isolating the subject, hard to choose... :/
Julia Trotti the lenses are great. The bokeh is a little weird, but I get great images. Hunts a little bit in extreme backlit situations but that’s every lens tbh. They’re built really nice and sleek looking,. Dust and grime does get in the focus ring tho
Most photos shot by 2 lenses from almost the small distance (3-5m far). If 85 shoot from 10-15 meters far away, the photos look great, full body with blurry background.
I'd say your best bang for the buck combo for portrait photography and even wedding (if you have fast legs) is going to be: A canon 6D + Sigma Art 35 1.4 + Canon 135 mm f2 + an ETL Canon flash. I'd say you should buy the Sigma brand new with warranty but the body and Canon lenses can be bought from ebay. Flash can be bought ebay or local market place. If you really need a 85mm, then an used canon 85mm f1.8 is fine and will save you a lot of money, and it doesn't add much weight to the set up above. 85mm is the golden focal for beginner portrait photography (it's easy to frame for newbie), more versatile than the 135mm but the 135mm is just too good and the 85mm f1.8 would be more usable at 2.8 actually. Just skip the 50mm altogether.
Love this video julia,i have a shoot on saturday and sunday and will be using both 35 and 85.Love both focal lengths,as both give such different results.One of my favourite videos of yours.
I think both lenses have their merits and produce wonderful produced wonderful shots. On a differing note, my daughters name is Liliana (although it's shortened to Lili, unless she's in trouble!) and haven't heard of another Liliana before, only Lilian's, Lily's or Lilliana's (2 'L's in the middle), so that was nice.
Great video once again! Random question: do you just walk the neighborhood, stop, and shoot, or do you knock on every door of the house you are using as the background (to request permission)?
Thank you! If we are just shooting with the outside of the building like we did here then I normally just shoot without asking. We try to be quiet, respectful to the property and we don’t stay for long either, usually just 5 or so minutes - plus if someone comes and asks us to leave we will go straight away. If I want to use something that’s right in someone’s front yard or I think we’ll be there for longer than 5 mins then I’ll knock and ask! But people in Sydney are usually really nice about it all and I’ve personally never had any issues 😊
@@juliatrotti Thanks so much! That makes sense. I was just curious. :) I've heard people in Sydney are super friendly. I hope to visit Australia one day when the world is back to normal.
Ha! Bye guys and end. This is also my favorite combo for travel photos! How did you like shooting on the tamron 35 again compared to your zeiss or canon 35?
Hey Julia ... the 35 is dreamy but the 85 is more direct and strong in my opinion ... i use the 85 a lot and don't own a 35 but now i will be looking into getting one. Thanks for all your effort to bring new content to the channel.
I’m glad you enjoyed it 😊 that’s so interesting I feel like the opposite where the 85 looks more dreamy to me because it melts the background away and the 35 is more direct and strong because you can see more of the location and it has an editorial feel to it! Either way, I love how they work in combination with each other.
I have to agree with Julia here. The 85mm is kind of a 'lose yourself' lens as the location is lost and we go straight to the emotion or action, distant like a memory, whereas the 35mm is the 'find yourself' lens, seeing more environment and context, while also able to be closer, feeling like the viewer is right there. Thanks to Julia and Mitch for this excellent comparison, so different and I struggle with the love for 50,35,85 myself for my work, Julia.
This is such a great video and it was so fun to watch! 2 questions. Do you always shoot in live view mode? Also do you have your cameras set on back button focusing?
Frames here and there on the 85 are repeatedly shot like it's a 35mm so the framing looks similar, which doesn't seem to distinguish well the unique traits of each lens
