These examples were very ineffective in determining which lens was best. Image examples were shot landscape...not showing any detail, bokeh, background separation, or night shots....which are some of the main reasons anyone buys a 1.4 lens.
Agreed. I've been really impressed with their lenses, recently... and it's especially impressive because the engineering is a little more tricky with the smaller mount and shorter flange-focal distance.
The shorter flange of the L+E mounts allow for far better size-to-performance values for wider and mid lenses (only slightly for longer lenses) so the new line of Sigmas designed for the fp, SL2 and S1/R/H will be smaller +/- sharper like this. As of OCT2019 Sigma has released a compact 800g 14-24mmF2.8, an even more compact 45mmF2.8 at 215g, and a large 1.1kg yet unique 35mmF1.2 (first ever with autofocus) which would have been impractically huge if built for reflex cameras. This particular Sigma is known to be the weakest in the ART series by a large margin, with some photographers preferring the ART28mm if they don't need as much range since it noticeably exceeds the Zeiss Otus ;) www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/03/mtf-results-for-recent-sigma-art-lenses/
Thank you very much for this great review and comparison! I have had the 24art and used it on a7r III but sold it after the GM came out. I wanted to get it due to the size and weight difference. And also the AF speed in video. If you have the 16-35 GM and 24-70 GM could you please make a comparison between them and the 24 GM at 24mm please? 🙏 Or if you don't have the time, can you respond here with your observations about it? It will be much appreciated! I am still deciding on whether I should get the 24 GM or not. It's very expensive in Europe and I already have 16-35 GM and 24-70 GM (which I've been trying to sell for a long time, because I also have the Tamron 28-75). But I really like a fast 24 and it is fantastic focal length for video, so I think I need one in my kit. It's just that I don't like to have lenses covering the same focal length... so I'm still debating.
It's a much bigger problem than a lot of people realize... that's one of the reasons I was so happy today when Sony announced the new 24-70 f/2.8 GM II ... it has a manual aperture ring, and it can be de-clicked, but it also has an aperture lock!
First time here Matt, excellent review and comparison. Those river shots at beginning looked awesome. I'm still undecided on the 24mm or 35mm .... Only so much cash to available. Have subbed and liked.
Hatte mich dieses Frühjahr für das Sigma 24mm 1.4 für meine A7iii entschieden und es bisher nicht bereut. Vor allem Nachts kommt mir die Lichtstärke als Amateur richtig entgegen :) Ist ja nicht so als hätte ich ständig ein Stativ dabei... LG !
@@tallaganda83 No it isn't, it's cheaper than Sony and Nikon's older (worse) lenses and considerably so compared to their launch pricing (with inflating the Nikon would be $2500)
if the sigma is a taller lens wouldn't that play a factor in it having that slightly having a slightly different result at 6:53 ? assuming you just kept the tri-pod in the same spot the position of the front of sigma's lens would be farther forward than the sony lens by the difference in comparative focal length?
Not at this distance, which is at least 150 meters to the opposite side. As a percentage, an inch (2.5cm) is nothing at all... and in fact, the optical opening of the lens is somewhere in the middle of the lens, so the actual difference in length would be less than an inch... maybe 1/2 inch.
Hi Peter..nice review..thanks. But how about 28mmf2.0 compare to the 24mmf1.4GM..? I need wide angle lens for travel and story telling photography.. Is it Sony FE 28mmf2.0 can delivered a good pictures..😇🙏thanks in advance.
Great review if only photographers look at your photos.Most normal people who see photos would think you were mad if you asked them to see the fine differences in any lens, they do not compare photos in Lightroom under these circumstances..They consider a great photo, by how good the photographer makes them look in the photo..
@@MatthewGore it's some weird kind of decentering or something like that, this is not exclusive to your Sigma. was it on whole image area the same? try comparing also sides etc possibly
@@tomasturis8909 Remember that this was only at one aperture setting; decentering would affect the lens beyond f/4. You can download the RAW images and look at them yourself, if you're curious, but the blur is across the entire frame. When I returned the lens to Sigma after testing and told them about the problem, the techs started trying to figure out what the problem was, and I gave them about 25 RAW images to check, with f/4 being bad in each case. They still haven't come up with a definitive answer yet. I still suspect a problem with the electronics in the lens and the IBIS system in the camera.
Awesome, thanks! Don't suppose you have a few RAW files I can look at? (Of the same scene at f/2.8, 4, and 5.6) I'd love to see what this looks like when there's no problem.
There is no way I would choose the GM over the sigma art. The horrible manual focus is just terrible for video work. (I’m mainly video) Where as the sigma art manual focus is a delight to pull focus with.
Overall great review. I suffer this aperture ring no lock issue with the anyway awesome fe 35 1.4 lens. The 15 USD helios lens has an aperture lock feature. Funny. Anyway nice video I wish I could have seen some shallow dof photos to see the bokeh rendering not only the bokeh balls. Anyway thanks.
Fair enough, although I doubt that it is a universal issue. After I showed them my results, Sigma started investigating in New York, and then escalated it to Japan, but I haven't heard anything solid back yet. They say that it's probably a firmware issue that can be fixed with an upgrade using the dock.
Hello, Can you get any information about what software was used in this lens when the test was performed? Now is firmware version Ver.02 2019.07.18, is the problem still at F / 4.0?
Sigma is 75% heavier than Sony, but Sony is 43% (not 75%) lighter than Sigma. A great comparison, but f/4 on Sigma looks like something went wrong. Are you sure that it didn't blow stronger then? Because it looks like a movement.
Yes, true about the weight... maybe I was a little sloppy there :-) Re: the f/4 blur, that was my first thought, too... that I touched the tripod, or there was a gust of wind, etc. But I had the same result at f/4 in four different shots at the same location, and also at f/4 at two nearby locations. In each case, I shot two shots each as I went up from 1.4 to f/8 or f/16, and then down to f/1.4 again, re-focusing between each shot, so they were taken minutes apart at least, and much longer than that in some cases. Also, the shutter speed was still around 1/1000th of a second, which is generally beyond the range that vibrations play a significant role, though it's not out of the question.
The F4 Sigma may have the same Problem like on the APS-C lenses 16mm and 30mm, which only have this defocussing problem at one specific F- Stop, with Viewfinder and AF-S. Sounds weird? It is weird. Same F-Stop and Display --> No problem. Same F-Stop, Viewfinder and AF-C. No problem. Any other F-Stop no problem. Just Viewfinder, AF-S and I think it was F2.0 at the 30mm and F2.8 at the 16mm?? Defocussed. There may be an Firmware Update for the lens.
One interesting difference that might matter to videographer is focus breathing. Sony has quite a bit of focus breathing while the Sigma is much less. It looks like Sigma at f/4 is strange. Electronics I would say...
Ever since your review, I guess Sony paid attention to your concern of unintentionally shifting aperture settings and slightly adjusted the manufacturing process and hence my piece I bought in 2019 has a definite and fairly firm auto (A) position which never caused accidental rotation of the aperture ring. Indeed an aperture lock would have been a likely better solution, however Sony has been obviously pushing the size and weight as low as possible without compromising image quality and autofocus performance.
A good question, but no... I don't think so; the distance in the length of the lenses is insignificant compared with the distances involved to the subject here. The subject (well, focal plane) was at least 150 meters away... so the difference in lens length of the lenses ( 1" or 0.025 meters) is not a significant (0.00016%)
I'm not sure what you mean about being able to inadvertently move the aperture ring off "A" to the f 16 spot. Mine is stiff to move from the "A" into the manual part of the ring. I don't know if you had an older or maybe a damaged model but accidentally moving if off the auto position is not an issue.
Ahh, well... I'm glad that it's not a problem for you. The ones that I've used have all been about the same... it was a pretty light touch to move it out of the "A" position, or to any other position... about the same as my other lenses with manual rings. It's an easy fix, at worst... but unfortunately it was not an uncommon occurrence for me.
Thanks for the reply. Yes mine is a pretty positive click to move it out of that position even with the click switch set to off. I got mine yesterday after about 6 weeks of waiting. Maybe Sony addressed the issue on the newer lenses. Thanks for the review.
Thanks! I just got a Tamron 17-28 f/2.8 for Sony, which I'll be testing against the Sigma 14-24 f/2.8, as soon as it arrives. I'm also curious about the new Tamron 20, 24, and 35mm primes... I'd like to see how they compare to the Zeiss Batis 25mm, for example. And the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 for Sony is at the top of my list.
Matthew Gore I look forward to seeing those reviews! If only Tamron he released f/1.8 primes, I’d love the 24mm in that case. I got the FE 35mm and always used 35mm but been curious about the 24MM Gm ever since I tried it 😅
Matt, I think you have done a fantastic job showcasing the low light capabilities of the new Sony 24mm F.14 GM. I liked the video and subscribed to your channel. Do you think the low light capabilities of the 24mm F.14 GM outweigh the 16-35mm F2.8 GM for outdoor low light video conditions drastically? I do a lot of low light virtual walk tours with the 16-35mm F2.8 GM right now (Using A7iii body + Zhiyun Crane 2 Stabilizer). I usually set the focal length to around 17mm or 18mm to compensate for the Sony 4K video crop and Adobe Premiere software stabilization crop while still providing a true virtual wide angle experience. Despite being absolutely blown away by the 24mm F1.4, I am concerned it is simply not wide enough for my style of videos. I definitely welcome your opinion if you know any better alternative. Anyway I would greatly appreciate if you could check out my recent videos and provide HONEST feedback. Subscribe if you enjoy :)
any word back on the f4 issue for the sigma lens? I'm contemplating which 24 to buy next and this is def a deal breaker if there is/was no fix. Although I don't shoot at f4 much, a lens should not be that blurry at that aperture.
Sigma USA told me that they had escalated their investigation to Japan, but I haven't heard anything beyond that. If you've seen my video about the Sony and Sigma 135mm f/1.8 lenses, you'll see that I ran into the same f/4 issue with that Sigma. In both cases, I asked people to check THEIR lenses and see if it was a problem with my Sony A7RIII or something (though, obviously it's not a problem when I use Sony lenses...), and nobody ever responded (except for one guy who said his Sigma was fine, but wouldn't give me any example files to check for myself). So, I just don't know. That said, Sigma is sending me a couple of lenses next week. It seems pretty clear that if it's an issue with the Sigma lenses, it's a firmware issue... so this should give me an idea of whether this is something that they've addressed in the past year.
@@MatthewGore yea, I saw that video as well because I eventually want the 135 also but I do more video work and find myself using my 16-35 gm at 24 A LOT so it's more practical for now to purchase a 24mm. I still find 2.8 not to be fast enough for my needs although for certain shoots it's more than fine. I would love an update once you get those lenses, I wish I had them to test as well because I would. Are you planning on a video when you receive them?
@@FreddyGMedia I will be doing videos on both of the lenses, yes.... but I like to give my lenses a good, long, thorough testing before making a review, so don't expect the videos for at least 6 weeks... probably longer, since I also have an upcoming trip to Japan that will be taking up a lot of my time. Sorry! But I will at least know whether there's an f/4 issue with the two lenses within the first few days of testing them... so I'll try to come back here and update you. Remind me in a couple weeks if you haven't heard from me.
@@MatthewGore sounds good man, enjoy that trip!! I live in NY and will be in Miami all of Feb for a couple shoots. Need to get out of this frigid weather. I'll comment back in a couple weeks!
Is it possible that the sony is slightly wider because it is shorter in length, and thus the edge of the lens barrel sits a few inches further back than the sigma?
Hi Dave. In this case, not really. There are a couple of reasons, but the most important one is that the distance to the opposite side of the waterfall was 600-700 feet, so the difference of 1" difference would be insignificant in the overall distance. I could probably have stepped back a several paces and, at that distance, the angle of view would would not have changed noticeably (though, of course it would make a distance on closer objects). Also important is the fact that the angle of view doesn't begin at the front element of a lens, it begins somewhere in the middle of the lens (depending on the lens design) where the image is focused down to a point and then flipped over. The measurement point is called the "optical opening", and this may be towards the back of the lens or in the middle... and may be exactly the same for these two lenses, or it could be even greater than the inch difference in lens length. If we were measuring angle of view on a closer object (a wall in the same room as the lens, for example), then it would be much more important to find the exact location of the optical opening of the lens and measure from there.
5 років тому
Shame the review isn’t longer, only one I feel worth watching on these lenses
Also from Missoula :-) I lived there until 1988, and I'm always surprised at how much it has sprawled when I go back to visit, but most of it still feels like home
@@MatthewGore yeah, the housing prices have gone way up too! I'm down in Pocatello, Idaho now. Much cheaper and better job market, surprisingly :) less mountains though...
@@jalexanderevans When we moved from Missoula when I was kid, my parents sold the house (lower Rattlesnake) for around $75k. A few years ago, one of the girls from my neighborhood sent me a link to the listing for the house that was back on the market, now for over $600k (though the separate garage had been converted into a rental/guest house). I guess that happens :-) It's been even worse here in the Seattle area, though.... maybe I need to move to Idaho.
Yes, that's true. I consider this video to be sub-par because of the problems that I had making it, so you and my other Patreon supporters will not be charged for it. (though I probably could have posted a notification there anyway) Thanks for your support!
Hi Eric, thanks! It's not on my list at the moment. There's no G Master to compare it to... maybe the Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.4. Might make sense. We'll see :-)
It all depends on your needs. They're both excellent lenses, optically, but you'll get more zoom range, more weight, and more cost with the 16-35m. It depends on which of those factors is most important to you :-)
Al aire libre@@hw10 ¿Y en el caso de un sel1224g o un sel1635gm para video y fotografía? and in the case of a sel1224g or a sel1635gm for video and photography?
Thanks for the comparison. You should render and upload your videos in 4K btw. Only 1080p and UA-cams harsh compression doesn't benefit lens/photo comparisons like this :)
Thanks :-) I've often thought about it. The problem with 4K is that for anyone who isn't using a 4K monitor, the details in the 100% magnification view will be smaller than 100%, and those people will lose a lot of information. Of course, I could produce a 1080 version and a 4K version, but that's way too much work :-) So... until 4K monitors become the dominant standard (I figure, another couple of years), I'll probably stick with 1080
@@MatthewGore I know this is a 10 month old comment, but you could simply zoom to 200% instead of 100%, and it'd look the same for 1080p users while 4K users get the benefits during the non-zoomed parts.
@@logitech4873 It's an option :-) But zoomed to 200%, there'll be visible pixelation for 1080p users, and I'm afraid that some of my viewers would be confused and think that it has something to do with the optical quality. But since most people probably don't watch videos full screen, it's probably a non-issue anyway. I'll think about it :-)
One thing that you've missed is video AF, on the Sony it tracks well and smooth while on the Sigma (like all Sigma lenses on Sony emount), the focus transition and tracking not smooth at all and is prone to abrupt stop.
I just have to say, your channel is brilliant, I came across it today looking for reviews of the Sony 24 1.4 G master that I have just ordered and your reviews are so in-depth, I love your sharpness tests, corner to corner, just so good, thanks for taking the time, it beats all the other channels I have seen!! followed and subscribed!! www.louisamore.com
I’m glad you do, I was afraid that you won’t review Canon gears no more, good reviewer(lenses comparison specialist to be precise) is rare these days. Do you have any plan on reviewing RF Lenses or future EOS R System?
@@kea5697 As a rule, I don't shoot "reviews", mostly because pretty much all modern lenses are so good that if you don't have something to compare them to, they all just look good... which isn't very helpful. Since the EOS R system only has a few lenses, and no 3rd party lenses, it would mean using an R lens compared to an adapted lens... and that starts to get tricky, since adapted lenses tend to have poor AF performance, and there's some slop introduced that can potentially affect image quality. I'm also not much of a fan of the EOS R system yet... so far I prefer the Nikon Z7, though I hear Canon may make an R model with IBIS soon. So, I'm more likely to do Nikon Z than Canon R, but who knows :-)
@@jmanjr Thanks Jon :-) I understand that a lot of people subscribed to my channel during the time that I was reviewing Canon lenses, so it's understandable for them to wonder if I'm still going to be making Canon videos.
I did see your video on my 104 " projector and i can see that the sigma it's always just a touch scarper and it just better color definition , the only time the sony it's scarper is at F 4 , well i would spend $ 1400 for a 67mm lens !
this is a stupid test. why do not you try to test under more harsh sunlight? or i mean harsh condition. All lens will work well on an ideal lighting condition, even an iPhone ! how about distortion? colour reproduction and micro contrast? most of the lens can easily get 30-40mega pixel but they are not the same! those are the reasons that people need to buy GM or CZ. you are just like a Sigma like want to own a cheap lens
--------------------Sony Sigma
Weight: 9/10 6/10
IQ: 9/10 8/10
Build: 9/10 9/10
Price: 7/10 9/10
Availability: 0/10 10/10
JAJAJJAJAJJA
thx
These examples were very ineffective in determining which lens was best. Image examples were shot landscape...not showing any detail, bokeh, background separation, or night shots....which are some of the main reasons anyone buys a 1.4 lens.
Sony has really stepped up their lens design with the smaller GM beating the much larger Sigma. Same with the 135mm
Agreed. I've been really impressed with their lenses, recently... and it's especially impressive because the engineering is a little more tricky with the smaller mount and shorter flange-focal distance.
And much more expensive...
@@TheEryk03 if you cant afford it buy something else .obviously quality does not come cheap
The Sony is also much newer and designed for Sony, the Sigma is really a Canikon lens
The shorter flange of the L+E mounts allow for far better size-to-performance values for wider and mid lenses (only slightly for longer lenses) so the new line of Sigmas designed for the fp, SL2 and S1/R/H will be smaller +/- sharper like this. As of OCT2019 Sigma has released a compact 800g 14-24mmF2.8, an even more compact 45mmF2.8 at 215g, and a large 1.1kg yet unique 35mmF1.2 (first ever with autofocus) which would have been impractically huge if built for reflex cameras. This particular Sigma is known to be the weakest in the ART series by a large margin, with some photographers preferring the ART28mm if they don't need as much range since it noticeably exceeds the Zeiss Otus ;) www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/03/mtf-results-for-recent-sigma-art-lenses/
Thanks for your review... A very fair comparison for both... I already owned 85mm f1.8.. Just thinking of getting the Sigma 24mm f1.4 in the future...
Thank you very much for this great review and comparison!
I have had the 24art and used it on a7r III but sold it after the GM came out. I wanted to get it due to the size and weight difference. And also the AF speed in video.
If you have the 16-35 GM and 24-70 GM could you please make a comparison between them and the 24 GM at 24mm please? 🙏 Or if you don't have the time, can you respond here with your observations about it? It will be much appreciated!
I am still deciding on whether I should get the 24 GM or not. It's very expensive in Europe and I already have 16-35 GM and 24-70 GM (which I've been trying to sell for a long time, because I also have the Tamron 28-75). But I really like a fast 24 and it is fantastic focal length for video, so I think I need one in my kit. It's just that I don't like to have lenses covering the same focal length... so I'm still debating.
i wanna know exactly same as you
yo tambien el sel1635gm vs sel24f14gm seria interesante ver
The Sony 24mm 1.4 GM works great in a set with Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8 and Sony 135mm 1.8 GM :)
I have the 55mm and 135 GM too, I have to agree with you :D
9:50 exact reason I sold my 40/2.5G and bought 35/1.8 instead.
It's a much bigger problem than a lot of people realize... that's one of the reasons I was so happy today when Sony announced the new 24-70 f/2.8 GM II ... it has a manual aperture ring, and it can be de-clicked, but it also has an aperture lock!
First time here Matt, excellent review and comparison. Those river shots at beginning looked awesome. I'm still undecided on the 24mm or 35mm .... Only so much cash to available. Have subbed and liked.
Hatte mich dieses Frühjahr für das Sigma 24mm 1.4 für meine A7iii entschieden und es bisher nicht bereut. Vor allem Nachts kommt mir die Lichtstärke als Amateur richtig entgegen :) Ist ja nicht so als hätte ich ständig ein Stativ dabei...
LG !
Great comparison! 25mm Zeiss Batis vs 24mm Sony GM would be another great comparison ;)
Thanks! I just used the Batis 25mm for the first time last month and I was really impressed. I'll have to keep that one in mind.
The batis 25 is fantastic but I’d love to know how the video autofocus compares with the 24 GM
@@tkarim There's already a video comparing these 2. Look it up!
@@tkarim The batis has better autofocus by all the reviews I have watched.
24GM = best-value all-round wide angle prime of all time?
Maybe the best prime, but I wouldn't call it value, its super expensive.
@@tallaganda83 No it isn't, it's cheaper than Sony and Nikon's older (worse) lenses and considerably so compared to their launch pricing (with inflating the Nikon would be $2500)
Am I the only one who thinks sigma is the sharpest one? specially in the corners
Sigma，Don't use F4。hahaha
I think at f4, sigma is somehow activating the ibis...
This has pretty much been my line of thought, too. Something to do with the IBIS freaking out, only at f/4, and only with non-Sony lenses. ?
if the sigma is a taller lens wouldn't that play a factor in it having that slightly having a slightly different result at 6:53 ? assuming you just kept the tri-pod in the same spot the position of the front of sigma's lens would be farther forward than the sony lens by the difference in comparative focal length?
Not at this distance, which is at least 150 meters to the opposite side. As a percentage, an inch (2.5cm) is nothing at all... and in fact, the optical opening of the lens is somewhere in the middle of the lens, so the actual difference in length would be less than an inch... maybe 1/2 inch.
Hi Peter..nice review..thanks.
But how about 28mmf2.0 compare to the 24mmf1.4GM..?
I need wide angle lens for travel and story telling photography..
Is it Sony FE 28mmf2.0 can delivered a good pictures..😇🙏thanks in advance.
Great review if only photographers look at your photos.Most normal people who see photos would think you were mad if you asked them to see the fine differences in any lens, they do not compare photos in Lightroom under these circumstances..They consider a great photo, by how good the photographer makes them look in the photo..
Your copy of Sigma is damaged? F4 being soft as yours is not possible ...
Possibly, but I don't know what kind of damage only affects a lens at f/4.
@@MatthewGore 😁
@@MatthewGore it's some weird kind of decentering or something like that, this is not exclusive to your Sigma. was it on whole image area the same? try comparing also sides etc possibly
@@tomasturis8909 Remember that this was only at one aperture setting; decentering would affect the lens beyond f/4. You can download the RAW images and look at them yourself, if you're curious, but the blur is across the entire frame. When I returned the lens to Sigma after testing and told them about the problem, the techs started trying to figure out what the problem was, and I gave them about 25 RAW images to check, with f/4 being bad in each case. They still haven't come up with a definitive answer yet. I still suspect a problem with the electronics in the lens and the IBIS system in the camera.
I own this lens I own this lens also and I've never had any focusing issues on any aperture. No problem at f4 on my copy either
The F4 issue mentioned in this video doesn't exist on my copy of the sigma art 24, maybe a firmware update has removed the problem
Awesome, thanks! Don't suppose you have a few RAW files I can look at? (Of the same scene at f/2.8, 4, and 5.6) I'd love to see what this looks like when there's no problem.
There is no way I would choose the GM over the sigma art.
The horrible manual focus is just terrible for video work. (I’m mainly video)
Where as the sigma art manual focus is a delight to pull focus with.
Are these lenses compatible with my a6400?
Yes, they both are.
For night shots or astrophotography, the Sony is the one to go for. I should be getting mine in a couple of days.
Overall great review. I suffer this aperture ring no lock issue with the anyway awesome fe 35 1.4 lens. The 15 USD helios lens has an aperture lock feature. Funny. Anyway nice video I wish I could have seen some shallow dof photos to see the bokeh rendering not only the bokeh balls. Anyway thanks.
The video sound is pretty good, beyond my imagination
You should have testet this lens on a nikon D850.
Thanks a lot! The video is very helpful for me.
Dead bodies )))). Everything is like in Russia)))))
The Sigma at f/4.. dealbreaker!
Fair enough, although I doubt that it is a universal issue. After I showed them my results, Sigma started investigating in New York, and then escalated it to Japan, but I haven't heard anything solid back yet. They say that it's probably a firmware issue that can be fixed with an upgrade using the dock.
Yeah, probably just that copy. Pretty good shootout Matthew! 👍
In the end we've chosen the Sony GM also thanks to this video. Going to use it as fast as we can.
Thanks for making this. I've been trying to decide on which one to get out of these two lenses. Sony is going to be my choice thanks to this.
Hello, Can you get any information about what software was used in this lens when the test was performed?
Now is
firmware version Ver.02
2019.07.18, is the problem still at F / 4.0?
Love my 24GM, only GM lens I own.
just wait for sigma release 24mm dn version for ml
Huh, I've never had that problem with just a specific aperture on an Art lens. Very odd.
Me either, and I've shot with just about all of them.
Great Video...Thank you!
the sound is not good I am quite disappointed
the sigma will do the new 85 1.4 for sony ML, half size and weight, new project, and i think will do the others orime art with new and impressive IQ.
It would be helpful if there was a table of contents.
Done.
Sigma is 75% heavier than Sony, but Sony is 43% (not 75%) lighter than Sigma. A great comparison, but f/4 on Sigma looks like something went wrong. Are you sure that it didn't blow stronger then? Because it looks like a movement.
Yes, true about the weight... maybe I was a little sloppy there :-) Re: the f/4 blur, that was my first thought, too... that I touched the tripod, or there was a gust of wind, etc. But I had the same result at f/4 in four different shots at the same location, and also at f/4 at two nearby locations. In each case, I shot two shots each as I went up from 1.4 to f/8 or f/16, and then down to f/1.4 again, re-focusing between each shot, so they were taken minutes apart at least, and much longer than that in some cases. Also, the shutter speed was still around 1/1000th of a second, which is generally beyond the range that vibrations play a significant role, though it's not out of the question.
@@MatthewGore So it must be IBIS.
@ That's the only thing that really makes sense to me, too.
The old man in the branches looks pretty sharp ;)
The F4 Sigma may have the same Problem like on the APS-C lenses 16mm and 30mm, which only have this defocussing problem at one specific F- Stop, with Viewfinder and AF-S. Sounds weird? It is weird. Same F-Stop and Display --> No problem. Same F-Stop, Viewfinder and AF-C. No problem. Any other F-Stop no problem. Just Viewfinder, AF-S and I think it was F2.0 at the 30mm and F2.8 at the 16mm?? Defocussed.
There may be an Firmware Update for the lens.
Shopping carts and dead bodies!!! 😂😂😂
Hi my purpose to buy lense is video....... mainly short films.....which one will be best?
54 тыс и 129 тыс рублей конечно сони лучше :)
Yes; the question was really only whether the Sony was significantly better; better enough to justify the difference in cost. :-)
One interesting difference that might matter to videographer is focus breathing. Sony has quite a bit of focus breathing while the Sigma is much less. It looks like Sigma at f/4 is strange. Electronics I would say...
Pro review!!!👍👍👍👍👍
Lol that really cool
Nice comprehensive review
I've been using 24mm GM for a while and have never experienced that issue with the aperture ring on Sony
Great review. The sigma is largest than the Sony, that could be the reason why in sigma’s pictures looked smaller.
Ever since your review, I guess Sony paid attention to your concern of unintentionally shifting aperture settings and slightly adjusted the manufacturing process and hence my piece I bought in 2019 has a definite and fairly firm auto (A) position which never caused accidental rotation of the aperture ring. Indeed an aperture lock would have been a likely better solution, however Sony has been obviously pushing the size and weight as low as possible without compromising image quality and autofocus performance.
this review is fantastic. you just got yourself a sub
Thanks Jacob, glad you liked it!
figured the same downside of the aperture ring and did not make a move on the Gmaster.
Awesome to see you back again, Matt! And although a somewhat truncated review, very interesting - thanks!
Glad you enjoyed it :-)
Вы считаете Sigma намного хуже ? Стоит переплачивать? Или разница не так уж велика?
Thanks for the great video!!!!
Hey, what do you think about the Tamron 24mm f2.8?
Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance got do any serious shooting with it. I can currently get one for about $150, so I may just buy one and see.
Couldn't the difference in angle of view be accounted for with the difference in the length of the lenses?
A good question, but no... I don't think so; the distance in the length of the lenses is insignificant compared with the distances involved to the subject here. The subject (well, focal plane) was at least 150 meters away... so the difference in lens length of the lenses ( 1" or 0.025 meters) is not a significant (0.00016%)
The Sony has very little coma (so is a fine astro lens) - on the other hand the Sigma has bad coma.
Yep, that's my understanding. I wish I'd been able to manage the drive to Eastern WA for this video, though!
Nice and Simple Review
Maybe you need a glasses all shots was day and night Sharpness contrast ang clarity
I'm not sure what you mean about being able to inadvertently move the aperture ring off "A" to the f 16 spot. Mine is stiff to move from the "A" into the manual part of the ring. I don't know if you had an older or maybe a damaged model but accidentally moving if off the auto position is not an issue.
Ahh, well... I'm glad that it's not a problem for you. The ones that I've used have all been about the same... it was a pretty light touch to move it out of the "A" position, or to any other position... about the same as my other lenses with manual rings. It's an easy fix, at worst... but unfortunately it was not an uncommon occurrence for me.
Thanks for the reply. Yes mine is a pretty positive click to move it out of that position even with the click switch set to off. I got mine yesterday after about 6 weeks of waiting. Maybe Sony addressed the issue on the newer lenses. Thanks for the review.
dope stuff. just subscribed!
Thanks!
Really great review man, hopefully you start uploading again soon!
Thanks! I just got a Tamron 17-28 f/2.8 for Sony, which I'll be testing against the Sigma 14-24 f/2.8, as soon as it arrives. I'm also curious about the new Tamron 20, 24, and 35mm primes... I'd like to see how they compare to the Zeiss Batis 25mm, for example. And the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 for Sony is at the top of my list.
Matthew Gore I look forward to seeing those reviews! If only Tamron he released f/1.8 primes, I’d love the 24mm in that case. I got the FE 35mm and always used 35mm but been curious about the 24MM Gm ever since I tried it 😅
How can you shoot at 16 bit listed at 1:31 when the A7R3 highest bit rate is 14?
I shot as 14 bit RAW, processed as a 16-bit file in Camera Raw, rather than 8-bit.
From F/5.6 to F/8 Sigma is sharper than Sony 24GM, Dowload the raws, compare them and you see.
Nonsense.
Great video. I share the comment about the aperture ring. I have the 85GM. Same issue!
Matt, I think you have done a fantastic job showcasing the low light capabilities of the new Sony 24mm F.14 GM. I liked the video and subscribed to your channel. Do you think the low light capabilities of the 24mm F.14 GM outweigh the 16-35mm F2.8 GM for outdoor low light video conditions drastically?
I do a lot of low light virtual walk tours with the 16-35mm F2.8 GM right now (Using A7iii body + Zhiyun Crane 2 Stabilizer). I usually set the focal length to around 17mm or 18mm to compensate for the Sony 4K video crop and Adobe Premiere software stabilization crop while still providing a true virtual wide angle experience. Despite being absolutely blown away by the 24mm F1.4, I am concerned it is simply not wide enough for my style of videos. I definitely welcome your opinion if you know any better alternative. Anyway I would greatly appreciate if you could check out my recent videos and provide HONEST feedback. Subscribe if you enjoy :)
any word back on the f4 issue for the sigma lens? I'm contemplating which 24 to buy next and this is def a deal breaker if there is/was no fix. Although I don't shoot at f4 much, a lens should not be that blurry at that aperture.
Sigma USA told me that they had escalated their investigation to Japan, but I haven't heard anything beyond that. If you've seen my video about the Sony and Sigma 135mm f/1.8 lenses, you'll see that I ran into the same f/4 issue with that Sigma.
In both cases, I asked people to check THEIR lenses and see if it was a problem with my Sony A7RIII or something (though, obviously it's not a problem when I use Sony lenses...), and nobody ever responded (except for one guy who said his Sigma was fine, but wouldn't give me any example files to check for myself). So, I just don't know.
That said, Sigma is sending me a couple of lenses next week. It seems pretty clear that if it's an issue with the Sigma lenses, it's a firmware issue... so this should give me an idea of whether this is something that they've addressed in the past year.
@@MatthewGore yea, I saw that video as well because I eventually want the 135 also but I do more video work and find myself using my 16-35 gm at 24 A LOT so it's more practical for now to purchase a 24mm. I still find 2.8 not to be fast enough for my needs although for certain shoots it's more than fine. I would love an update once you get those lenses, I wish I had them to test as well because I would. Are you planning on a video when you receive them?
@@FreddyGMedia I will be doing videos on both of the lenses, yes.... but I like to give my lenses a good, long, thorough testing before making a review, so don't expect the videos for at least 6 weeks... probably longer, since I also have an upcoming trip to Japan that will be taking up a lot of my time. Sorry! But I will at least know whether there's an f/4 issue with the two lenses within the first few days of testing them... so I'll try to come back here and update you. Remind me in a couple weeks if you haven't heard from me.
@@MatthewGore sounds good man, enjoy that trip!! I live in NY and will be in Miami all of Feb for a couple shoots. Need to get out of this frigid weather. I'll comment back in a couple weeks!
Is it possible that the sony is slightly wider because it is shorter in length, and thus the edge of the lens barrel sits a few inches further back than the sigma?
Hi Dave. In this case, not really. There are a couple of reasons, but the most important one is that the distance to the opposite side of the waterfall was 600-700 feet, so the difference of 1" difference would be insignificant in the overall distance. I could probably have stepped back a several paces and, at that distance, the angle of view would would not have changed noticeably (though, of course it would make a distance on closer objects).
Also important is the fact that the angle of view doesn't begin at the front element of a lens, it begins somewhere in the middle of the lens (depending on the lens design) where the image is focused down to a point and then flipped over. The measurement point is called the "optical opening", and this may be towards the back of the lens or in the middle... and may be exactly the same for these two lenses, or it could be even greater than the inch difference in lens length.
If we were measuring angle of view on a closer object (a wall in the same room as the lens, for example), then it would be much more important to find the exact location of the optical opening of the lens and measure from there.
Shame the review isn’t longer, only one I feel worth watching on these lenses
do canon vs sigma 24 mm pls... thx
I'll put it on my list :-)
Did u make this review ef vs sigma?
Dont get me wrong please but 11:50 is enough
very nice comparison i've ever seen
Nice work
A fellow Montanan! Missoulian here! :)
Also from Missoula :-) I lived there until 1988, and I'm always surprised at how much it has sprawled when I go back to visit, but most of it still feels like home
@@MatthewGore yeah, the housing prices have gone way up too! I'm down in Pocatello, Idaho now. Much cheaper and better job market, surprisingly :) less mountains though...
@@jalexanderevans When we moved from Missoula when I was kid, my parents sold the house (lower Rattlesnake) for around $75k. A few years ago, one of the girls from my neighborhood sent me a link to the listing for the house that was back on the market, now for over $600k (though the separate garage had been converted into a rental/guest house). I guess that happens :-) It's been even worse here in the Seattle area, though.... maybe I need to move to Idaho.
@@MatthewGore do it! Couple hours from the Tetons, SLC, and Boise and 2700 square feet for $200k
good revirw thank you
For some reason I was not notified about this video in patreon and i am paying the highest for your videos
Yes, that's true. I consider this video to be sub-par because of the problems that I had making it, so you and my other Patreon supporters will not be charged for it. (though I probably could have posted a notification there anyway) Thanks for your support!
Any plans to do a sigma 50 1.4 e mount comparison video? Love your comparison video.
Hi Eric, thanks! It's not on my list at the moment. There's no G Master to compare it to... maybe the Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.4. Might make sense. We'll see :-)
Thanks Matt!! Love your work and the level of detail you put into your vids :)
I guess it is kind of off topic but do anybody know of a good website to stream new series online?
@Giovanni Ryder flixportal
@Rogelio Porter thanks, I went there and it seems like they got a lot of movies there :D I appreciate it !!
@Giovanni Ryder happy to help xD
@@giovanniryder4057 bloody spammers?!?!
Niceeeeeee
Which wide angle lens should I buy for traveling ? It’s my option for either Sony 24mm F 1.4 GM or Sony 16-35mm F2.8 ?
It all depends on your needs. They're both excellent lenses, optically, but you'll get more zoom range, more weight, and more cost with the 16-35m. It depends on which of those factors is most important to you :-)
Matthew Gore really hard to make decision. Anyway, thanks for your advice.😀
16-35 bro, zoom is important for traveling and the 2.8 are more than enough for wide lens!
FullandStarving Photography same of my final decision, thanks !
Al aire libre@@hw10
¿Y en el caso de un sel1224g o un sel1635gm para video y fotografía?
and in the case of a sel1224g or a sel1635gm for video and photography?
Sony wins.
Thanks for the comparison. You should render and upload your videos in 4K btw. Only 1080p and UA-cams harsh compression doesn't benefit lens/photo comparisons like this :)
Thanks :-) I've often thought about it. The problem with 4K is that for anyone who isn't using a 4K monitor, the details in the 100% magnification view will be smaller than 100%, and those people will lose a lot of information. Of course, I could produce a 1080 version and a 4K version, but that's way too much work :-) So... until 4K monitors become the dominant standard (I figure, another couple of years), I'll probably stick with 1080
@@MatthewGore I know this is a 10 month old comment, but you could simply zoom to 200% instead of 100%, and it'd look the same for 1080p users while 4K users get the benefits during the non-zoomed parts.
@@logitech4873 It's an option :-) But zoomed to 200%, there'll be visible pixelation for 1080p users, and I'm afraid that some of my viewers would be confused and think that it has something to do with the optical quality. But since most people probably don't watch videos full screen, it's probably a non-issue anyway. I'll think about it :-)
@@MatthewGore 200% for 4K viewers.
It would look like 100% for 1080p viewers.
@@logitech4873 Ahh, of course... guess I'm still waking up. I'll give it some more thought after I have another cup of tea :-)
One thing that you've missed is video AF, on the Sony it tracks well and smooth while on the Sigma (like all Sigma lenses on Sony emount), the focus transition and tracking not smooth at all and is prone to abrupt stop.
Yep, I don't shoot video, so I leave video-related reviews to others :-)
I just have to say, your channel is brilliant, I came across it today looking for reviews of the Sony 24 1.4 G master that I have just ordered and your reviews are so in-depth, I love your sharpness tests, corner to corner, just so good, thanks for taking the time, it beats all the other channels I have seen!! followed and subscribed!! www.louisamore.com
Thanks, Louis. I'm glad people are still finding it useful :-) I just checked out your website, incidentally, and your work is wonderful.
@@MatthewGore Likewise !! thank you for such great content!!
Are you with team Sony now? Good bye to your oldie goodie Canon?
I do mostly shoot Sony, now, but I still have my Canon and shoot it too. My next video will probably be a Canon :-)
I’m glad you do, I was afraid that you won’t review Canon gears no more, good reviewer(lenses comparison specialist to be precise) is rare these days. Do you have any plan on reviewing RF Lenses or future EOS R System?
Dumb dumb dumb comment. He’s a fair reviewer and works hard to provide this equal and clearly unbiased info. If you can’t see that good riddance!
@@kea5697 As a rule, I don't shoot "reviews", mostly because pretty much all modern lenses are so good that if you don't have something to compare them to, they all just look good... which isn't very helpful. Since the EOS R system only has a few lenses, and no 3rd party lenses, it would mean using an R lens compared to an adapted lens... and that starts to get tricky, since adapted lenses tend to have poor AF performance, and there's some slop introduced that can potentially affect image quality. I'm also not much of a fan of the EOS R system yet... so far I prefer the Nikon Z7, though I hear Canon may make an R model with IBIS soon. So, I'm more likely to do Nikon Z than Canon R, but who knows :-)
@@jmanjr Thanks Jon :-) I understand that a lot of people subscribed to my channel during the time that I was reviewing Canon lenses, so it's understandable for them to wonder if I'm still going to be making Canon videos.
I did see your video on my 104 " projector and i can see that the sigma it's always just a touch scarper and it just better color definition , the only time the sony it's scarper is at F 4 , well i would spend $ 1400 for a 67mm lens !
Best lens reviewer on UA-cam.
this is a stupid test. why do not you try to test under more harsh sunlight? or i mean harsh condition. All lens will work well on an ideal lighting condition, even an iPhone ! how about distortion? colour reproduction and micro contrast? most of the lens can easily get 30-40mega pixel but they are not the same! those are the reasons that people need to buy GM or CZ. you are just like a Sigma like want to own a cheap lens