Such great shots and the best comparison video I have ever seen with the shots being identical, side by side, entartaining, and no dumb pixel peeping. Keep them coming.
Your lens comparisons are always what i need to see. to be able to make the kind of informed decision I need to make. I've been sooo patiently waiting for these Sigma primes to come to the X mount. We're eating good now, mon ami! Thanks for the video.
you did a phenomenal job recreating the same composition with both lenses. Most comparisons just have similar shots while you had pretty much the exact same in all of them except the walking one! this is great, please do more. i actually had the sigma when i shot Sony, but made the switch to Fuji in part because of the f1.2. even though the depth of field is only marginally shallower, it really shines in some photos (like at 1:34)
Thank you so much. I tried my best to match each image in camera as closley as possible. I'm glad it's noticeable. Yeah I really REALLY love the Fujifilm 56. Overall it seemed sharper and the Dof is really nice. Also the fall off is to die for. Thanks for watching and I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Hi John! Thank you so much for your vids. They are always informative and fun learning. Will you be able to do a video on x-s10 for portraits or a wedding soon? Thank you. Cheers.
With such a wide f1.2 aperture, highlights are brighter whereas the f1.4 was subtly less bright. Amazing both lenses performed about the same from my viewpoint. Thx!!
Loved the Video man I Recently Brought Fujifilm XT4 a month ago after watching your wedding shoot with XT3 and now will be opting 56mm sigma f1.4 its an impressive lens and affordable one!
You and the model both did an astonishing job recreating the same image with each lens! Really great comparison. Based on these shots, I think I'll save myself $520 and get the Sigma. To my eyes the differences weren't consistent enough to pick a clear favorite, so I'm happy to take the affordable option. I'd like to have an aperture ring, but if I'm honest with myself I'm gonna lock the aperture at 1.4 most of the time. Edit: Maybe one consistent exception in the skin tone where the Fuji has a slight edge for me: I think skin tones (oranges, I guess) are rendered slightly lighter, making the skin look smoother overall. Normally I'd create that effect with the HSL panel in Lightroom. Definitely not a big enough difference to make me spend the extra money.
For less than half the price new (Here in Denmark at least), that Sigma seems to be AMAZING value! Great comparison video. Loved the shots and credits to the model as well!
Thanks for the nicely setup comparison. Since I already own a Fuji 56/1.2, I will stick with it. It will be interesting to see if Fujifilm does release a significantly higher resolution sensor next year as rumored and how these Fuji and Sigma lenses stack up then --- however, the Sigma is so much cheaper I can see buying it now and have more money left over for buying a newer lens later if necesary.
Properly excellent comparison out in the real world. I don’t have a dog in the hunt as I already have the Viltrox 56 f1.4 which works well, but I think I prefer the Sigma images. Either way, it’s great that Fuji shooters are finally getting great third party lenses to choose from.
I had this lens on my Lumix GX 8 and missed it so much...Now I am since half a year on Fuji XT-4 and saw that this lens also is for Fuji now. By your comparison definitely want to own this lens. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and images(nice sophisticated model btw), greets from the Netherlands, Guus
such a great video! if you are on a budget, do you think is still worth buying the old version of the 56 1.2 (used at half the price) or buying the Sigma is a better choise?
Used to have the sigma 56mm e mount when I had my Sony A6500, fantastic lens with great af and image quality. Owned the Fujifilm 56mm f/1.2 too, love the rendering and sharp wide open at f/1.2, autofocus is a bit slow, especially when dealing with subject tracking. Compare the two, sigma definitely has a way more attractive price tag. If I have to pick one between the two now, I would go Sigma. But rumours has it, Fujifilm is going to have a 56mm mk2.
@@lukmie2769 I don’t think it will, since they definitely have to price it lower than their 50mm f/1. Plus based on the 23mm f/1.4 LM, it is pretty much the same price.
What a great comparison! Excellent video, thanks for this. I think this makes the Sigma a no brainer as a budget option for being this close to the Fuji IQ wise.
Great job! I read distortion is noticeable on the Sigma e-mount. As your shots containing architectural elements look pretty clean (to me at least), can we conclude that in-camera correction does a fine job and distortion won't be an issue for jpegs shooters?
Microcontrast is unbelieavalbe on the 56 Fuji - 10% above Sigma. Clean and clear like fresh water - smooth at the same time. Look at the richness of skin tones. The Sigma as any Sigma I own with a fantastic result, but the topping on the Fuji reminds me my GF Lenses. Absolut fantastic.
Maybe you mentioned this on the video and I didn't catch it, but is there any way we could download the JPEGs? I'd like to compare sharpness without factoring youtube compression into the mix
really very well done vid. thanks for the effort and sharing. you and your model were wonderful. she really nailed the look and was able to repeat for each lens demo. impressive. fuji 56 just has a very special quality. sigma 56 was a breathe warmer (magenta?) and a wee bit sharper. BIG thumbs up.
good side by side comparison. interesting they are far more similar than different. is the sigma slightly warmer look ? or was camera WB 100K different ?
Thanks for doing this great video. I couldn’t notice any differences to be honest, the IQ looked the same, maybe the Fuji had a very slight softer Bokeh but its an advantage definitely not something a customer will pickup. I would have loved to see a Continuous AF walking test or similar as for me this is an area the fuji 56 struggles. Did you find the Sigma performed any better with AF?
It was great to see you at WPPI. You did an amazing job comparing two lenses. It was very hard to tell a difference but my eyes kept rolling on the Sigma 56mm more. So, here's my vote... Team Sigma.
Look at the rendition of the black of the dress at e.g. 5:18. The Fujinon lets you feel the texture and shine of the cloth, whereas the Sigma is just a flat black. If I had the money, the Fujinon would be my choice w/o a doubt.
@@koju911 I wonder if that has something to do with exposure. It is true that the Sigma is a bit more contrasty, however it seems like the photo you are referring to is a 1/3 stop underexposed compared to the Fujinon. Dunno.
It is very close but in this video I noticed a couple things; Both are tradeoffs in center sharpness but I noticed the background out of focus is more creamy with the Fuji where the Sigma in comparison is slightly harder. The contrast is more noticeable on the sigma which doesn't surprise me being that sigma is not known for inner contrast qualities which I think is why the Fuji images Pop just a good bit more. Those things might be the difference in price and look. I'll stick with my XF56mm.
Great photoshoot. Love your amazing style of portraiture. I own the Fuji 56mm and am frustrated that I can’t get close enough for head & shoulder pics. I was hoping you would show Sigma’s close-focus advantage which should blow Fuji out of the water and create great background separation. Any chance you can do a short video showing close ficus comparison for portrait close-ups?
The min focusing distance on both lenses is exactly the same according to the specs sheets, 1.6'/50cm. There should be no significant close focus advantage to either one.
@@evankolpack I’ve got the older (non WR) version of the 56mm lens. Close focus is about 72cm. Can’t do portraits easily. Very annoying. I might get the newer Fuji 56mm. Or save money and buy the Sigma😀. Do you have any of these? Happy with results?
@@barrymayes6712 I don't have either, I was going off spec sheets. But after watching some videos comparing the old non-WR version and the new WR version, I'm sold on the latter, even at significantly higher $$$. Unless these comparisons are fudging things, the new lens is considerably sharper and there is WAY less glare/haziness from bright lights. It's very noticeable from standard pics viewed on a standard 1080 screen, no pixel peeping involved. The original 56 has a lovely look, a bit more oldschool and soft, while the sun glare/haze can give a cool nostalgic effect. But I'll be using this lens mostly for product photography, so clarity is super important.
Thanks for this comparison video, John! I found Tony's comparison a bit clinical - yours is a great real world example in what I would consider ideal light. If it weren't for the smidgen of extra background separation on the Fuji, I would consider these images indistinguishable when viewed on RU-vid or Insta. The 56mm f/1.2 is my most used lens, but I'm happy to see the enthusiasm around, and quality of, the Sigma trio.
The Fujinon is a superb portrait lens. The Fujinon lens has a bit more character (eg softer bokeh), the Sigma wants to be sharp (what the ideal was a decade ago).
Thanks a lot for this great video! I will go for Sigma 56 1.4 for sure. but if Sigma have aperture ring like Fuji it would be great. It will made me very easy and comfortable to use.
I'm very impressed with this sigma, I have to say that I prefer sigma colours, skin tones and sharpness, I appreciate that sigma have warm tones like Fujifilm. Maybe for price range I would see a comparative between sigma and Viltrox/tokina but I know they give a more cold tones that I don't like very much.
I don't know if it is just my perception but I believe the images from the sigma are a bit flat so my personal preference would be the Fuji. I suppose that one of the main reasons I chose Fuji was that the lenses had an aperture ring so that would be a deal breaker for me. You are also very right about the fall off which is what sold me on the 56 1.2 in the first place. Most excellent job on the comparison!
Hi, thanks for your job, really interesting. For me the Fuji looks more “film” and the bokeh is more pleasant so it is more than better for portrait. The Sigma is maybe better on sport or fast kids portraits I imagine but, the Fuji will come in a new version soon I suppose, like 18-23-33 did. Cheers
I watched the entire video and not any final thoughts on what you thought of each of the lenses or the comparison. We've been nice to hear a recap of what you thought of the sigma
Very good video comparison. The bokeh on Sigma is noticeably less smooth, but it's a small difference. Sigma in some of the shots is sometimes sharper in the center. Over-all Fuji wins, but the Sigma is really excellent, too.
never use fuji 50 but while seee your video i was wondering sigma just as good as fuji did.. and also for the price for me😁. thanks for the videos! what a great work!
Hello John, Thank you very much for the fantastic work, i made my decision by your rewiew... It would be great to make a rewiew between the new 56 1.2 WR and the Sigma 56 on XT-5 Bodies. Thanks a lot 🍀🙏🍀 Christoph
It's fairly close IMHO but I thought the Fuji image was better vis a vis micro contrast which gives it a better look for me. Check out the pendant in the various shots - it just sparkles more with the Fuji. Good comparison video. Would love to see a studio/strobe version.
Hey John, excellent video. Your video helped me decide to save the extra money and just buy the Sigma 56mm for my Fuji. I have a problem that I was hoping you might be able to offer some insight on. When I use Auto ISO WITH Shutter Speed dial set to "A", the camera defaults to a minimum S.S of around 1/300 or so. Which of course drives the ISO up unnecessarily. Have you experienced this or can you verify this behavior? Thanks for all your content, and double thanks if you're able to check into that!
I believe when you actually take the foto that the shutter speed or ISO changes from what you see as you're framing. Easy to do a test of that. See what u get when looking thru viewfinder and compare to metadata.
Thanks for this. I'm looking at both right now. Adorama has the Fuji for just 499.99 NEW. The Sigma the same. They show to be almost identical yet the Sigma renders a slightly darker image. Is that what you saw? I think I'll go with the Sigma for the smaller form factor..
I use Fuji cameras myself and I love them, but anyhow although both terrific lenses I found the Sigma slightly better. The Sigma was kind of brighter, natural and somehow effortless in greatness and that appealed to me.
The optical performance is, for most intents and purposes, indistinguishable at equal apertures. The issue hinges on whether you want the Fuji badge, build and additional one third of a stop for twice the price.
Thank you for doing this video. I found the Fuji lens in "like new condition" for 25 dollars more than the Sigma brand new. I was wondering if I should cancel and get the Sigma just because it's brand new and it being lighter. After watching your video, I found myself liking the results from Fuji more often. Maybe I am seeing things but the model's face looked a little larger in the results than Fuji? Or maybe it was the skin tone result. Very little difference overall though. I'll keep my Fuji order. Appreciate you.
Nice. I prefer the Sigma. Seems to be warmer with slightly more contrast. I liked it better than the Fuji lens in every shot. I already own the Sigma 30 1.4, looking to get this as well.
Finally a real comparison with real examples side by side. Great video. Where I live, Sigma is twice as cheap, so I have nothing to think about. Team Sigma and channel subscription.
Fuji showed more contrast and I could see a bit more micro contrast in the leaves in the latter shots. But it is more $ and more weight. But it has an aperture ring. As a side note - I've seen Fuji JPG be slightly different from one shot to another. A better test would be to shoot raw and apply the same consistent post processing.
This will actually help out a lot on deciding which one to get. Sigma is almost on par with Fuji but faaaar way better when it comes to price. Great vid! keep it up
Team Fuji, although was v impressed by Sigma's lens. Mind you, just ordered my 56mm, which arrives tomorrow just in time for Saturday's wedding .Great video as always.
Thanks for this video! Sigma for the win on this one for me. At the same price, I would have a hard time deciding, they are so close and both excellent! It's more a matter of preference at this point. Bokeh is slightly better on the Fuji (normal at 1.2) but that's not even always obvious on your shots, I also prefer the tones on the Sigma. At half the price of the fuji, the Sigma is a no brainer. What's funny is that I was looking at buying the Fuji and I saw your video.
I have both at the moment and I must say, both feel very different. Even though the differences are minor, I prefer the Fuji for Portraits and the Sigma for everyday/travel lens more. The Fuji has a slightly different color rendition, die Bokeh looks a little bit more "classic", but also the whole lens feels way bigger and heavier. The Sigma has the typical Sigma look. Quite digital, less soul than the Fuji, consistently sharp, also the edges, way more neutral Bokeh balls than Fuji. And most importantly, it feels way lighter and it is significantly smaller. I prefer it for travel when space and weight is limited. And the Sigma has a more premium feel, maybe because it is not only metal and many chinese companies copy the all metal bodies of Fuji. It is made from high quality plastic that actually feels like metal and has high quality rubber on the focus ring. Especially in colder environment it feels nicer on the skin.
This was super helpful for my decision. Already sold the Fuji and picked up the mkII (not considered here) but was not for my everyday/travel - AF, handling, ease of use. Always preferred the 90 f2 look and rendering for portraits, so the Sigma looks a solid option for everyday short Tele... even if I'll miss the aperture ring.
Based solely on your Jpeg images and being on a budget I would get the Sigma lens because new vs. new it's 1/3 the price of Fuji's 56mm, but if I wasn't on a budget, I'd still purchase the Sigma because I preferred its Jpeg's over the Fuji lens.
On this day it was SUPER overcast and cloudy. So what started happening is my auto white balance was showing things a little TOO blue for my liking. And since I was shooting in JPG I have to get everything correct in camera. So changing to Shade brought back the warmth to my images. Basically once skin tone starts looking off in camera is when I start shooting in Kelvin.
Would like to see a lowlight comparison. At some fotos the fuji looks brighter but anyway, the sigma is so close… and the money you save… was there at least a big difference in the af?
AF is pretty comparable. However, during this video the Sigma didn't have it's final firmware so it's basically pre production. Which is why I didn't talk about the auto focus too much. But for what it was, it was pretty good.
Is it just me, or did the sigma capture a slightly tighter frame than the Fuji? Also, I agree with some of the other commenters about the colors. The Sigma leaned a little warmer and more magenta while the Fuji had a touch more green. We’re the settings the same on both? It seemed like the Sigma exposed a bit darker on a few shots.
I had the settings the same on both cameras for the most part. As far as the color tones and everything that was all the same. I was shooting the Fujifilm at f1.2 so that made a difference and my settings for each photo were a little different. So I basically tried my best to match them in camera. Also, when I took the shots I stayed where I was and it seemed like the Sigma was a little tighter. But it's hard to say.
Awesome comparison, both look great. I personally have the Sigma 56 with the Sony a6100. The Fuji has that extra roll-of on close-ups that makes it look like it was shot with a FF camera. However you can get an a6100 or an X-T3 with the Sigma for about the same as the Fuji lens alone, which is pretty amazing value especially if you’re buying pre-owned.
They are so close, even in side by side its hard to differentiate. Bokeh looks similar (despite the fact Sigma is 1.4), Sigma looks tad darker and more contrasty IMHO. Are there any difference in AF performance?
I don't know if this sounds weird , but the looks of these 2 lens is kinda different in my eyes , it's not technical ... but the Fuji 56mm 1.2 looks like a fuji photo , while the sigma one renders something a sony camera will produce. both looks great , but still different looks. thanks for the hardwork , your videos make me wanna become a wedding photographer lol cheers.
Sigma just recently starting making lenses that will fit on the Fujifilm cameras. I still prefer the native Fujifilm lenses but it's something you should totally check out.
Thanks for watching. Super impressive to see what Sigma is doing. I personally prefer the Fujifilm but it's looking like Fujifilm users now have another great option for their bodies.
You have to change the aperture using the settings on your camera. If you have an X-T series you can do that with the dials on the front and back of the camera.
I think this might be my biased opinion but Im more of a product shooter that would opt for the Sigma due to its macro/like ability to shoot really close compared to Fuji. if you do it as a main job (portrait shooter the Fuji) might be better for someone like me who shoots product shots Im more inclined towards the sigma
High John I use the xe2s & the xe1 I know they’re older but I love them I owned a a camera store in Nj for 43 years I always liked sigma I believe the 56 1.4 sigma was sharper & better color good luck
Got the fuji 56 but the AF frustrates me. Just bought the new fuji 33mm and absolutely love it. Will be saving up for the fuji 56mm 1.2 mk2 and skipping viltrox & Sigma
Nice video bro. I think we need to commend and give kudos to the model. She was able to redo the poses and they match. She actually made the video interesting and no one is taking about this. Ma'am, I celebrate you
Team Fuji! Not because of technical perfection, but "soul". Sigma of course wins the value for price battle (and AF Speed...), but there is "something" with this Fuji 56 that made me sell the sigma. I have to say that i generally love the character of these "old" Fuji lenses - i also adore the old 35 1.4, which has (for me) similar "magic". It's not always about technical perfection :-) Nice video, dude - have a nice day and greetings from Germany
Both lenses produce really nice images, but, how did (you) like their performance? Which one is better for AF when it comes down to speed/snappiness/accuracy? I don't know if I should just buy a Fuji now or wait for the new Sigma to come out soon what is your opinion? Speed and accuracy is more important to me. Thank you will really appreciate your input on this.
It's really hard to say. The Sigma was doing great, however it also wasn't running it's final firmware. So I can't totally say how well the AF was doing. When I used it however it did feel good so that says a lot. I still prefer the Fuji lens but the Sigma is a great cheaper alternative.
@@jbivphotography Thanks for replying. What do you mean by "it's really hard to say"? You were using both lenses. Did you feel the Sigma had the same speed and accuracy as the Fuji? Did the Sigma ever hunted or couldn't lock on focus in any situation? One of the reasons why I ask is because I recently purchased the Viltrox 56mm with the latest firmware and people rave about that lens calling it "fast" compared to the Fuji 56 1.2, but the Viltrox isn't that fast and it misses focus on still objects in plain daylight. If totally fine if Sigma updates the firmware later on, but how did your copy perform? The tittle of your video is Which Lens Is Better? :-) If you say "is really hard to say" then would you say the Sigma performs the same as the Fuji since you didn't notice any difference? Thanks.
proably due to youtube comrepssion I really didn't see much if any difference between either lens with the comparisons you made. A more systematic review has shown the sigma to be superior for contrast, flaring and autofocus speed (well its a new lens against a quite old one) but maybe in the real world this doesn't amount to much. One of the big draws of the Fuji system is the ergonomics - having that aperture ring on the lens - and I don't like being without that. Also the Fuji 56 1.2 is built like a tank. I won't be getting rid of mine any time soon.
Couple quick questions. Where are you shooting wide-open on every shot in the video or did you stop down to 1/3 or 2/3. I take it you’re using the most current firmware on both lenses? Is the Sigma lens front war upgradable life the future lenses? What is the auto focus speed about the same when using face detection? Did one lens hunt more than the other? Were you using servo or single?
I shot every picture in this photo wide open. No stopping down at all. Also, the Sigma was on pre-production firmware. Due to this I didn't talk too much about the autofocus but from what I saw it was pretty good. However, I always shoot in single point auto focus. So no continuous or eye auto focus. I'm not sure how well the Sigma performs in that as I didn't test it at all.
Def noticed the reds in her skin Coming out more My preference depended on the picture for me It would be nice to see a sharpness comparison with some zoom and get Johns feed back with the actual use. Talking about focusing and general performance.
So at 6:04, the Fuji missed focus and for some reason is front-focused on your model's shoulder (and I don't doubt you had the box over her eye, FWIW). That's the main thing that drives me insane about the Fuji, i.e. the sporadic AF. I often like the slightly soft glow of the F1.2 wide open (though not in every case, admittedly), but the thing is I can always add a little softening in post to taste. What I **can't** do is go back in time and make the lens nail focus like it should have in the first place, and there's a lot of times I'd like to with my Fuji 56mm. Having shot the Sigma on Sony and MFT, I already know it's a bit sharper, CA control is better (3:19), and the slightly narrower depth of field I can certainly live with, but the biggest draw for me is the AF. I'll miss the aperture ring for sure, but still, preordered the Sigma.
