Ok...let's state the obvious. You just wanted to come to that boat and duck show. But you had to work in the office that day XD. They are both good, that's the review!
If I was considering paying the euro price for this new lens (precisely twice as expensive as the Sigma 50/1.4 DN) I would just save up for the 1,2 GM. Don't think I've ever seen more sublime bokeh and there has to be a reason you purchased an expensive f/1,2 lens in the first place as opposed to the several 1,4 / 1,8 options already available.
@@Vantrakter I have to admit I didn't see the euro price before writing the comment, I assumed (stupidly) it was going to be equivalent to the USD. Since I would have bought it in Italy, probably you are right... not worth 2x the price of the sigma dg dn. And yes, the 50 gm f1.2 (together with the 70-200 gm II) were the reasons why I moved to Sony in the first place. But sometimes I ask myself if I would be able to tell the difference in the real world photos or if I just have a bad GAS problem
@@Vantrakter Euro (including UK/GBP) prices for anything that's been released within say the last 6 months have been utterly insane. I mean £879/€999 for a lens that costs $699 in the US? Eh? If we look at "older" bodys/lenses (50 1.8 - £160/$250, 70200GM II - £2600/$2,800, 24-105 - £1000/$1300), the pricing actually makes sense. I mean even at £1/€1 = $1, I think most people can swallow it but not when the number itself for £/€ is larger than it is USD...yeah...hell no
FWIW the 50 f/1.2 GM is the superior lens, and it's largely for that reason I don't regret my purchase. That said, the cost and size are very valid considerations.
the pice difference in europ is much bigger. the sigma is 950€ and the sony 1850€. i think the sigma is the clear winner in europe, unless you have infinite money. i dont think beeing slighty smaller and optically slightly better justifies paying twice as much.
Is there really a practical reason to purchase an f1.2 lens over an f1.4 lens? Realistically speaking, how often will someone be shooting with an f1.4 lens and think to themselves “this shot is impossible without a faster lens”? I know that certain *ahem* “influencers” in the online photography space will say that f1.2 is “more professional” and “a necessity,” but I just don’t buy it. For one, cost is a huge factor, and you are most definitely past the point of diminishing returns when considering an f1.2 lens. Also, I feel like where we currently are with mirrorless cameras, f1.2 lenses are attractive because there either isn’t another fast, standard option (Canon, Nikon), or because the pre-existing, first-party f1.4 lenses are outdated (Sony). Actually, now that I think about it, even back in the days of DSLRs, Canon’s faster primes were in a very similar situation. The 50 f1.2L was the obvious choice for those who were looking for a fast 50mm because of the more modern lens design. The 50mm f1.4 was over a decade older, and was behind in build quality and resolution because of that. I’m sure the 50mm f1.2L wouldn’t have been nearly as enticing if it had been released around the same time as the f1.4 lens.
Great review as always, but your statement that the Sony f1.2 isn't that much more than the Sony f1.4 left me scratching my head. The f1.2 is $700 more than the f1.4 and $1,150 more than the Sigma!
Maybe it’s a bit of an “in good a penny, in for a pound” kind of thing? I kept reading great things about the Nikkor Z 50mm 1.8 S, but it just seemed too expensive for a 1.8 prime at $500USD. So, what did I do but buy a Nikkor Z 50mm 1.2 S for $1600 used… it is a big price difference, but maybe if someone is considering between them, they’re willing to save up the extra if they think f1.2 is worth it.
Without having shot with the 50/1.4 GM, my guess is the Zeiss Planar has more technical IQ issues. But it probably adds up to having more character as well. Colour rendition I would probably favour towards the German coatings.
My thinking is Sony’s marketing points of weight and size point toward a similar image quality. The zeiss is a chonky boy but I’ve never noticed poor image quality from my copy. It was their flagship “standard” lens for a while so if image quality was an issue Tamron and sigma would have jumped all over it. Other guess is the use of linear motors in the GM makes it faster focusing but again 50mm isn’t exactly what I think of when I think an action/sport/wildlife lens.
The difference wide open is huge - in a test chart anyway. I wonder something else might be at play here. Different cameras, different RAW engine, some focus error? Especially if the Sigma was already called "very sharp wide open" in its own review. It almost looks like the Sony was stopped down to F8.
you shouldn't compare price only, but also include expected reselling value, say three years from now. I assume you'll get significantly more for a used GM then, hence reducing the difference in overall cost of usage pretty good
What is Jordan doing behind the camera that has Chris laughing in so many clips? And was that Tony N's voice discussing the lenses' price comparison? I'm gonna guess that you forgot to actually mention the prices, so you threw that clip in for yucks. These lenses tested almost equal. I thought the Sony's cats-eye bokeh was actually worse. If I shot Sony, I'd get the Signs.
Wait…. So the Sony is “substantially more expensive” than the Sigma ($450). But then in the next sentence you are considering buying the 50 1.2 because it isn’t that more expensive (+$700)?! My math may be a little rusty, but I believe you are talking a little crazy there.. 😂
Sometimes the product positioned in the middle is the hardest sell. For me, I don't think that's actually the case here. The Sony 1.4 seems to be technically superior to the Sigma, from what I've seen, and I feel like I'm only losing the insane aperture by going with the Sony 1.4 over the 1.2. As someone who uses a fast body, that burst rate on the 1st party lenses is hard to pass up if I think there's even a possibility for that use case.
Sure but the extra money does provide an even wider aperture in that case. We thought the Sony F1.4 would be way more expensive than the Sigma, but it really isn't that much. I'd go for the Sony 1.4 myself, but some people really want that F1.2
I'm pretty sure the $700 difference between the GM 1.4 and 1.2 trumps the $450 difference between the Sigma and GM 1.4? Plus a few things I wished were discussed is whether or not the focus is linear: Sigma no, Sony yes. Sigma also has a closer focusing distance. Plus what's the breathing like?
@@hardywoodaway9912 It's an all new 420g 2nd gen introduced late 2021. Did you have it as well ? Dustin Abbott just compared it to the Sigma DN ua-cam.com/video/AOR5CfBDpxc/v-deo.html
i said it before, the Sigma 1.4 is a dud. the old version is as bad. it's similar to the nikon 150$ small plastic lens you can get. the G version. but that one is small at least.
So the f1.4 GM is way more expensive than the Sigma f1.4 ($450 difference) But the f1.2 GM isn't tht much more expensive than the f1.4 ($700 difference) Guys, just decide how much is "a lot" or "not that much" but keep it consistent, at least during one video.
Great review and comparison, the price difference is significant , but as much as This matters, for most of us who sell gear to buy more gear the RESALE value is a big deal. I hardly ever see it mentioned. One of the problems with "off brand" lenses is that the minute you buy the lens the resale value plummets. I know that most reviewers don't seem to focus on RESALE value but it matters to > 80% of shooting professionals, this is how most upgrade their gear.
Great video as always! Love those outdoor shows ^^. In Germany the price differenz is rediculous. Its 900€ for the Sigmar and 1800€ for the Sony. I know what I would go for.
If you aren't shooting wide open, save your money and get a much smaller 50/55 f/1.8. Why lug around a monster like the Sigma. BTW I've seen reviews that show the Sigma much sharper wide open on A7RIV than your test. I'm not sure what maths school you attended Chris, but if you think 1999 is not much more than 1299, please make sure someone else fills out your tax returns.
Thanks Chris, another great video (as always) from DPReview TV. I already have the Sigma 50mm Art on order but this was a very nice "focus" on both. Additionally, I just found you on one of your other "channels" detailing, reviewing and advising on miscellaneous fly fishing gear. Good to see you there as well, being that is yet another interest of mine and what better way to gather additional insight than to follow a smart, concise, familiar face. Keep up the great work on both accounts.
So this is what we can expect from canon and nikon when their "mirrorless landing" is done within a few years: Good mid priced f1.4 primes (mid priced considering todays standards.... )
there is a difference of 700 dollars between the sigma and the sony I still don't understand the reason for the surcharge and I don't think it's the button Which on the Sony machine you can customize
@@Juventinos Canon and Nikon have been playing catch-up for years. Let me know when they have a 50/1.2 as small, light, and good as Sony's, and when they have any 50/1.4 at all.
@@Juventinos When Sony brings their 85/1.2 to market you can be sure it will be smaller, lighter, have better optics, and focus faster than what you are using currently. Oh, and it will be hundreds of dollars cheaper. And if you want something still excellent but a thousand bucks less expensive, the Sigma 85/1.4 DN will remain a great option. Just like the Sigma 50/1.4 DN is a great option. Sony's ecosystem is unbeatable, and unless Canon and Nikon wake up and allow 3rd party glass, they'll never be able to compete. I shot Canon for many years, and then Nikon for many years after that. It's refreshing to finally be using a system that embraces options and works with 3rd parties.
Hey! When they say 50mm, what does that mean? I understand the higher the number, the more narrow the field of view, I get that, but is 50mm the distance from front element to back element? Or is it the distance from front element to image sensor? Can you guys explain please?
It's the physical distance from the focal plane (image sensor in this case) to the point inside the lens where light converges, known as the "optical center." In a single-element lens, this would just be the distance from the lens to the film. This measurement is taken when the lens is focused to infinity. Now, these days I'm not sure if it's purely calculated from the angle of view, or if it is actually measured. Probably more of the former, with some rounding, as we see different lenses with the same reported focal length having slightly different angles of view.
It replaces the quite recent Sony Zeiss Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA of 2016. All former Sony Zeiss e-mount lenses even the recent ones are gradually replaced by Sony. Its price will drop and I think it will be a bargain. The Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA was one of the last lenses of the Sony Zeiss collaboration.
The 55mm Sony/Zeiss 1.8 hasn’t been replaced yet and I don’t consider the 50mm 1.8 plastic fantastic to be its replacement. Hopefully Sony makes an updated version of the 55mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 into one lens.
Please stop talking about things like “cat’s eyes” and smoothness of transition between in focus and out of focus. Those are completely made up characteristics. “Cat’s eyes” is always present in fast lenses, that’s just how optics work. Show me a lens that does not have a smooth transition between focus and out of focus, I have never seen one because they simply don’t exist, the transition is never abrupt.
The larger size and lower image quality wide open, is pretty rough for the Sigma. If I were shopping, I would have to stretch for the Sony. I hope Sigma comes up with an awesome 50mm F1.8.
Hey Jordan 2:30 section the video af hunts quite a bit for a pretty straightforward shot. Maybe Panasonic S5ii AF still isn't that robust? Or was it a setting issue?
Awesome insight as always..for some photographers at this point..its all about that lower f-stop..1.2>1.4..im sure this 1.4 is amazing like its "bigger sibling" the 1.2..and of course now you are paying for the price difference..is around $700 USD worth it for a 1.2 or 1.4..like I said at this point for some photographers..its just clout and bragging rights that "I paid more than you" for a 1.2..haha at the end of the day our clients can't even tell and even some photographers can't even tell what image is what..1.2 or 1.4 image..its weird that Sony still chose to make this 1.4 GMlens? seems like there is no need for it when you have that 1.2?..now you're putting the lens against each other for sales?..when you could have just made customers not have the ability to choose and make them choose the only one 50 GM 1.2..lol I am just waiting for that 85 1.2 GM!! haha im sure it will be around the same design as that 50 1.2 GM..slightly smaller and lightweight would be perfect..
@@RandomTheories imo 50art didn't justify its price. from the samples i see it has unacceptable close up capability(due to its single element focusing group) and really bad LoCA.
Ok...let's state the obvious. You just wanted to come to that boat and duck show. But you had to work in the office that day XD. They are both good, that's the review!
If only I knew about this coming... I bought the 50mm f1.2 GM only three months ago, I could have saved some money and space in the bag
If I was considering paying the euro price for this new lens (precisely twice as expensive as the Sigma 50/1.4 DN) I would just save up for the 1,2 GM. Don't think I've ever seen more sublime bokeh and there has to be a reason you purchased an expensive f/1,2 lens in the first place as opposed to the several 1,4 / 1,8 options already available.
@@Vantrakter I have to admit I didn't see the euro price before writing the comment, I assumed (stupidly) it was going to be equivalent to the USD. Since I would have bought it in Italy, probably you are right... not worth 2x the price of the sigma dg dn. And yes, the 50 gm f1.2 (together with the 70-200 gm II) were the reasons why I moved to Sony in the first place. But sometimes I ask myself if I would be able to tell the difference in the real world photos or if I just have a bad GAS problem
thats why i look at rumour sites before buying expensive new stuff
@@Vantrakter Euro (including UK/GBP) prices for anything that's been released within say the last 6 months have been utterly insane. I mean £879/€999 for a lens that costs $699 in the US? Eh?
If we look at "older" bodys/lenses (50 1.8 - £160/$250, 70200GM II - £2600/$2,800, 24-105 - £1000/$1300), the pricing actually makes sense. I mean even at £1/€1 = $1, I think most people can swallow it but not when the number itself for £/€ is larger than it is USD...yeah...hell no
FWIW the 50 f/1.2 GM is the superior lens, and it's largely for that reason I don't regret my purchase. That said, the cost and size are very valid considerations.
A lens review at the Calgary outdoor and boat show... Chirs is combining two of his passions 🤣 👍👍
That was my immediate thought too. An excuse for Chris to play with some of his favorite toys! Good for him.
Exactly!
the pice difference in europ is much bigger. the sigma is 950€ and the sony 1850€. i think the sigma is the clear winner in europe, unless you have infinite money. i dont think beeing slighty smaller and optically slightly better justifies paying twice as much.
Yeah, the considerable upcharge for us EU sony shooters on the last lenses from Sony makes even great lenses a bad deal.
@@Sil3nC4 yea, but at least the used market for sony is pretty good as e mont is so much older than the other FF mirrorless mounts
@@doublevgreen if it weren't for that, I wouldn't have gone for Sony FF. I love my tiny Sony/Zeiss f1.8 lenses, all bought used
You can almost fly to the US and get it there, fly back and save money instead of buying in the EU ;)
You do a fantastic job on all your videos's, whether it's fly fishing or photography.....keep em coming ....!!!
Is there really a practical reason to purchase an f1.2 lens over an f1.4 lens? Realistically speaking, how often will someone be shooting with an f1.4 lens and think to themselves “this shot is impossible without a faster lens”? I know that certain *ahem* “influencers” in the online photography space will say that f1.2 is “more professional” and “a necessity,” but I just don’t buy it.
For one, cost is a huge factor, and you are most definitely past the point of diminishing returns when considering an f1.2 lens. Also, I feel like where we currently are with mirrorless cameras, f1.2 lenses are attractive because there either isn’t another fast, standard option (Canon, Nikon), or because the pre-existing, first-party f1.4 lenses are outdated (Sony). Actually, now that I think about it, even back in the days of DSLRs, Canon’s faster primes were in a very similar situation. The 50 f1.2L was the obvious choice for those who were looking for a fast 50mm because of the more modern lens design. The 50mm f1.4 was over a decade older, and was behind in build quality and resolution because of that. I’m sure the 50mm f1.2L wouldn’t have been nearly as enticing if it had been released around the same time as the f1.4 lens.
Another rock solid video guys, I wonder whose Idea it was to do the show ant the Calgary Boat and Outdoors show?🤔
Great review as always, but your statement that the Sony f1.2 isn't that much more than the Sony f1.4 left me scratching my head. The f1.2 is $700 more than the f1.4 and $1,150 more than the Sigma!
Maybe it’s a bit of an “in good a penny, in for a pound” kind of thing? I kept reading great things about the Nikkor Z 50mm 1.8 S, but it just seemed too expensive for a 1.8 prime at $500USD. So, what did I do but buy a Nikkor Z 50mm 1.2 S for $1600 used… it is a big price difference, but maybe if someone is considering between them, they’re willing to save up the extra if they think f1.2 is worth it.
6:30 What do you mean 153% of the price isn't that much more expensive LOL f1.2 vs f1.4
The bigger question is how does it compare to the lens it theoretically replaces in the Sony line up, the Sony 50mm f/1.4 zeiss.
Without having shot with the 50/1.4 GM, my guess is the Zeiss Planar has more technical IQ issues. But it probably adds up to having more character as well. Colour rendition I would probably favour towards the German coatings.
My thinking is Sony’s marketing points of weight and size point toward a similar image quality. The zeiss is a chonky boy but I’ve never noticed poor image quality from my copy. It was their flagship “standard” lens for a while so if image quality was an issue Tamron and sigma would have jumped all over it. Other guess is the use of linear motors in the GM makes it faster focusing but again 50mm isn’t exactly what I think of when I think an action/sport/wildlife lens.
In real world, I am not sure if this going to make a difference unless you are shooting ppl with angel lights as BG at f/1.4 :)
Thank you to good review. Can i ask what wirst strap you use ?
Hello, what camara would you recommend for videography between panasonic s5 ii vs sony fx30 if you don’t own any lenses?
When you said the lens is a quarter of a noct what the heck is a noct?
Thanks for sharing another wonderful video like always 👌🙏👍
50mm lenses these days are as big as my 28-70 2.8 lens I used for my 35mm camera back in the day, too big.
The difference wide open is huge - in a test chart anyway. I wonder something else might be at play here. Different cameras, different RAW engine, some focus error? Especially if the Sigma was already called "very sharp wide open" in its own review. It almost looks like the Sony was stopped down to F8.
6:27 to 6:36 - "Isn't that much more expensive" What? $1,999 versus $1,299 is quite a difference!
Hasn’t Adobe or some other company developed an algorithm to handle Loka effectively yet? Just mix some of that AI magic in there 😉
I got a big laugh seeing Gordon Drake caught on video perusing Drake magazine. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ..... nice!
you shouldn't compare price only, but also include expected reselling value, say three years from now. I assume you'll get significantly more for a used GM then, hence reducing the difference in overall cost of usage pretty good
Sigma fringing reminds me of my 24-105mm canon EF mount sigma lens.
waiting for test 50/1.4 Sony GM VS Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA
Awesome, test two lenses side by side on two different cameras.
Hate the drake.
I guess this is goodbye to the Sony Zeiss 50mm 1.4
dud of a lens.
Looks like Jordan is enjoying the Panasonic S5 Mark ii. I thought he would use the Panasonic GH6 these days
It seems very good but too expensive, 1700eu is a lot of euros.
I just want an updated nifty fifty 1.8 for my a7c.
Guess we are going to see 50 1.2GM VS 50 1.4GM in another video
Sigma -> Sony1.4 = $450
"substantially more expensive "
Sony1.4 -> Sony1.2 = $700
"not that much more expensive"
What is Jordan doing behind the camera that has Chris laughing in so many clips? And was that Tony N's voice discussing the lenses' price comparison? I'm gonna guess that you forgot to actually mention the prices, so you threw that clip in for yucks.
These lenses tested almost equal. I thought the Sony's cats-eye bokeh was actually worse. If I shot Sony, I'd get the Signs.
Wait…. So the Sony is “substantially more expensive” than the Sigma ($450). But then in the next sentence you are considering buying the 50 1.2 because it isn’t that more expensive (+$700)?!
My math may be a little rusty, but I believe you are talking a little crazy there.. 😂
Sometimes the product positioned in the middle is the hardest sell. For me, I don't think that's actually the case here. The Sony 1.4 seems to be technically superior to the Sigma, from what I've seen, and I feel like I'm only losing the insane aperture by going with the Sony 1.4 over the 1.2. As someone who uses a fast body, that burst rate on the 1st party lenses is hard to pass up if I think there's even a possibility for that use case.
Sure but the extra money does provide an even wider aperture in that case. We thought the Sony F1.4 would be way more expensive than the Sigma, but it really isn't that much. I'd go for the Sony 1.4 myself, but some people really want that F1.2
1:35 and compare that to my 1993 canon EF 50mm F1.4 - 290 grams... the mirrorless promise of smaller lenses has failed.
I'm pretty sure the $700 difference between the GM 1.4 and 1.2 trumps the $450 difference between the Sigma and GM 1.4? Plus a few things I wished were discussed is whether or not the focus is linear: Sigma no, Sony yes. Sigma also has a closer focusing distance. Plus what's the breathing like?
Lol this feels more of a Vlog going to the outdoor show with Chris featuring Sony 50mm F1.4 GM vs Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG DN Art. Lol
❤❤❤❤
Sorry guys, Christopher Frost beat your review of this lens yet again !
Smaller, faster, sharper and not for a crazy price difference. The Sony is clearly the winner here. Sigma will have to lower the price to compete
👍🏾🙏🏾
Would love to see a 3 way comparison vs the Samyang 50/1.4 II
you get what you pay for… I had nearly all samyang. And IF you have a good copy AND you have 5year or more warranty, be happy with it.
@@hardywoodaway9912 It's an all new 420g 2nd gen introduced late 2021. Did you have it as well ?
Dustin Abbott just compared it to the Sigma DN ua-cam.com/video/AOR5CfBDpxc/v-deo.html
So basically this was an excuse for Chris to do a bunch of outdoor stuff indoors. Did I get that right?
Yup!
Sony, WHERE IS THE UPDATED 85MM PRIME? WHAT ARE YOU DOING??
Why are Sigma lenses ALWAYS bigger than the competition?
because sony canon and nikon have better optics designers. Sigma needs more glass to compensate for the optical aberrations
Sorry bad review....First one I ever gave...
Sigma 50mm is an automatic kill, 50mm f1.4 at this weight is simply dumb.
Eat less, buy oem.
Ewwwww Cutco, pyramid scheme knives!
i said it before, the Sigma 1.4 is a dud. the old version is as bad. it's similar to the nikon 150$ small plastic lens you can get. the G version. but that one is small at least.
So the f1.4 GM is way more expensive than the Sigma f1.4 ($450 difference)
But the f1.2 GM isn't tht much more expensive than the f1.4 ($700 difference)
Guys, just decide how much is "a lot" or "not that much" but keep it consistent, at least during one video.
I'm actually really impressed at how useful this place was for testing!
Great review and comparison,
the price difference is significant , but as much as This matters, for most of us who sell gear to buy more gear the RESALE value is a big deal. I hardly ever see it mentioned. One of the problems with "off brand" lenses is that the minute you buy the lens the resale value plummets.
I know that most reviewers don't seem to focus on RESALE value but it matters to > 80% of shooting professionals, this is how most upgrade their gear.
never heard this mentioned ! WELL SAID!
Great video as always! Love those outdoor shows ^^. In Germany the price differenz is rediculous. Its 900€ for the Sigmar and 1800€ for the Sony. I know what I would go for.
Lol, Chris definitely had fun with this location eh?
I’m just hoping this helps drop the f1.2 in price but that 67mm filter thread is mighty appealing too!
Let's be honest, Chris just wanted to go fishing 🎣
Look at those $ numbers! Wow! I might have to sell BOTH kidneys now!
Looks like you had a great time shooting this video!
Gotta say, the Sony wide open is pretty impressive.
If you aren't shooting wide open, save your money and get a much smaller 50/55 f/1.8. Why lug around a monster like the Sigma. BTW I've seen reviews that show the Sigma much sharper wide open on A7RIV than your test.
I'm not sure what maths school you attended Chris, but if you think 1999 is not much more than 1299, please make sure someone else fills out your tax returns.
in dprtv sample images it looks like the 50art optical axis didn't line up accurately, they may need to get it repaired
Thanks Chris, another great video (as always) from DPReview TV. I already have the Sigma 50mm Art on order but this was a very nice "focus" on both. Additionally, I just found you on one of your other "channels" detailing, reviewing and advising on miscellaneous fly fishing gear. Good to see you there as well, being that is yet another interest of mine and what better way to gather additional insight than to follow a smart, concise, familiar face. Keep up the great work on both accounts.
Can you please tell the name of the other channel?
Thanks for watching that channel as well! Really appreciate it!
@@WalterWhiteFromTheBlock It's BowRiverTroutfitters. I help out there a little bit because I love fly fishing so much.
So this is what we can expect from canon and nikon when their "mirrorless landing" is done within a few years: Good mid priced f1.4 primes (mid priced considering todays standards.... )
there is a difference of 700 dollars between the sigma and the sony I still don't understand the reason for the surcharge and I don't think it's the button
Which on the Sony machine you can customize
Can you guys do a comparison of the Sony GM 50 1.2 vs 1.4? Thanks!
Man, this S5ii footage is nice👌🏾👌🏾👌🏾
...except for the disgusting color grading
All lenses should be blessed with
an Aperture ring
👏
Sony knocks it out of the park again.
when have they EVER knocked it out of the park with a lens? more like Sony tries to catch up to Nikon and Canon
@@Juventinos Canon and Nikon have been playing catch-up for years. Let me know when they have a 50/1.2 as small, light, and good as Sony's, and when they have any 50/1.4 at all.
@@IanHobday they did catch up with the 50 1.2. I don't shoot 50 1.2. 85 1.2 yes, i do.
@@Juventinos When Sony brings their 85/1.2 to market you can be sure it will be smaller, lighter, have better optics, and focus faster than what you are using currently. Oh, and it will be hundreds of dollars cheaper. And if you want something still excellent but a thousand bucks less expensive, the Sigma 85/1.4 DN will remain a great option. Just like the Sigma 50/1.4 DN is a great option.
Sony's ecosystem is unbeatable, and unless Canon and Nikon wake up and allow 3rd party glass, they'll never be able to compete.
I shot Canon for many years, and then Nikon for many years after that. It's refreshing to finally be using a system that embraces options and works with 3rd parties.
@@IanHobday Sony worked with 3rd parties because their glass sucked ballz for years. That's why!
come on mate, you are way to big of a fanboy.
Hey!
When they say 50mm, what does that mean?
I understand the higher the number, the more narrow the field of view, I get that, but is 50mm the distance from front element to back element?
Or is it the distance from front element to image sensor?
Can you guys explain please?
It's the physical distance from the focal plane (image sensor in this case) to the point inside the lens where light converges, known as the "optical center." In a single-element lens, this would just be the distance from the lens to the film. This measurement is taken when the lens is focused to infinity.
Now, these days I'm not sure if it's purely calculated from the angle of view, or if it is actually measured. Probably more of the former, with some rounding, as we see different lenses with the same reported focal length having slightly different angles of view.
@@ziginox Thank you very much for that!
I appreciate it!
6:27 ....it's literally almost double the price lol
You see, you can compete on quality instead of shutting down the competition
It replaces the quite recent Sony Zeiss Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA of 2016.
All former Sony Zeiss e-mount lenses even the recent ones are gradually replaced by Sony. Its price will drop and I think it will be a bargain.
The Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA was one of the last lenses of the Sony Zeiss collaboration.
The 55mm Sony/Zeiss 1.8 hasn’t been replaced yet and I don’t consider the 50mm 1.8 plastic fantastic to be its replacement. Hopefully Sony makes an updated version of the 55mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 into one lens.
Poor Jordan, always having to do what Chris wants to do, but Chris will not do what Jordan wants to do. Let's make a video of what Jordan wants :D
Canon RF 50 1.4? Are you there? Where are you?
I know you are... Please?!????
thanks for the review! it would be very exciting to see a comparison on the l-mount side: the new sigma vs. the lumix and the leica 50mm f1.4?❣️
Drunk archery for the best of 2023 episode
Love your channel!!! Do 2 different videos. Both lenses on Sony 7RV and another video for L-mount users. The cameras are so different
No comment re video traits such as focus breathing?
Both have terrible breathing.
Hold on a minute, didnt they launched the 1.2 yesterday?
Pentax!
Please stop talking about things like “cat’s eyes” and smoothness of transition between in focus and out of focus. Those are completely made up characteristics. “Cat’s eyes” is always present in fast lenses, that’s just how optics work. Show me a lens that does not have a smooth transition between focus and out of focus, I have never seen one because they simply don’t exist, the transition is never abrupt.
I'll try to limit my observations to how they handle underwater photography instead, just for you.
@@niccollsvideo Hahahahaha, a very good one!
1/4 Noct! My GAWD
The larger size and lower image quality wide open, is pretty rough for the Sigma. If I were shopping, I would have to stretch for the Sony. I hope Sigma comes up with an awesome 50mm F1.8.
oh wow...while Sigma holds its own pretty well, it's very clear that the GM is better in sharpness/resolution.
First
Hey Jordan 2:30 section the video af hunts quite a bit for a pretty straightforward shot. Maybe Panasonic S5ii AF still isn't that robust? Or was it a setting issue?
Currently how many thousands of 50 1.4 lens models are on the market?
Awesome insight as always..for some photographers at this point..its all about that lower f-stop..1.2>1.4..im sure this 1.4 is amazing like its "bigger sibling" the 1.2..and of course now you are paying for the price difference..is around $700 USD worth it for a 1.2 or 1.4..like I said at this point for some photographers..its just clout and bragging rights that "I paid more than you" for a 1.2..haha at the end of the day our clients can't even tell and even some photographers can't even tell what image is what..1.2 or 1.4 image..its weird that Sony still chose to make this 1.4 GMlens? seems like there is no need for it when you have that 1.2?..now you're putting the lens against each other for sales?..when you could have just made customers not have the ability to choose and make them choose the only one 50 GM 1.2..lol
I am just waiting for that 85 1.2 GM!! haha im sure it will be around the same design as that 50 1.2 GM..slightly smaller and lightweight would be perfect..
It just seems to make sense to buy the sigma especially for the price
like with many other lenses, Sigma is excellent when it comes to price for performance
get a 1.8 50. you are better off spending the money somewhere else.
@@RandomTheories not this time, i think it will be more reasonable if priced at ~$700.
@@RandomTheories imo 50art didn't justify its price. from the samples i see it has unacceptable close up capability(due to its single element focusing group) and really bad LoCA.